Carb forced me out of Calif.

Not to make this a political tangent but what is forgotten is that California really can't tell another state registered trucks what they need to drive on federally funded roads - which most of California has. This can be construed as a regulation of interstate commerce by California and is one of the few mandated duties of the federal government. Until it goes to court or congress addresses the issue, we will have to deal with it unless some want to make a test case out of it by refusing to abide by their laws. The bigger picture of the issues is that in a realistic approach to the interstate commerce clause a large portion of the encroachment into states by the federal government hinges on the past decisions of the courts to uphold the federal right to regulate interstate commerce and only the federal government.

 

But you forget that states have just as much power to right and pass any laws they want within their own state borders. Government can't do anything about that. So California could say we only want blue 2014 freightliners in this state and there isn't a #### thing the government could do about UNLESS they feel it would drastically effect the US and go against the better nature of the constitution then they can over ride the law. But they have yet to ever over power a states power when it comes to stuff like that cause it requires congress to do stuff and they don't care about stuff unless it effects them directly. So good luck with that.

 

This is propaganda which originates with new truck salesmen and anti-owner operator mega-carriers. Also, apparantly a few defeatist drivers who like to sound important by parroting nonsense and other misinformation they have forcefed to them by their mega-carrier lords.

I've run the numbers on new vs. old truck, and my old truck is in new mechanical condition, which is a proven money maker in my operation. I will do what is most profitable for me. I don't make business changes on what some nanny wishes things would be;I make those decisions on what they are now, in reality.

 

I understand what you are saying but the feds already have interjected in hundreds of laws based on the Interstate Commerce Clause and the courts rulings in the past 120 years. ALthough what you say is true that the states have the power, this is an exception like other laws. One of the reasons is the standing agreement between the states to follow federal guidelines for vehicles, harmonizing something like 60 separate regulations between the 48 states at the time of the agreement. However again this is a bit different than states making laws and having the power to make them.

The difference is simple, the state can't tell what another states citizens have to do to access their markets.

No matter what the vehicle is used, be it a cart or a truck, unless the state where the citizen lives agrees to apply another state's regulations to their own, with no grandfathering in (meaning in this case retrofitting the truck to comply) then that state can't tell them what to do. There is no preclusion or exception to the original agreement between the states that harmonized the vehicle/road laws (that's when we had the states all agree to have the same lights, the same brakes, the same safety systems, etc. ...)

See the Interstate Commerce Clause is there to make sure everyone have equal access to other states and their markets, stopping border checks that limits another state's citizen from travel and stopping special requirements for protectionism of a state's market. It was an equalizing clause that forced everyone to play nice and has worked for us in the past.

The other half of the problem is the federal mandate to be per-emptive over state's laws that is built directly on the rulings of the court decisions solely based on the clause. Since the days of the rail road, the courts have been clear about this, the states can't put in special rules to limit interstate commerce one such example is special track width that would only allow one type of train to run within a state - excluding the neighboring state's train unable to access the state's rail lines (that said there was a mix of rail widths for a long time not based on state laws but based on company needs which is different). Everything from Farm subsidies to the EPA and emissions are based on this clause and the courts decisions up holding the federal right to regulate commerce between the states.

As pointed out, there are a couple exceptions, one is trailers and bridge laws but that is also in the federal regs about how states can make their own specs for road building based on their needs and this is also agreed on by all the states to be allowed.

The bottom line is this, unless all the states agree to adopt California's laws and force their citizens and company entities to conform to those laws, California is hoping to continue to fool all of us into conforming to their laws and keep us thinking they have the right to dictate to anyone about who can drive on federally paid for roads in the state. There is no court case that has affirmed the right of California to do this to other states citizens nor has it gone to court because they have yet to fine owners and confiscate trucks from out of state that don't comply.

 

Whoa folks its been covered before--from a strictly financial standpoint--Cali can DO WHATEVER it wants--it is the only state the feds cannot blackmail--they have been trying it since the late 70's--and Calis answer since the Reagan adm(as cali gov--b4 pres)
We(cali)return MORE fuel/road tax to the feds than we get--THEREFOR we will do what we want--OR we will NO LONGER collect or disperse tax money in this state---The FEDS cannot live WITHOUT the FED gas taxes collected in Cali--
Nothing New
The only chance of beating the Carb crap trucking had--WAS--refusing to comply from the begining--and since that didn't happen---it is over--argue forever--CARB isnt going to change--and nobody will force them to...

 

If you are moving your business, why not consider a state like nevada (no sales tax) or texas (no state inc tax). I'm sure there are freight lanes and such to consider that are beyond me right now - just thought I'd mention it.

 

Ridgeline made an excellent post. California can only dictate requirements for California state registered vehicles.

Example, California passed clean air regulations back in the 70's, but these regulations only pertained to California registered vehicles.

They could not ban the operation of vehicles registered in other states, or deny vehicles registered in other states from driving in California.

California has zero authority to dictate and impose regulations on other states.

 

They don't have the power to regulate other state vehicle your right. But if your gonna operate within the California border they do have that right. Anytime you cross that border or any other state border you have to follow STATE LAW. That's like saying I can ignore the idle law cause I live in Iowa. Not while I'm in California. I have to follow the state law.

 

I pass razor blades every time I pass the port. Like a voice says, You have 21:00:53 left, before CHP finds some thing to write you a ticket. Only state & Canada that scares me. Big bucks when I go past Blythe.

 

If you are running an apportioned plate and CA is one of the states for which that plate has been apportioned, then you are probably considered to be registered in the state of CA just like all the others.