Leno's law shot down

[Zeke]

Originally Posted by speeder

If I was forced to ride the bus, light rail or a bicycle here and I got a free GT3 if I moved to where you live, I'd stay put.

Where does he live? I might take a deal like that. You could put me down for less than a GT even. Wouldn't take much less to move me.

But if he lives in AZ, TX or southern NV, nope. BTDT.

[Mahler9th]

"@Mahler9th, that's how it went down."

Not sure what you mean.

Understanding $$ to implement is an important part of running the sausage factory.

Folks can access some of the info (for example analysis info) on the legislative information web site. I have not done so.

I did take a very cursory look at the Bill text... and it appears to be more "complex" than "simply moving the exemption date" to something like 1955.

I assume that smart people worked on this and there were compromises along the way.

After all, it is sausage making.

Here perhaps is some opinion...

https://calmatters.org/politics/2025/08/california-kills-jay-leno-classic-car-smog-bill/

My 1975 911 is smog exempt. But I think there is a federal law prohibiting the sale of leaded fuels.

These matters can be quite complex.

After all, it is sausage making.

I suspect that it ain't over.

Never is.

[Por_sha911]

Originally Posted by Mahler9th

1975 and older cars are still exempt, like my 911.
NO SMOG for my 911, as it has been for many years.

Translation: I got mine and it sucks to be you that yours is not old enough. Nice.

Originally Posted by speeder

If I was forced to ride the bus, light rail or a bicycle here and I got a free GT3 if I moved to where you live, I'd stay put.

If they offer the above deal in TN, I will pray you stay put too.

[speeder]

Originally Posted by Zeke

Where does he live? I might take a deal like that. You could put me down for less than a GT even. Wouldn't take much less to move me.

But if he lives in AZ, TX or southern NV, nope. BTDT.

He definitely does, live in one of those places. Think concrete, *****ty malls everywhere and 115 degrees all summer. Just hell.

And yet he likes to take shots at coastal CA. every chance he gets. Doesn't take a Phd in psychology to decode that one. Look, if someone made me an employment offer that was attractive enough, there are other places in the USA and plenty in the world I could live...wouldn't even have to bribe me with a car. Connecticut close to NYC springs to mind, 93 octane fuel and nice towns. But I'm happy here.

[Mahler9th]

"Translation: I got mine and it sucks to be you that yours is not old enough. Nice."

LOL.

You can translate what I said any way you want.

And I can translate what you said as... predictable.

No, that is NOT why I posted what I posted.

Read the Bill.

It is sausage making.

I never even looked at it until today.

When I bought my car in 2001, the rolling exemption was in place, and that changed in the first few years of my ownership.

I think 1975 became the cutoff because of CATS. Not the meow kind.

My car is not typically driven on public roads. But it is smog exempt.

You can see I raced it at the RR IV at Laguna Seca.

There is a lot of information and history on this topic available in the public domain.

It is not so simple as CA foolishly requires smog tests on older cars...

Like all sausage making, balance can be an important consideration.

But perhaps more important for those that wish to propose a new recipe... understand how the sausage gets made.

I presume that was the case here.

I think it likely that smart folks worked on this.

I also presume there were a lot of other recipes for new kinds of CA sausage that were proposed and got shot down.

That is the nature of the sausage biz.

If they remove the "pinch of pepper" in a new proposed recipe, perhaps the resulting recipe will be approved by whomever the sausage factory chiefs are at the time of consideration.

[gduke2010]

Originally Posted by Zeke

Typical of the people running things here. Thing is, they aren't running anything except into the ground. Seriously, the kind of people we have in any form of government are low grade morons. I bet if you asked any of them who the 3rd president of the US was they would not know.

Every single person on the public trough is mentally constipated or they wouldn't be there. It's embarrassing.

can't disagree with that

[Mahler9th]

Not vetted but if true, perhaps germane:

"In 2004, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed Assembly Bill (AB) 2683 to require older vehicles to undergo smog checks, overriding a previous exemption. The bill's intent was to improve air quality by reducing emissions from some of the most polluting vehicles on California's roads."

I think this legislative action, signed off by the Terminator, eliminated the rolling program.

For example:

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2004-sep-24-me-arnold24-story.html

I suspect that legislative information about AB 2683 (2004) is available on the CA legis info site.

[Por_sha911]

Mahler9th: One of the problems with no rolling exemption is smog parts on older cars are almost impossible to find and are priced to be made of obtainium. In many cases, newer more modern fuel systems and exhaust can yield better mpg and emissions but are not legal.

The poor schmuck with a 1976 in CA is screwed but you posted the 'I got mine" and expressed no empathy for for your fellow Pelican with his plight. It may not be how you meant it but it sure comes off that way.

