Maine, Canada, Kyoto

This was written twice somewhere between Atlanta and San Francisco. The worst feeling in the world is when the computer decides to reset just as you get ready to hit the save button on a masterpiece.

OK. Maine, Canada, and Kyoto.

Had a nice long, well thought out post written and then somehow lost it, so this one may be fairly short and to the point as I don't want to rewrite the same thing, again.

To recap, Maine and several other Northeastern states got together with their Canadian counterparts and devised an agreement to implement the Kyoto protocols in their region, despite the fact that the US Federal government is not a signatory to the treaty.

Bottom line, in my opinion, is that the law is good, but the agreement itself was unconstitutional.

First, the agreement. The Constitution clearly states that foreign policy and agreements with foreign nations will be the purview of the Federal government and that the States of forbidden from entering into transnational agreements. The agreement between the Northeastern states and the Canadian Provinces is an international agreement and as such it is illegal.

The Federal government needs to take the signatories to court to censure them and to defend the Constitutional separation of State and Federal rights, but also to get the agreement nullified. The last thing that we need is for some envirowacko to use this agreement in front of a sympathetic judge that's looking to create law from the bench. The risks of not nullifying the agreement are fairly substantial. The agreement was wrong and it needs to be declared as such fairly quickly.

But the law itself should be allowed to remain in force. If the State of Maine wants to be known for being unfriendly to business, that's their choice. If they want to have these onerous restrictions in place, that's fine. So long as they don't try to force them upon companies operations in states other than Maine, their fine. I think that the law is not really all too bright, but if that's what the people of Maine want, who am I to say that they're wrong?

Now I'm sure that someone is probably wondering how I can condone the law when the agreement that brought it about was itself unconstitutional. I actually believe that the law was probably being considered before the meetings with the Canadians, and it is not unconstitutional for a state to decide to implement the terms of an unsigned treaty, so long as they don't sign the treaty itself. It's a fine line, but I am not convinced that Maine wouldn't have passed this law even without the agreement with the Canadians. Unless the Feds can convince a court otherwise, the law should be allowed to stand.

This is certainly not the most brilliant move that could have been made by Maine. Implementation of the most restrictive environmental laws this side of California is going to do some real damage to their economy.

But the people of Maine, the ones who actually have to live with the consequences of this lunacy, have recourse if they don't like the effects of the law.

They can vote out the folks who put the law in place.

And that will be the best condemnation that anyone can make against this kind of lawmaking.