Quote:
Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
2) Let's get back to the reality here, which Spanky's post misses. We're talking about labeling requirements for meat and other products in interstate commerce. This is not costless--companies are potentially required to comply with 50 different state laws, even though they have, say, one production facility. Can it be done? Sure, but at rather substantial expense. Why do you think the Clean Air Act contains a provision limiting emissions requirements to either those adopted by California or those adopted by EPA. Do you really want to have cars that you can drive only in Minnesota? It's not an easily dismissed problem. Sounds great to have higher standards some place, but it's not costless.
|
Um, right, but then the company can choose to sell only in certain states. And I don't think the ban would necessarily be on *using* the products in a particular state -- I think it's more on *buying* the product. I bought my car in Texas and brought it to CA. I'm sure if I brought some canned food with me from Texas, and it isn't labelled in accordance with CA standards, I can still eat it here -- but I may not be able to sell it.
States who have totally wackadoo labeling requirements will find that their consumers face higher prices and have less choice. The market will make the state modify its laws, right?
This is kind of getting similar to the boycott/embargo thing.
