Rep. Sally Kern authored a bill (HB 3219) which is now under consideration on the House floor that proposes that Oklahoma leave environmental regulation of our state’s resources solely to Oklahoma. According to Rep. Kern, “the act declares that regulation of hazardous waste, emissions, water quality, drilling, processing, and exploration of oil and natural gas that originate and remain in the state shall not be subject to federal law or regulation.”
Considering that federal law is the supreme law of the land under the United States Constitution, such legislation is likely to be ruled unconstitutional and will cost the state a significant amount of money in defending the legislation in court. Furthermore, if the state suddenly were to tell citizens and businesses in Oklahoma they no longer have to follow federal environmental regulations, would DEQ really be prepared to protect our environment and resources instead of the EPA? What are your thoughts on this legislation?
Do you believe it will be better or worse for our environment if Oklahoma were to disregard federal environmental laws that apply to all other states?
- Worse (100%, 25 Votes)
- Better (0%, 0 Votes)
- Not sure (0%, 0 Votes)
Total Voters: 25
In my opinion, the department is stretched to capacity undo its current regulatory responsibilities. Adding additional responsibilities in this time of budget shortfalls is unthinkable and silly.
And once the law is overturned in court, will the state compensate all those businesses when they have to come into compliance with Federal Law?
While states’ rights do matter, let’s not forget that the Constitution gives authority for the United States Congress to govern commerce. Rep. Kern’s anti-EPA HB 3219 disregards the Commerce clause and is just plain unconstitutional. Uniform federal environmental regulation is good economic policy that helps promote interstate commerce. Pushing unconstitutional legislation merely to play on public fears of our federal government is bad for Oklahoma taxpayers and fiscally irresponsible. The costly litigation defending a bill that will be ruled unconstitutional is a waste of taxpayer money.