Edit: I remember something about the Governator and his motivation for cleaner air. Problem: a Classic 40 year old Porsche that is kept in meticulous condition probably drives a fraction of the miles than a 15-20 year old rust bucket pickup truck that has never been tuned up. Which one does more polluting considering condition and miles?

[RANDY P]

Originally Posted by speeder

If I was forced to ride the bus, light rail or a bicycle here and I got a free GT3 if I moved to where you live, I'd stay put.

Good! It's coming soon! No one wants you here anyhow. Tell the rest of 'em while you're at it.

rjp

[RANDY P]

Originally Posted by speeder

He definitely does, live in one of those places. Think concrete, *****ty malls everywhere and 115 degrees all summer. Just hell.

And yet he likes to take shots at coastal CA. every chance he gets. Doesn't take a Phd in psychology to decode that one. Look, if someone made me an employment offer that was attractive enough, there are other places in the USA and plenty in the world I could live...wouldn't even have to bribe me with a car. Connecticut close to NYC springs to mind, 93 octane fuel and nice towns. But I'm happy here.

Don't you live in a trailer?

rjp

[Mahler9th]

"It may not be how you meant it but it sure comes off that way."

That interpretation is up to you.

Like I said, in social media forums, such "conclusions" can be predicted.

Way back in 1989 or so I took a biz trip to the OC. Stayed at the Marriott Newport Beach. Was working for GE and living in WI.

I had traveled with a female colleague for some business meetings.

We were both < 30.

We took a run one afternoon... 3-4 miles.

After that we both wondered why our lungs were aching.

Painful.

And we were on the coast.

One of our local biz contacts walked us to an area between buildings at the hotel... an area that was outside and there was a view eastward.

The sky was orange.

It was smog.

That was 1989 or so.

I had been there a few times before on business, and on the first trip even played a bunch of tennis at that Marriott.

This time was different as it was Summer.

I obviously have not forgotten that experience.

A simple web search can provide plenty of pix of this smog.

Here is some perspective on the recent Bill:

https://www.hotrod.com/features/leno-law-senate-bill-712-advances-california-senate-appropriations-committee

Implementation can be tricky... I suspect that some proponents pointed out that very few 1965 Mustangs are around that might abuse smog exemption.

But it is sausage making.

The gubment incurs costs from smog.

Smog is bad.

How much more smog with simple change of law?

It is sausage making.

"I remember something about the Governator and his motivation for cleaner air. Problem: a Classic 40 year old Porsche that is kept in meticulous condition probably drives a fraction of the miles than a 15-20 year old rust bucket pickup truck that has never been tuned up. Which one does more polluting considering condition and miles?"

How do you ensure that exempted gross polluters don't game the exemption?

Guardrails...

If the Bill had passed, would a person with 1972 911 have to pay $500 for some type of historic plates? And change to a different type of policy? Things they are not required to pay for today?

I have not examine the Bill closely enough to know.

The devil can be in the details.

Implementation of such a Bill might require IT changes at DMV, and on and on, and on. Who pays?

Read the Bill.

What a mess.

I suspect that this may come up again.

I for one don't think sausage making is so easy.

If you knew how the sausage factory was run (including how the sausage is made and how recipes are chosen), would you eat the sausage?

Perhaps folks in CA can figure out how to run their state's sausage factory?

When I was in college and grad school in Hanover, NH, I never experienced any smog.

I am pretty sure if I went to UCLA in that same time period, I would have experienced smog.

One thing for sure:

I would not expect CA to implement the same types of laws about smog as NH, or even TN.

[Crowbob]

Originally Posted by speeder

The truth of it is that in the list of challenges that CA. has, some smog exemption bill isn't even on the radar. It simply doesn't matter to anyone but a small subset of the population, which we happen to be a part of. Don't overestimate your own importance...it just doesn't matter.

It appears that you are not aware of what you are advocating, here.

You seem to be arguing that because the exemption is so miniscule compared to California other problems, and because so few people will be affected by the new law, that it’s completely reasonable to act in an oppressive, arbitrary and capricious manner against such a minority.

In addition, you seem to argue that those few of whom this law would impact are somehow acting inappropriately by virtue of their opposition to such tyranny and that they simply do not matter.

Am I correct?

[speeder]

The thing is, CA. has an exemption for 1975 and older gas vehicles and 1998(?) and older diesels. Seems reasonable to me and I have owned a lot more old cars than most people here. As Mike pointed out above, the improvement in air quality in Southern California in the last 40 years has been nothing short of dramatic, especially in the last 25 or so. It's a result of the fleet on the roads getting steadily and continuously newer and cleaner with hybrids and EVs replacing a lot of older, dirtier vehicles.

