Bacon's Rebellion

Democracy Thrives in Sunlight

Virginia Untethered From California’s Nutty EV Regs

—

by

James A. Bacon
in

by Kerry Dougherty

Well, God bless Gov. Glenn Youngkin and Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares .

On Wednesday the dynamic duo announced that they’d found a way to undo some of the damage done by the commonwealth’s Democrats when these far-left lawmakers hooked Virginia’s wagon to California’s.

You can read the attorney general’s advisory opinion here.

Let’s back up.

In 2021 when Dems were running all three branches of Virginia state government, the General Assembly recklessly passed a bill – and the loathsome Ralph Northam signed it – linking our state laws on electric vehicles to California’s.

As if California is a state that any of the 49 others would want to emulate.

California has now revised its regs on EVs effective January 1, 2025 and Mirayes opines that we’re not obligated to follow the new ones.

Hallelujah!

The Richmond-Times Dispatch reports that “The new California mandates step up the pace to require that all new car, truck and SUV sales be zero emission vehicles by 2035, with 35% of new sales being electric vehicles in model year 2026.” Continue reading.

Share this article

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

Comments

22 responses to “Virginia Untethered From California’s Nutty EV Regs”

  1. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    uh oh… this ought to REALLY set off a tirade!

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/2495af671c794f77761d8c6dea05435af1313cd4983d73e73e58b13e1b9cbb4d.png https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/1ff6e70cf1d78d7e1fc6daec94c01a867380c6595bbe93d0e29eefc3e5f9e852.png
    https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/07/climate/biden-mileage-electric-vehicles.html?unlocked_article_code=1.yE0.SGZR.8GjJ6wKGhGt4&smid=url-share

    1. Chip Gibson Avatar
      Chip Gibson

      Biden should remain in the basement and spend more time on Family Crack Mileage and Firearms Safety.

  2. Chip Gibson Avatar
    Chip Gibson

    Great article. "…the loathsome Ralph Northam.", a most fitting title. We should have delivered an "Electric Blanket Party" to pre-Gov Ralph 44 years ago.

  3. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    and THIS…

    " Prop 65, also known as the California Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, is a law that requires businesses to warn consumers about possible exposure to chemicals that may cause cancer or reproductive harm. The law applies to manufacturers, distributors, and retailers who sell consumer goods in California, even if the company is not located in the state. Businesses must post warning signs or labels on products, food, drinks, and paint if they contain any of the chemicals on the state's list, which is maintained by the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) and updated annually"

    what a CONCEPT – the govt forcing businesses to tell consumers if the product contains any cancer-causing chemicals!

    This one, Virginia has NOT adopted but Virginians already benefit from Cali Regs because many manufacturers put it on all the labels to their products:

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/915486ad2a29525f72863016ae30c98c364871484587690a30a2e2dc398cbda6.png

    1. Paul Sweet Avatar
      Paul Sweet

      Almost everything contains chemicals known to the state of California (but nobody else?) to cause cancer etc. I don't know if I have bought anything lately that didn't have this label.

      1. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        well not true… but a lot more than most folks realize. Prop 65 was a citizen initiative (which Va does not have) and it was thought to go down hard but won by 2/3 to 1/3.

        What happens is California leads the way and other states follow later.

        If California were a country it would be the 7th largest by GDP. It’s a significant reason the US is so
        high on world rankings of GDP.

        All this talk about Va NOT adopting another state and doing their own thing. They typically don’t and they
        don’t allow citizens to propose it via referenda.

        Prop 65 goes too far for some folks but remember does not prohibit , it just requires notice. People still
        make their choices.

  4. Eric the half a troll Avatar
    Eric the half a troll

    The new JAB right wing promotion – not posting the entire Kerry article to redirect readers to her site whether they want to go there or not. No thanks!

    Good to see Kerry approves of the administration attempts to unilaterally overturn laws enacted by our duly elected representatives. Right in line with the Conservative philosophy these days.

    1. Chip Gibson Avatar
      Chip Gibson

      Yeah, I went there too and had to back up…

      I approve of Kerry's approval of overturning the Marxist wrath of out of office representatives, such as Ralph. What is Ralph doing these days? Throwing himself a 65th birthday party with his two friends, Hanky and Panky Crab, over on the Eastern Shore….or, maybe Cuba?

      1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
        Eric the half a troll

        “I approve of Kerry's approval of overturning the Marxist wrath of out of office representatives, such as Ralph”

        Which would be… perhaps… legitimate if Northam had been the one who enacted this law. He is not, it was an action of the legislature which neither the Governor nor the AG has the power to overturn.

  5. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    Where's Ralph? Well, he'd be gov again if he could get a second term. Youngkin would lose big time to Northam… but you'd never know that listening to conservatives! Think NoVa and other blue Va votes choosing between a real Dem and a Trump-loving GOP masquerading as a moderate!

    1. Randy Huffman Avatar
      Randy Huffman

      Trump loving GOP masquerading as a moderate? Really? You expect anyone to believe that?

      But to your point, I think Youngkin would trounce Northam in an election. What would be close is Youngkin and Spanberger, and assuming she gets the nod, she will likely be the favorite. Though the Republicans hopefully will nominate someone who will make it a very close election, such as Sears or Miyares, unless they both choose to run for reelection.

      1. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        He’s made several and continuing statements about supporting Trump, so yes. Youngkin barely won against a bad Dem.. Sears/Miyares, you’re dreaming… they’re hardly known among most voters and neither has well-known positions and I suspect their positions on abortion would hurt them badly even before voters found out they are Trumpsters also.

        Hey – you’re speaking to me here,,, are you going to beg off again? You don’t do personal attacks which is a GOOD thing. stay in touch!

