EPA , and Government regulators vs. States Rights

[samfp1943]

An interesting article seems to have surfaced this week in regards to current government and its onerous regulatory processes in regards to the use of Coal.

FTA: @ http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2015/11/08/governor-elect-matt-bevin-to-the-epa-go-pound-sand-kentucky-is-in-the-coal-business/

Headline is: "Governor Elect Matt Bevin To The EPA: “Go Pound Sand” Kentucky Is In The Coal Business…"

Posted on November 8, 2015 by sundance

in part the point is :"...The powers not given to the Federal government are the province of the States. These cases always come down on the side of the States. Never in the history of the world, has there been such a demand for coal and Kentucky is sitting on an abundance of it. We will tell the EPA and other unelected officials -who have no authority over Kentucky as a state- to ‘pound sand’..."

 

It seems the new govenor-elect of Kentucky is drawing his line in the sand....as a citizen you have to wonder how this will come out of "...the my lawyer can whip your lawyer..." phase of this battle over States Rights vs unelected regulators??? It will be an intersting scrap, from the stand point of rail fans? 

 

 

[schlimm]

More accurately:  "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people."

Historically, the Supreme Court has declared that the 10th Amendment is a truism. This means that the amendment doesn't really add anything new to the Constitution.  The Supreme Court has almost never in our 200+ year history turned over a federal law because it violated the 10th Amendment. This is because the Constitution gives Congress the right to regulate interstate commerce, commonly called the commerce clause (Article 1, Section 8,  clause 3 of the  Constitution.

[wjstix]

The Founding Fathers wanted it clear that the rights they were listing in the Constitution / Bill of Rights were not the only rights the people had, and that there were other rights that could be specified by the states. As noted above, interstate commerce is constitutionally able to be regulated by the federal government.

BTW it's "onerous" not "ownerous". Comes from the Latin for "a burden".

[Domer66]

As a Kentuckian, some additional light into our newly elected Ky. Govenors intentions. He was elected as an outsider "Teaparty" candidate reportedly as the voters wanted somebody different without political baggage. The problem is that he is responding to the plight of the Ky. Appalcian coal mines. The

samfp1943

It seems the new govenor elect of Kentucky is drawing his line in the sand..

Trains article  in December 2015 (pg. 8) points out that the problem is with the cost competiveness of that coal with cheaper midwest coal. Western Ky. coal production has increased as a result (along with Ill. and Ind. coal production); but unless market forces change, you will see little improvement for Eastern Ky. coal. The new Govenors intentions are good, but his lack of political and economic savy means he probably will accomplish little in reality.