THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Volume XIII, Issue # 10, January 7, 2011
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Government Committed to & Acting in Accord with Conservative Principles
Ensures a Nation's Strength, Progress, & Prosperity
CALIFORNIA DREAMING, OR NIGHTMARING?
Dictatorial New Delaware Vehicle Rules Impose
California Rules, for No Environmental Gain
By John Nichols
ENVIRONMENTALISM & DICTATORSHIP IN DELAWARE: DELAWARE'S NEW SECRETARY OF NATURAL RESOURCES &
ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL, BY EXECUTIVE EDICT, IMPOSES CALIFORNIA'S DRACONIAN EMISSIONS STANDARDS ON
VEHICLES SOLD IN DELAWARE. THE NEW "GREEN" STANDARDS MAKE DELAWARE EMISSION RULES MORE
STRINGENT THAN EVEN FEDERAL REGULATIONS. THE NEW DELAWARE REGULATIONS WILL COST JOBS & POUND
FAMILY BUDGETS, FOR NO HEALTH, ENVIRONMENTAL, OR ECONOMIC GAIN.
FULL STORY:
Attention Delaware drivers. Effective with model year 2014, all new vehicles sold in Delaware shall comply with California
emissions standards. Delaware standards are no longer sufficient. New “green” standards make First State emission rules
more stringent than even Federal regulations.
Thus spoke Delaware Secretary of Natural Resource and Environmental Control Colin O’Mara, in issuing his December 11,
2010, Order No. 2010-A-0039, amending Title 7 of the Delaware Administrative Code.
The new program will bring “considerable benefits to human health and the environment,” asserts a news release issued
by Secretary O’Mara, a self proclaimed “energy entrepreneur” from California. However, since current model year cars
already emit 95% fewer emissions than their 1970 predecessors, actual health and environmental improvements are likely
to be minimal.
Thus, an additional justification for the edict is the claim that it will protect planet Earth against “dangerous global
warming.” That is equally dubious.
What is certain is that Secretary O’Mara has unilaterally raised the average cost of post-2013 vehicles sold in Delaware
by at least $1,000, simply to comply with the Department’s questionable findings. That’s according to an April 1, 2010,
New York Times article. Industry experts say the regulations will add “about $3,000 to the up-front cost of the
average car or truck,” notes PBS.
And to think all of this transpired without a whimper from Delaware’s elected officials, or mention in the papers. O’Mara
claims the necessary notification and hearings took place. However, few Delawareans know nightmarish California air
quality standards have been imposed on them, and fewer still understand the edict’s costs.
Indeed, California vehicle standards can hardly be justified even in the once-Golden State. They have their origin in its
infamous smog, and Los Angeles was ground zero. But LA’s smog occurred because car exhausts were trapped in the
San Fernando Valley. Catalytic converters, not the new California emission standards, dramatically reduced smog.
California’s draconian new standards were justified on global warming grounds; rammed through by an ecologically
activist Legislature, Governor, and Air Quality Control Board; and protected by the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, the Federal Courts, and the nation’s largest block of U.S. Senators and Congressmen. But Delaware is not
California. Its expensive edict may preen O’Mara’s green feathers, but they will be irrelevant to the U.S. or global
atmosphere.
So where were Delaware’s elected representatives and news media when this was happening? Aren’t our legislators
supposed to represent us? Isn’t the media supposed to report vital news and inform citizens of significant events like
this? With a $58,000 annual income for the average Delaware household, it should be news when an unelected
bureaucrat from California decides to increase the new car purchase price by up to $3,000. If O’Mara’s diktat were a tax
hike, an irate citizenry would have revolted.
Why was this information suppressed? Perhaps, it’s because the centerpiece of Governor Markell’s agenda is “green
energy,” and anything that makes electric vehicles more price-competitive must be supported, even if science and
economics don’t justify the decision. With Fisker Automotive deciding to build electric cars in the state – with help, of
course, from “Delaware’s own” Vice-President, Joe Biden, and promises of big-time subsidies from U.S. taxpayers – the
need to keep the citizenry uninformed is even more compelling.
Whether Fisker ever builds a single car in Delaware is debatable. But the Markell administration has just bet a large
chunk of the State’s economy on this outcome. Increasing the price of gas-powered vehicles advances that objective.
