Quote:
Originally Posted by TXiceman
I am with Rusty here. The rules are what they are and the manufacturers knew what was required. The market place will decide based on reliability and economic factors.
|
Ken, It's easy to make rules that favor your business model. People have to take that into consideration when you look at how this all came down. I would love it if I could sit on a federal panel so I could write the laws as I want them to apply to me.
You know - there's a lot of things that get forced through at the Federal level that aren't right and that need to be looked at. The suit is not about suing the SCR consortium, but the Feds that manage the Clean Air Act. Look at what happened in the Gulf ... your government at work.
All that the suit would like to determine is;
does the Federal EPA Clean Air Act apply to all participants equally and if not why not? That's it in a nutshell. It's not about one camp suing the other.
According to the Press; In a lawsuit filed July 5, Navistar accused EPA Director Lisa Jackson of not doing her duty to uphold the Clean Air Act, and her agency of not doing its part to protect public health. Let them work through this issue to see if in fact this is true or not. It's not about anyone not meeting the standards because they do. The point is - do you meet the standard 100% of the time or some some other arbitrary figure when its convenient not to be 100% compliant.
In my opinion, I believe that the investigators that worked this case are professionals and they would not advise that a frivolous suit be brought against the government unless the case had merit.
1 more government ruling that is making everyone's life better is using food for fuel. I'm still upset about that. But we can discuss that point later.