Help Us Stop Governor Walz From Imposing California’s Car Rules on Minnesota!
In late September, Governor Walz announced that he would seek to impose California’s mandates for zero emission vehicles and low emission vehicles on Minnesota. Rather than passing this proposal through the normal legislative process, Governor Walz is trying to impose these rules on Minnesotans by instructing the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency to draft the mandates forcing our state to comply with regulations drafted by unelected bureaucrats on the California Air Resources Board.
Why wouldn’t Governor Walz want to go through the legislative process where legislators can weigh the pros and cons of the proposal and vote accordingly? Probably because these regulations are not about expanding consumer choice, they will not make cars safer, and they will have no measurable benefit to the environment.
Center of the American Experiment and the Upper Midwest Law Center are dedicated to fighting for the right for individual Minnesotans, not unelected California bureaucrats, to decide which cars they drive but we need your help.
We need as many people as possible to sign the letter below and submit it to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency via normal U.S. mail, or at the email address provided below. Sending the letter doesn’t make you a legal “party” or create any obligation on the part of the letter writer.
Thank you for your help!
November ___, 2019
Ms. Sheena Denny
OAH Legal Assistant
Office of Administrative Hearings
600 North Robert Street
P.O. Box 64620
St. Paul, MN 55164-0620 [email protected]
Re: Request for Administrative Law Judge Hearing in the
Proposed Rulemaking 36416 PCA, Revisor’s I.D. No. 04626
Dear Ms. Denny:
I am writing as a Minnesota resident to request that a hearing be scheduled and conducted before an Administrative Law Judge concerning the proposed Rulemaking designated as 36416 PCA, Revisor’s I.D. No. 04626, Request for Comments (Possible Amendments to Rules Governing Passenger Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Minnesota Rules, Chapter 7023).
I oppose the Rule in its entirety because I do not believe that Minnesota can do more than comply with the existing federal standards without serious harm to our economy, livelihoods and quality of life and that our adoption of California’s standards would, in any case, have an insignificant effect on overall emissions, such that the cost/benefit comparison is very much against adoption. There is also no Minnesota legislative authority for this rule-making, and the EPA has now withdrawn California’s (and therefore Minnesota’s) federal waiver to issue such rules, so it is clear that the courts will ultimately determine that the Rule, if adopted, is unlawful and cannot be enforced.
[Name – signature]
[Name – please print]