        1. Randy Huffman Avatar
          Randy Huffman

          I don’t see how you can call McAuliff a bad Dem, he won before, plus how much name recognition did Youngkin have before that? My hunch is Sears will run I have no idea about Miyares. As to abortion, the time for that to be a major issue is probably over, but who knows what is going to happen this November let alone a year later.

          1. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            McAuliff messed up on his stance to parents and public education at a time when Youngkin was capitalizing on the drop in NAEP scores. I was no fan. He came across to me like a used car salesman. I think you’d be wrong about abortion Randy, it’s a potent issue that will result in every single GOP candidate being asked to state their position on abortion. If Youngkin runs again or Sears, they’ll be on the bubble for that issue. This is where candidates will have to be honest about their positions on that issue and will not be able to finesse it.

          2. Randy Huffman Avatar
            Randy Huffman

            We have talked about abortion before so I will not repeat it, but while there are many staunch pro life people, there are just as many the left who want to allow abortion with no limits. Youngkin had the right idea, just bad messaging. I think a lot of Republicans are coming to grips with this.

            You can be pro life but stake out a position that abortion is allowed up to a point of time , such as 15 weeks or something else reasonable.

          3. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            Not bad messaging. Lying about it and proof positive with other states. Few on the left want no limits. They were fine with Roe/Wade. It was the GOP that was not okay with Roe/Wade and have passed much stricter limits and now advocate restrictions to birth control itself. That’s way more than “messaging” . “Reasonable” is NOT what Republicans and Conservatives “decide”. They’re going to be held to account at elections. When they say “reasonable restrictions” do we believe them? Pretty clear we should not.

          4. Randy Huffman Avatar
            Randy Huffman

            With all due respect. That point of view represents simple talking points on the left. Not all conservatives are pro life, I know of many including myself. Youngkin was not lying. The Supreme Courts ruling was not on the merits of abortion, it was on the issue of whether the Court should be setting policy, which is judicial activism at its worst, or whether it’s a matter if States rights. It was the Left who used the courts to “decide policy” NOT the right!

            More and more people in this country are waking up to what the Left is doing, that is why Biden is going to lose.

          5. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            seen some polls? It's not just left. Youngkin may not have been lying but if he had an absolute majority in the GA and they sent a more restrictive bill, he would sign it. He would not refuse.

            People know that.

            Look at the other states Randy. Blaming the left is lame and will not work (except for conservatives).

            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/09b3bf57c0c17bbc6cde1967696a34e8d2f3e631fc5c7d757dc835cde9c82a66.png

          6. Randy Huffman Avatar
            Randy Huffman

            That is not the right question, The question is should abortion be legal in all circumstances, some circumstances, or none. There are alot of Liberals who do in fact support the legal in all circumstances argument, and quite a few conservatives are pro life from the beginning or 6 weeks (not me).

            Gallup did the survey last summer scroll down and 69% say its should not be legal after the first trimester, which is before viability which was allowed under Roe, and Youngkin proposed 15 week, just after the first trimester.

            https://news.gallup.com/poll/321143/americans-stand-abortion.aspx

            Needless to say, this is one survey and a snapshot in time. But time and time again most people favor limits before what was in Roe.

          7. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            Like I said, there were restrictions in RoevWade that most Dems were okay with. Conservatives were not.
            Had not seen the Gallup. Thanks.

            I support Candidates being truthful about , not changing later, and let voters decide. it's that GOP candidates have said one thing then done another that voters don't trust them.

            AND , I think that the GOP saying they support a 15-week limit won't pass muster for most folks because some abortions past that time are necessary in their eyes and they just don't trust the GOP to support it.

            I think what most people DO support is no late abortions for convenience.

            I think most people want birth control to be freely available and not outlawed as some states are
            trying to do.

            When these other states do tough laws on abortion – the folks opposed to it in other states go
            after their GOP leaders and say that if other states are doing it their state should also.

            And trying to get the truth out of GOP candidates is not easy,. THey seem to shift and say
            that the "shift" is "messaging". It's not. It's actual tighter restrictions that they won't come
            clean on and folks both left and moderate simply don't trust them. So they ask them as
            candidates and how they answer determines if they get the votes.

            I personally do not like abortion but at the same time I think birth control should be freely
            available and when anti-abortion folks ALSO want to restrict birth control – that's it for me.

            If a GOP candidate will say: "I support 15 weeks and I will NEVER support shorter AND I support 100% birth control availability and will never change on that" – they could get moderate/left votes. If they hand-wave and prevaricate, they are toast.

          8. Randy Huffman Avatar
            Randy Huffman

            Fair response and I personally agree with you on several of what you say except two key things.

            1) a lot of the waffling is politically driven because a lot of financial supporters are staunch pro life, but it goes both ways. You correctly challenge the GOP, well challenge the Liberal candidates too. Would they stop at Roe? I believe most will not be pinned down because a lot of donors are the left want no restrictions.

            2). I don’t put a litmus test on abortion issues because like many Americans it’s not at the top of my list.

          9. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            I don’t think too many on the left want totally unrestricted – small number and so Dem candidates are going to go with something like Roe give or take a bit. Remember, the Dems were not campaigning for less restriction before Roe got whacked… they were okay with it.

            It’s a pretty big issue with Dems if they are going to vote for a GOP candidate over a Dem. They have
            to trust the GOP to not say one thing then be persuaded by the pro-life to take a more restrictive stance.
            The other things in tandem with abortion are support of Trump and the culture war… those candidates
            will not get many Dem votes in my view.

            Youngkin won by winning over some suburban voters, especially women. He’d not get them again
            if they see him as taking a tougher line on abortion and supporting Trump, again in my view.

            See, we CAN discuss these things without big drama!

Leave a Reply

Read More