You are on page 1of 1

Generic Solvency: Economic Feasibility Page 1 of 1

Bozarth/Voell Arx Axiom/Vector

Generic Solvency: Economic Feasibility


Bozarth/Voell

Pepperdine Law Review 08 - The Federal Budget cannot maintain every idea, bill or
proposal that is presented that is why a study showed that six out of seven examined
bills emphasize econ benefits
Seth W. Eaton, [J.D. Candidate 2008, Pepperdine University School of Law, Malibu, CA; Bachelor of Arts in History from Dartmouth
College, Hanover, NH, Class of 2004], “Winter is Frigid, n1 so I Say Bring on the Greenhouse Effect! A Legal and Policy Discussion
of the Strategies the United States Must Employ to Combat Global Warming”, Pepperdine Law Review, 2008, 35 Pepp. L. Rev. 787,
<accessed via LexisNexis>, [brackets added for clarification], (ZV)
“The federal budget cannot maintain every idea, bill or proposal that a Congressperson,
representing the interests of his or her constituents, attempts to bring to the table. n263 For
this reason, bill proposals are careful to include distinct language indicating that economic efficiency is a primary concern in
implementing the law. n264 California's Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 includes the terms "cost-effective" and "feasible"
eleven times each in the text of the statute. n265 In addition, the statute makes reference to the efficiency and cost of global warming
regulations five other times. n266 The California Legislature did not take the cost of creating such a vast environmental framework
lightly, and it was able to get the bill passed through the State Assembly and signed into law by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger.
n267 Congress also seems to recognize the concern for economic feasibility. A
poll of seven proposed
Congressional "global warming" bills revealed that six out of the seven emphasized the
cost-effectiveness or the economic impact of the regulation.”

Pepperdine Law Review 08 - The concern with federal funding is understandable,


especially when the figures for fixing global warming are revealed
Seth W. Eaton, [J.D. Candidate 2008, Pepperdine University School of Law, Malibu, CA; Bachelor of Arts in History from Dartmouth
College, Hanover, NH, Class of 2004], “Winter is Frigid, n1 so I Say Bring on the Greenhouse Effect! A Legal and Policy Discussion
of the Strategies the United States Must Employ to Combat Global Warming”, Pepperdine Law Review, 2008, 35 Pepp. L. Rev. 787,
<accessed via LexisNexis>, [brackets added for clarification], (ZV)
“Realizing that economic feasibility would be a momentous problem for federal
regulation, Congress spoke on the subject of "unfunded [*829] mandates." n269 In 1995, responding
to widespread state and local distaste with the economic burden of implementing its laws, n270 Congress enacted the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act. n271 According to the law, all subsequent federal mandates would require more rigorous cost-efficiency
figures, and procedures were created for opponents of legislation to defeat it on cost-effectiveness grounds. n272 Likewise, if a law
promises future funding, the Act demands that the legislation "expires" if and when the funding does not materialize. n273 This
protection from unfunded mandates also extends to agency regulations. n274 The
concern with federal funding is
understandable, especially when the figures for fixing global warming are revealed.”