Is Federalism the key to proving the disaster of green central planning – Is it flourishing with that?
Centralized planning always fails, but the utopian visionaries who execute the plans cannot admit that they are at fault. A scapegoat must be found. As a leading example, when the collectivization of agriculture by Soviet dictator Josef Stalin led to mass starvation, Official responsibility has been laid about the “destructor” and “the vandal”.
Our analog system today is the centrally planned replacement of our very large, inexpensive and highly functional energy system, mainly based on fossil fuels, with options alternative to intermittent wind and solar generation, favored by incompetent government regulators. I don’t understand how these work or how much they will cost. Energy prices for consumers – from electricity to gasoline – are skyrocketing; and the reliability of the supply is widely threatened.
All of which leaves our President to blame the current price and supply problems in the energy market for anything but his administration’s willful attempt to prevent fossil fuel energy works. One day, the scapegoat was Vladimir Putin; the other is “gas station operators”, accused of price manipulation.
Unfortunately, a broad section of the electorate is only too willing to believe that the failure of central planning is correctly blamed on vandals or vandals or devaluations or rooskies or whatever, rather than incompetent central planners. And central planners can generally maintain their narrative, as long as they can impose their control broadly enough to prevent their audience from becoming aware of successful alternatives. .
And therefore, maintaining federalism in energy policy is crucial to avoid the disaster of green energy centralization. And that’s why the Supreme Court’s recent decision on West Virginia v. EPA very important in the ongoing energy wars. West Virginia v. EPA defeated a centralized federal effort to command the structure of the nation’s power generation system, on the grounds that Congress had not explicitly authorized the exercise of such sweeping authority by one agency. executive.
With federalism in energy policy, we can put New York ahead with the “Climate Leadership and Communities Act” and California does the same with SB 100 – both seeking to eliminate remove fossil fuels from electricity generation, and then force all energy consumers to use only electricity to supply them. Satisfactory job? If New York and California succeed, they will be role models for the rest of the country to follow. Congratulations will be in order. If they fail compared to other states – i.e. if they see high energy prices, frequent blackouts or shortages of needed energy – it is clear that green energy has failed, not a failure. “vandals” or “vandals” or “price saboteurs” who may end up attacking other states as well.
The federal administration will do everything to tie all the states into a federal energy organization, so that the (inevitable) failures of green energy cannot be blamed on the perpetrators. In Friday’s post I have noticed two new federal initiatives,West Virginiato seek national containment on fossil fuels, one by imposing “ozone” emissions limits in Texas, and the other by refusing to conduct rental auctions abroad.
Yet another such initiative was announced on Thursday, July 7th: a so-called “Framework for reducing greenhouse gas emissions in transportation” from the Federal Highway Administration. This takes governance boldness to a whole new level. Under the proposed rule, states must set GHG emission reduction targets for highway traffic that must be aligned with the Net-Zero target as directed by the President in two Executive Orders and agreed at the international Climate Leaders Summit. The federal Net Zero goals have not been enacted or authorized in any way by Congress and come into existence solely through the press release issued by President Biden on April 22, 2021. In other words, the rights and the FHA is eyeing the Supreme Court West Virginia decision.
Fortunately, red states don’t just go along with this sort of thing anymore. This will be an important battleground in the next 5 to 10 years.
Related
