Future Retirement Success
  • Politics
  • Business
  • Investing
  • Stocks
  • Politics
  • Business
  • Investing
  • Stocks

Future Retirement Success

Investing

Should California Waive Environmental Laws?

by January 29, 2025
January 29, 2025
Should California Waive Environmental Laws?

Jeffrey Miron

On January 12, California Governor Gavin Newson signed an executive order waiving permitting requirements for homeowners and businesses affected by the fires in Los Angeles and Ventura counties. The directive suspends sections of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the California Coastal Act, aiming to expedite the rebuilding of as many as 12,000 homes destroyed in the fires.

Even before the fires, the typical home in California was $790,742, 220 percent of the national average. Moreover, the Wall Street Journal points out that California’s onerous building codes and permitting fees contribute to astronomical “affordable” housing costs, where units can cost $1 million to build. The state’s regulatory framework is widely regarded as a significant barrier to development; by requiring environmental reviews and opening the door for lawsuits, CEQA and the Coastal Act delay projects for years, driving up costs and discouraging investment.

Governor Newsom’s executive order waives permits previously justified as necessary for environmental protection and sustainable development. But if these regulations were essential before the fires, why suspend them now? The risks they seek to mitigate, such as soil erosion and waterway contamination, still exist post-fire and may be amplified by rushed rebuilding.

On the other hand, if these regulations were always excessive, then why limit their suspension to fire recovery? In the past, CEQA exemptions have been granted for high-profile projects such as sports stadiums and affordable housing developments. These cases highlight an inconsistency: the state recognizes that CEQA hinders timely and efficient development but has so far resisted broader reform. Why not reform or relax the laws to make them less onerous everywhere, rather than relying on piecemeal exceptions during crises?

Newsom’s executive order exposes a fundamental tension in California’s housing policy. If the regulations are too restrictive for disaster recovery, they are likely too restrictive broadly. And if they truly are necessary, they should remain, even in the face of the fires.

This article appeared on Substack on January 29, 2025. Jonah Karafiol, a student at Harvard College, co-wrote this post.

0
FacebookTwitterGoogle +Pinterest
previous post
MuxCap.com Reviews | How Safe Are the Platform Traders? Is There Room for Improvement at MuxCap?
next post
Trump fires two Democratic commissioners on civil rights enforcement agency as White House targets DEI

You may also like

It Is Time for the Fed to Cut...

July 15, 2024

Should CMS Raise the Price (Reduce the Subsidy)...

February 21, 2024

SNAP and Obesity

May 3, 2023

The Draft Is Antithetical to Liberty, Even if...

October 21, 2024

Lawsuit Filed Challenging Trump’s “Liberation Day” Tariffs

April 15, 2025

Cato’s Erec Smith: ‘DEI is Built Upon a...

March 25, 2024

Nobel Prize Winner Claudia Goldin on the Gender...

October 11, 2023

Friday Feature: Trinity Arch Preparatory School

March 15, 2024

Cato CEF Friday Feature Marathon

November 27, 2023

Interstate Migration of High Earners and Retirees

July 30, 2024

    Get free access to all of the retirement secrets and income strategies from our experts! or Join The Exclusive Subscription Today And Get the Premium Articles Acess for Free

    By opting in you agree to receive emails from us and our affiliates. Your information is secure and your privacy is protected.

    Recent Posts

    • AI could consume nearly half of global datacentre power by year-end, new analysis warns

      May 23, 2025
    • UK energy bills to fall by £129 from July as Ofgem cuts price cap by 7%

      May 23, 2025
    • Consumer confidence rises as global trade tensions ease, despite inflation spike

      May 23, 2025
    • UK private sector activity contracts for second month, raising fears of economic slowdown

      May 23, 2025
    • ‘Half a dozen’ more states to ban soda, junk food purchases with food stamps, Trump Agriculture secretary says

      May 23, 2025
    • GOP holdouts sound alarm on $36T debt crisis as Trump’s ‘big, beautiful bill’ passes House vote

      May 22, 2025

    Categories

    • Business (8,035)
    • Investing (1,981)
    • Politics (15,356)
    • Stocks (3,099)
    • About us
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms & Conditions

    Disclaimer: futureretirementsuccess.com, its managers, its employees, and assigns (collectively “The Company”) do not make any guarantee or warranty about what is advertised above. Information provided by this website is for research purposes only and should not be considered as personalized financial advice. The Company is not affiliated with, nor does it receive compensation from, any specific security. The Company is not registered or licensed by any governing body in any jurisdiction to give investing advice or provide investment recommendation. Any investments recommended here should be taken into consideration only after consulting with your investment advisor and after reviewing the prospectus or financial statements of the company.

    Copyright © 2025 futureretirementsuccess.com | All Rights Reserved