Tag Archives: Clean water

SB 715: they’ll always have their tenther drivel

22 Wednesday Jan 2020

Posted by in Missouri General Assembly, Missouri Senate

≈ 5 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , ,

Eric Burlison (r) [2016 file photo].

A bill, introduced in the Missouri Senate:

SECOND REGULAR SESSION
SENATE BILL NO. 715 [pdf]
100TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY
INTRODUCED BY SENATOR BURLISON.

Pre-filed December 1, 2019, and ordered printed.

ADRIANE D. CROUSE, Secretary. 3039S.01I

AN ACT

To repeal section 536.037, RSMo, and to enact in lieu thereof two new sections relating to state enforcement of federal regulations.

Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Missouri, as follows:
Section A. Section 536.037, RSMo, is repealed and two new sections enacted in lieu thereof, to be known as sections 1.360 and 536.037, to read as follows:

1.360. 1. To ensure that the powers reserved to this state under Amendment X of the Constitution of the United States are protected and to ensure that the federal government does not encroach on this state’s status as an independent sovereign in a federal system of governance, all federal rules and regulations promulgated by the United States Environmental Protection Agency shall be subject to approval by the general assembly as set forth in subsection 5 of this section.

2. No department or agency of this state shall enforce any rule or regulation promulgated by the United States Environmental Protection Agency within the borders of this state unless the enforcement of such regulation is approved by the general assembly as set forth in subsection 5 of this section.

3. No rule or regulation promulgated on or after August 28, 2020, by any department or agency of this state in conjunction with the enforcement of any rule or regulation promulgated by the United States Environmental Protection Agency shall be enforceable unless such rule or regulation is approved by the general assembly as set forth in subsection 5 of this section.

4. Any existing rule or regulation promulgated before August 28, 2020, by any department or agency of this state in conjunction with the enforcement of any rule or regulation promulgated by the United States Environmental Protection Agency that is in force and effect after August 28, 2020, shall be subject to review by the committee on administrative rules, established under section 536.037. The committee shall determine whether such rule or regulation shall continue to be enforced and shall make a recommendation thereof to the general assembly. The general assembly shall review all such rules and regulations referred to it by the committee and shall approve or disapprove of the continued enforcement of such rules or regulations. No such rule or regulation that the general assembly disapproves shall be enforceable unless and until the rule or regulation is again referred to the general assembly by the committee of administrative rules and then approved by the general assembly. Any such rule or regulation that the general assembly approves shall continue to be enforced unless such rule or regulation is repealed by the agency or department.

5. No rule or regulation promulgated by the United States Environmental Protection Agency, or any rule or regulation promulgated by any department or agency of this state in conjunction with the enforcement of any rule or regulation promulgated by the United States Environmental Protection Agency, shall be effective in the state until the general assembly, within the first sixty calendar days of the regular session immediately following the promulgation of such rule or regulation, by concurrent resolution, approves such rule or regulation.

[….]

4. The committee shall review all rules and regulations promulgated before August 28, 2020, by any federal agency or by any state agency in conjunction with the enforcement of any rule or regulation promulgated by the United States Environmental Protection Agency that are in force and effect on August 28, 2020, and determine whether such rules and regulations should continue to be enforced under section 1.360. In its review the committee may take such action as it deems necessary, which may include holding hearings. The committee shall refer all reviewed rules and regulations to the general assembly with a recommendation of whether such rule or regulation should be enforceable. Any citizen of this state may request the review of any specific rule or regulation promulgated by the United States Environmental Protection Agency, and the committee shall review such rule or regulation.

[….]

So, you like clean air and water, eh?

Fear and undocumented immigrants

06 Tuesday Jul 2010

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

One tenet of management theory that I learned many years ago is that people are motivated in differing degrees by either praise or fear depending on their basic psychology. And while we all prefer both giving and receiving praise, fear often plays a beneficial role in improving performance – as long as people have an honest understanding of what negative consequences are possible and what they need to do to avoid them. Fear can also lead people to do incredibly stupid things when the threat is not well understood and when there is no rational way to respond effectively.

For example, in Sunday’s St. Louis Post-Dispatch there was a story about how the town of Waterloo is collecting unused prescription drugs in order to prevent people from flushing them into the water supply where they pose a growing environmental hazard that threatens aquatic life and, potentially, humans. Folks in Waterloo are justifiably frightened about verifiable, destructive consequences of flushing pharmaceuticals like valium, vicodin, percocet, etc. down the toilet, and they have taken sensible steps to do something about it.

Leonard Pitts also wrote about the motivating power of fear in the same issue of the Post-Dispatch. But the situation that he described was a far cry from the rational response to a proven hazard that the citizens of Waterloo have demonstrated.

Discussing some of the more questionable statements that Arizona’s Governor Jan Brewer has made about criminal behavior on the part of undocumented immigrants – they are, according to Brewer, almost all drug mules, and many are regularly beheading defenseless Arizonans – he pointed out her total unwillingness or inability back up her claims with facts and figures:

… note the lack of proof. The statement is quantifiable, yet the governor doesn’t bother to quantify.

But then, you only quantify for the benefit of the head. You toss the raw, red meat of emotion for the benefit of the heart. In this case, the emotions being appealed to could hardly be clearer: nativism, xenophobia, and that old standby, fear. And they don’t ask any questions.

In this case, we have an elected official who is willing to whip up the fear of her constituents for what we can only assume are political reasons. It is, though, easy to understand Brewer’s decision not to fight the nativist surge, but to go along for the ride. Telling people the truth has little effect when the problem lies deeper than the wild stories used to justify rash actions.

Just consider the trump card that many of those worried abut undocumented immigrants almost always pull out when stories like Brewer’s are exposed as unfounded: “what part of illegal don’t you understand.”  Annoying, sure, but also a desperate gambit on the part of folks who really do understand that the debate actually involves questioning the legal status quo, and rejecting or confirming it, rather than invoking it. But they just can’t give it up.

Consider, for instance, red light cameras, about which many, usually conservative, Missourians make serious if flawed arguments about how the status quo, in this case a camera that photographs cars that are illegally in intersections during red lights, does not meet social needs or even constitutional requirements. They would rightly respond with exasperation to “what part of illegal don’t you understand” as the final justification for the cameras.  

So if people aren’t really as dumb as they pretend,  why can’t we get beyond exaggerated or false claims about the dangers posed by undocumented immigrants, and put aside red herrings abut what is legal or not legal now? Reuben Navarrette may be on to something when he observes:

… what’s the real reason so many Americans are increasingly anxious about immigration and want to cut back on it? It’s all about changing demographics. Folks in the South have experienced in the last 10 years what those of us in the West experienced a generation or two ago. They see immigrants changing their surroundings and impacting the culture and it scares the daylights out of them.