Imagine if a factory periodically spewed massive amounts of pollution when its pollution control device failed, fouling the air and … More
Will sea otters soon be returned to San Francisco bay?
California sea otters have come a long way from the 50-member population discovered off Big Sur in the early 1900s, … More
California waives environmental regulations for forest management: will this become more common as wildfires worsen?
California experienced two of its worst wildfire seasons in 2017 and 2018. Deadly fires shook several communities, while also marring … More
An antiquated California water law encourages political conflict rather than market transactions
California ski resorts are experiencing record snowfall this February, thanks to a storm system that has dropped an estimated 18 … More
Conservation through compromise or conflict: lessons from California’s Tejon Ranch
High Country News reports on a simmering conflict over the development of California’s Tejon Ranch, an area of the Sierra … More
Paying California farmers to suck up the state’s excess carbon dioxide
In April, California launched its latest climate change initiative: In a grand experiment, California switched on a fleet of high-tech … More
The Avocado Toast Rebellion: California confronts the feds over federal land policy
Federal lands have long been a source of political conflict. In the 70s and 80s, the Sage Brush Rebellion challenged … More
Is EPA head Pruitt a federalism hypocrite for criticizing California climate policy?
Federalism is not a facile commitment to “states-rights” no matter what states do. EPA Administrator Pruit’s criticism of California’s attempt to regulate beyond its borders is entirely consistent with a commitment to federalism.
Supreme Court should preempt state laws to save environmental federalism
If Congress can only protect its choices by broadly preempting states laws, it will. And, in the long run, states will have less room to protect the environment than they would if courts continued to enforce the balance. That would be a significant blow to both federalism and the environment.
States cannot veto Congress’ decisions to put federal lands to productive uses
If Republican states have to accept Congress’ decisions to restrict the use of federal lands, Democratic states have to accept decisions to encourage productive use of these lands.