Slashdot Mirror


White House Punts On Petition To Allow Tesla Direct Sales

First time accepted submitter neanderslob (1207704) writes Last Friday, over a year after the petition gained the required signatures for a response, the White House rejected a We the People petition to "Allow Tesla Motors to sell directly to consumers in all 50 states." The letter went on to defend the administration by citing their initiatives "in promoting vehicle efficiency." In response, Tesla is firing back, blasting the White House for a lack of leadership on the issue and stating "138,469 people signed the petition asking the White House to allow Tesla Motors to sell directly to consumers in all 50 states. More than a year later, at 7.30pm EST on Friday as most of America prepared for the weekend, the White House released its disappointing response to those people. Rather than seize an opportunity to promote innovation and support the first successful American car company to be started in more than a century, the White House issued a response that was even more timid than its rejection of a petition to begin construction of a Death Star." There's a legal issue here: the executive can't just wave state law aside. But they could suggest Congress write new laws instead of just noting that Congress would need to take action.

5 of 382 comments (clear)

  1. Why not? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    "There's a legal issue here: the executive can't just wave state law aside. But they could suggest Congress write new laws instead of just noting that Congress would need to take action."

    Why not? He completely bypasses all laws and even our constitution using executive orders, why not for this? Oh, that's right, it would affect his dirty money income from industry lobbies.

  2. Re:What? by gandhi_2 · · Score: -1, Troll

    If there's one thing Obama is passionate about, it is expanding federal power to all aspects of everything.
    Why not cut out the middle man and create a petition that asks the White House to assume authority over all levels and government branches? That's essentially what you are asking for.

  3. Re:What? by gandhi_2 · · Score: -1, Troll

    ...except HE gets to tell you that. Because Master Blaster runs Bartertown.
    Like Stalin... Here to administer the equality, not to participate in it.

  4. Re:He cant or wont? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    If he can declare war without congressional approval...

    When did he do that?

    When the US bombed Libya in 2011.

    Of course, Obama said that wasn't "hostilities"::

    Let’s be honest: President Obama’s claim that U.S. military action in Libya doesn’t constitute “hostilities” is nonsense, and Congress is right to call him on it.

    Blasting dictator Moammar Gaddafi’s troops and installations from above with unmanned drone aircraft may or may not be the right thing to do, but it’s clearly a hostile act. Likewise, providing intelligence, surveillance and logistical support that enable allied planes to attack Gaddafi’s military — and, increasingly, to target Gaddafi himself — can only be considered hostile. These are acts of war.

    I guess Obama was confused by his plethora of "If you like your plan, you can keep it." and similar lies, and just lied about dropping bombs on Libya out of habit.

  5. Re:What? by gandhi_2 · · Score: 0, Troll

    The point of the article is that 138,469 wished they lived in a kingdom with a benevolent dictator who can simply make people do stuff because they want it.