In a landmark case, the US Supreme Court has rules that the Environmental Protection Agency DOES indeed have the right and power to regulate carbon emissions from automobiles.
It had refused to do so and was brought to court by several “green” states which saw its refusal as another policy by the Bush administration which ran counter to the “spirit of Kyoto” and the entire global concern over climate change.
Interestingly, the administration took the position that it would hurt the automobile industry to be too draconian in regulations as well as the general economy. This reflects an aged view of how to protect “american” industry (a label which in itself no longer exists in its own right). The fact that there is an emerging industry which depends on strong environmental policies is often set aside since that one has not yet developed the “washington-relationships” that it needs to in order to better influence policy at the federal level.
We once tried to hire a lobbyist in Washington and found out just how hard it is and how complicated it can be to get government behind environmental concerns. It ended up that our interest might have been considered as a “pork line item” in a larger budget pursuit. In the end, we really didn’t care so long as we got the funding (which we never went through with).
The decision by the Supreme Court only reflects current popular sentiment that “sustainability” policies must go hand in hand with economic ones. They are no longer separable and the federal government in the USA, not only has the duty it has the authority to act.
Sass