But where are the facts to support this gamble? The November 2, 2010, elections, continued high unemployment, and a
dozen states teetering on the brink of insolvency have changed public and congressional thinking about “green
energy” subsidies.
As to insolvency, by far, the worst example is O’Mara’s home state. California ranks 49th out of all states on how its
tax system treats business, according to the Tax Foundation. Its costly and dictatorial environmental regulations are
legendary. With established businesses fleeing and new entrepreneurs choosing to go elsewhere, California’s
unemployment now stands at 12.4% – just behind Nevada. Its Legislative Analyst says the state faces a
$20-billion-per-year deficit for the next six years.
And California is to be the role model for Delaware?
At the very least, a thorough economic study must be conducted to explore the effects of O’Mara’s edict and Markell’s
tacit support. It should be accompanied by a careful analysis of the alleged environmental, health, and climate change
benefits of the new car rules. These studies will almost certainly confirm that the regulations will cost jobs and pound
family budgets, for no health, environmental or economic gain.
In fact, virtually all climatologists now agree that even full compliance by all developed countries with the Kyoto
protocols would keep average global temperatures from rising by an unmeasurable 0.05 degrees Celsius (0.09 degrees
Fahrenheit) by 2050. Secretary O’Mara’s pricey rule might reduce temperatures by 0.0001 degrees – assuming carbon
dioxide really does play a key role in climate change.
Meanwhile, a real debate must occur in a public forum, instead of behind closed doors, where decisions are made by
unelected regulators, go unreported by the media, and don’t even merit a question or expression of concern from
legislators. The same goes for other states, our U.S. Congress, and actions by the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency.
Or, perhaps, I'm totally out of touch. Perhaps, transparency is an antiquated notion, unsuited to governance by
regulation. But, if so, we might as well get rid of the Delaware and U.S. Constitutions, since they no longer serve the
purpose for which they were ratified.
After all, if elections no longer matter, why waste the time and effort? The populace can simply let the “most qualified”
regulators tell them how to behave, what to eat, how to think, and what to drive – and accept a “benevolent
totalitarianism.”
But, then again, maybe people still believe basic human rights come from God – and the government’s job is to protect
unalienable natural rights from the dictates of unelected regulators. Indeed, according to a recent Rasmussen survey,
most U.S. voters say the primary purpose of government is to protect individual rights and freedoms.
But maybe those who hold those beliefs are now to be simply disenfranchised – by the benevolent dictatorial nanny
class that always knows what’s best for us. The next few years will decide.
LINKS TO RELATED TOPICS:
Political Environmentalism Versus Human Progress & Prosperity:
Policy Issues Relating to Energy, Environment,
& Natural Resources
The Earth's Natural History, Global Climate Changes,
& the Future of Human Life & Civilization on the Planet:
Science, Ideology, & Public Policy
Political Economy -- Philosophies, Systems, & Public Policies:
Government, the Economy, & Economic Prosperity
John Nichols is an investment advisor and ardent environmentalist who believes in individual freedom and
responsibility, and closely follows Delaware politics and power grabs.
Return to Top of Page
Go to the WEBSITE INDEX
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Public Issues & Political Controversies
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
Most Recent Articles
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Volume XIII, 2011
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Subject Matter Highlights
Return to POLITICAL EDUCATION Homepage
CONTACT & ACCESS INFORMATION
This is not a commercial website. The sole purpose of the website is to share with interested persons information regarding civics,
civic and social education, political science, government, politics, law, constitutional law and history, public policy and political
philosophy and history, as well as current and recent political developments, public issues, and political controversies.
POLITICAL EDUCATION, CONSERVATIVE ANALYSIS
POLITICS, SOCIETY, & THE SOVEREIGN STATE
Website of Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr.
Government, Politics, Public Policy, Legal Issues, Constitutional Law, Government & the Economy, Cultural Values, Foreign Affairs,
International Relations, Military Defense & National Security, Geopolitics, Terrorism & Homeland Security, American National Interests,
Political Systems & Processes, Political Institutions, Political Ideologies, & Political Philosophy
INDEX FOR THE ENTIRE WEBSITE
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
Y
Z
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Conservative & Free-Market Analysis of Government, Politics & Public Policy, Covering Political, Legal, Constitutional, Economic,
Cultural, Military, International, Strategic, & Geopolitical Issues
Conservative Government Ensures a Nation's Strength, Progress, & Prosperity