The Preemption Game

I wish we were able to clearly report the motivations for legislation that proposed some sort of local preemption. In Florida, a legislator wants to limit cities ability to lower emissions. Where is this coming from? They say climate plans are making things more expensive without mentioning all the externalities, costs, and impacts or the current paradigm. Proponents of this sort of thing give only half the information likely because vested interests don’t like change.

Another recent example is Transportation Secretary Duffy saying that USDOT doesn’t want speed cameras because they don’t want cities to use them as revenue sources. But what about all the research that shows people slow down and they save lives? Speed traps I get, giving people tickets for breaking the law…?

Maybe it’s also just rampant misinformation but a lot of it is politics. Like saying that you want to place a federal cap on state gas taxes as Trump has. I’m sure that has nothing to do with benevolence or worry for taxpayers in certain states. And of course he just says stuff all the time that doesn’t mean anything.

But what emerges when people see a benefit to value creation from publicly supported programs meant to actually benefit taxpayers? The defense of those programs from all sides. Energy Star, which the appointees at the EPA tried to kill, has been brought back from the depths and funded because a lot of people saw the benefit of those ratings to their pocketbooks.

I wish it were always so clear. Many times under the surface you need a pair of goggles.

***

For this intro post and more news in your inbox every morning, sign up for a two week free trial of The Overhead Wire Daily, our popular newsletter established in 2006.