Clean Air Act In Congress

In the past, the Congress and the House have forced the state governments to meet in certain enviromental standards. (Sparknotes Editors, Federalism, page 2)

States have always been sensitive about the amount of power they have; the federal government has always had to step carefully around the demands of the states. This has been true since the beginning of the United States. But both believe that they should have the most power when it comes to certain things. Individual states have different values and as such tend to implement different laws about certain topics; such states want their state laws to reflect these individual values instead of a blanket law from the federal government. States should have less power compared to the federal government when implementing laws dealing with topics such as the legalization of marijuana, gay marriage, and abortion.

The State focuses more so on sustainability and what this means is that, although an act may be harmful to an environment or its inhabitants if done in moderation it would be deemed acceptable. If and only if the act is beneficial to the majority i.e providing a service in which we the consumers benefit from in our daily activities. Extra legal definitions are needed in order to regulate the amount of harm done unto the environment to ensure that a resource is not exhausted or overly harmed. Without these extra legal definitions many of today's resources would be scarce or nonexistent.

The Supremacy clause of the U.S. Constitution establishes that the federal constitution, and federal law generally, take precedence over state laws, and even state constitutions. While in this particular matter, the statutes of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) would generally trump the state level regulations of organizations such as the California Air Resources Board (CARB), however the EPA has also mandated that “The setting of these pollutant standards was coupled with directing the states to develop state implementation plans (SIPs), applicable to appropriate industrial sources in the state, in order to achieve these standards.” (EPA, 2015) The standards in questions are called National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)

In 2011 Texas, Alabama, Louisiana, Virginia and several other industry groups sued Environmental Protection Agency over a Cross state pollution rule, also known as the transport rule. For years, the Environmental Protection Agency had implemented rules to cut emissions dating back to 1998. They identified twenty-seven states which included Texas that were considered “upwind” states. They believed that these states significantly affected the quality air in “downwind” states. The lawyers for the state argued that the rule would hurt job

States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which

State regulations however, are much more in depth. Each state has their own laws and regulations. Wyoming for example requires that all water supplies within a quart mile of drilling sites be identified before drilling. While Pennsylvania requires that pressure testing is done prior to completion. New York on the other hand focuses more on visual, noise, greenhouse gas and invasive species mitigation plans. While each state has their own rules and regulations, they are all trying to do the same thing, protect their states land and best interest, as well as bring down the price of energy and lower Americas dependency on foreign fuels.

Another time it has been used was with the Clean Air Act. The clean air act was a mandate put by the national government, that all of the states must follow, that is unless that states want to face fines by the government. The Clean air act is a federal law that was passed in an effort to regulate air emissions from mobile and immobile devices.

Federal government can rule over the laws of state governments by introducing a new policy, which would be implemented nationwide. So, it would make sense for the state government to intervene in the policies made by the local government. If the laws passed by the federal government can be implemented nationwide, regardless of the state’s views on those laws, the laws passed by the state should also be implemented state-wise, regardless of the views of local government. However, I do not believe that local control needs to be influenced by the state government. The local policies are the ones that closely represent what the people want in the local community. For example, the residents of Denton, Texas voted to ban fracking in their local community through a people-led referendum. The people were troubled with toxic fumes, bright lights, and noise due to the fracking sites right in their backyards. The ban on fracking provides what the people of Denton wanted. Local control is also necessary because people in different counties in the same state might have different opinions on the same issue. For example, people of Loving County may encourage fracking as the county is not heavily populated, fracking sites could be constructed far from residential areas, and fracking is a boost in the economy (not much in the

The Clean Air Act is a United States federal law designed to control air pollution on a national level.[1] It is one of the United States' first and most influential modern environmental laws, and one of the most comprehensive air quality laws in the world.[2][3] As with many other major U.S. federal environmental statutes, it is administered by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), in coordination with state, local, and tribal governments.[4] Its implementing regulations are codified at 40 C.F.R. Subchapter C, Parts 50-97.

Since human’s activity, pollution becomes a big problem in the world. There are a lot of part of pollutions include water pollution, light pollution and air pollution. Air pollution is happened in our life. The United States is also a victim of air pollution. In 1943, Los Angeles photochemical smog event occurred. The whole of Los Angeles was covered with smoke. There are about 400 people died and a lot of fruits in orchards began to wither.

Improved air quality wasn’t a subject of national concern until the mid 1900s. After decades of coal burning, unregulated gas emissions from cars and the excessive burning of fossil fuels, people started noticing bad air quality as a hazard to their lives. Over several decades, after seeing the costly effects air pollution was having on the environment and people’s health, interest groups like the Friends of The Earth club and the influences of Theodore Roosevelt and Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring finally came together to persuade the government to enforce legislation that would reduce air pollution. Because of these efforts, the policies of the Clean Air Act of 1963 and the Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Act of 1965, that aimed to control air pollution and raise air quality standards, helped create the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on December 2, 1970. Since then, the EPA has passed more air quality improvement acts, and amendments to previous acts passed, to increase restrictions on air pollutants, with their main policy concern being the Clean Air Act. Improved air quality acts imposed by the EPA have been successful in cleaning the United States’ air quality by reducing ground-level ozone pollution and reducing emissions, allowing for a decrease in pollution related deaths/illnesses and a better standard of living. The EPA, through regulations and the Clean Air Act, has delivered it’s promise to improve air quality in the United States.

South Coast’s fleet rules are not preempted by the federal Clean Air Act because the pollution standards are not below federal standards and maintain federal standards. Congress can have exclusive federal statute of certain laws that state governments cannot regulate. Even though there is a federal law regulating air pollution “More often, though, federal statutes do not expressly provide for exclusive jurisdiction. Supremacy clause does state that federal law is the “supreme law of the land” and if state laws conflict with federal law, federal law trumps state law, which is known as preemption doctrine. In these instances, state and local governments have concurrent jurisdiction to regulate the area or activity” (Cheeseman 2013). States

Due to violations of the clean-air law, Exxon Mobil agreed to pay $2.5 million for civil penalties and spend $300 million to improve pollution-control technology in their plants along the Gulf Coast. This settlement will prevent thousands of tons of pollution in the future, such as benzene (which causes cancer), from plants in the Texas and Louisiana area. Many environmentalists, however, disagree that this settlement is punishment enough for years of violations committed by the giant oil company. This deal settles allegations that the federal Clean Air Act was violated by Exxon for releasing many harmful pollutants after modifying their flaring systems. These allegations were noted more than a decade ago. However, Exxon declared it will make

since 1970. 40 percent of sulfer dioxide in the air has been reduced, as well