----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Perelman" <michael at ecst.csuchico.edu> To: <lbo-talk at lists.panix.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2002 4:07 PM Subject: Re: The Big One- Supremes decimate federal regulation
> I would go further than Ian here. Regulation should sometimes defer
to
> the states, but only if the states do not do anything that the corps.
> don't like. For example, states are not supposed to put harsh
regulations
> on pesticides, so defer to the feds. The only thing consistant in the
> mishmash is that nothing is supposed to detract from profits.
==========
States won't put harsh regs. on some corps. unless other corps., in alliance with consumers, workers etc. demand regulatory relief. In those instances, legislative change tracks tort law at the State level. The Feds are called in to 'the rescue' when complying with too many differing tort regs. generate crises of jurisdiction and the like and the corps. get a sense of the need for colllective action to secure a 'jurisprudence of scale' favorable to their interests and then they fight tooth and nail to protect themselves from lefty appropriations of 'States rights' approaches to enviro. regs and the like, considering as, all ecosystems are local [even airsheds.....]
Ian