Quote:And what would happen if they can't agree on a contract?   Does Georgia just keep sending pollution into Florida?  Or does Florida send their air force to take out the source of the pollution with a few well-placed smart bombs? 

 

These types of disputes between states are why we scrapped the Articles of Confederation in the first place and wrote a Constitution,  which established a central government.  It was because the states squabbled over all sorts of issues like this.  

 

It seems like it would be a lot simpler and more efficient to have a national pollution law that applied to all the states.  Then you don't have 50 states all negotiating treaties with each other as if they were separate countries. 

 

That's ludicrous when was the last time a nation bombed another nation for pollution? Why then would it even be a remote possible that neighboring states couldn't avoid physical conflict in this situation?

 

I'm not saying you'll have no federal oversight and maybe the states would agree to all be held to a single standard, who knows but how effective is the EPA in it's current form? 

 

That's what federal control gets you. 

 

edit: The EPA's budget last year was 7.9 Billion dollars, this year its 8.2 Billion dollars. That means we spend on average 164 Million PER STATE on the EPA, you don't think local governments could be just a little more efficient with that? Just a little? 

---