When I first moved here, I would see people jogging and wonder why TF they were even bothering? Why hyper-ventilate smog? It didn't seem healthy, at all. CARB and the EPA has done a fantastic job of cleaning up the air and water in CA but of course that might start going backwards now. Other states have emissions testing, including where Randy lives. Everyone in the USA has the freedom to live anywhere they want, as long as they can afford it. Many places do not emissions test vehicles.

What I'm getting at is that there are several different objectives at play and now might not have been the best time to try to pass a bill to loosen any air quality regs, with the way that the general winds are blowing. Most of the people crowing the loudest about smog checks either downplay or completely dismiss air quality concerns and those are people not worth talking to.

[look 171]

Originally Posted by Scott Watkins

"Typical of the people running things here."

No sir 100% the responsibility of the California voters. If the folks want something different in California, they'd educate themselves and vote accordingly.

When was the last time our voting base actually matter or made a dent? 30 years ago, maybe?

I knew this was too good to be true. I didn't even try to hold my breath this time around.

[speeder]

Originally Posted by RANDY P

Don't you live in a trailer?

rjp

No, I own a couple of trailers including an Airstream and an Airstream motor home but I live in an apartment. I like it a lot. I’d live in a tent here before living in Phoenix, though, even if you gave me a free house. What an ungodly schithole.

[vash]

first time I visited LA as a kid I remember the sky was gray. the smog was shocking. I was 10 and I still remember it.

probably took some hard decisions to make it better.

politics suck ass. I hate it, I do know one thing. there is no single decision that doenst piss off someone. this planet is gonna shake us off. hahaha...**** it.

[Mahler9th]

"You seem to be arguing that because the exemption is so miniscule compared to California other problems, and because so few people will be affected by the new law, that it’s completely reasonable to act in an oppressive, arbitrary and capricious manner against such a minority.

In addition, you seem to argue that those few of whom this law would impact are somehow acting inappropriately by virtue of their opposition to such tyranny and that they simply do not matter."

I understand that not everyone has the time, ability and/or interest to become better-informed when they post in forums.

That is part of human nature, and reading "communications" in forums is not much different, if at all, from other ways we can be reminded of that.

I see words like "oppressive, arbitrary and capricious," and "tyranny," and yet it does not appear, at least to me, that folks using such words have any idea what happened to this Bill.

One might have used such words in forums like this in the 70's when cats became mandated at the federal level. But internet forums did not exist.

Now we have the www, and via that tech, folks can become better-informed about a variety of things, including the legislative progress of the Bill in question.

I have read parts of the Bill, and it appears quite complex. Part of the complexity seems related to a desire to create effective guardrails to prevent abuse of any further exemption.

It certainly is possible that others argued that the need for robust guardrails is low, for example by arguing, with supporting data, that there are not enough vehicles is some pre-1975 range to make any difference in CA smog levels, should they be exempted.

However these same folks may have a secret stash of 20,000 of the worst polluting American muscle cars just waiting to be unleashed with an exemption.

It is also possible, if not likely, that in CA, the sausage making process includes a required appropriations step, and even if Bills reach that step with all sides agreeing on known and likely budget implications, the gatekeepers in the appropriations step might suspend such a Bill.

This type of scenario is possible, as are many others.

Government sausage making for an entire state is perhaps different from sausage making at an enterprise like Usinger's.

I am reminded of a glimpse I got into sausage making way back 25 years ago, when these forums were quite different.

One of my good friends, a "DOJ employee," (that has a federal building named after him through an act of congress), was visiting with his wife who was, and still is what some might call a lobbysist. Very high level.

She told me that her organization's wardrobe budget, just for her, was $10k per month.

That is not likely a budget line item that existed at Usinger's at that time.

[Arizona_928]

Originally Posted by Por_sha911

Translation: I got mine and it sucks to be you that yours is not old enough. Nice.


If they offer the above deal in TN, I will pray you stay put too.

Some states love to pull the ladder up only after certain people have exploited the system.

[Arizona_928]

I think it’s an important aspect to mention the chemistry of the initial smog compared to the fuel that is sold today. 99% biodiesel doesn’t have sulfur, non-blended biodiesel is very difficult to find in that state. I think the lowest i ever filled up with was 20%. This is a nothing burger as most large trucks do not fill their tanks in the state. The other is unleaded gasoline and therefore the current use of catalytic converters…

[Mahler9th]

Please note that the Bill was apparently not "voted down."

It appears to have been stopped on its path in a step related to "appropriations," which can likely happen in any sausage-making process.

It appears that if this is true, it is only true for this year's session and in the form at the time it was stopped.

If it was stopped in "appropriations," one might find some related analysis information on gubment web site.

I did.

And I read it.