[new299]

There are a huge number of laws that apply to building a home, and have for a long long time.

To single out this law, which appears to be an overwhelmingly a good idea, as the "bad" one, seem a bit nonsensical.

If your against all regulation of building, then that might be a stand that you could try argue for. But to pick out this one new law seems weird.

[loudmax]

I'm in agreement that solar panels in south Florida are a good idea, and that to single out this law as an end of American freedom is ridiculous. But we have to admit that this isn't the best way to address the problem. The law exempts houses in the case of shade, but there are are bound to be other edge cases where solar panels don't make sense. IMHO, the ideal way to address the problem of carbon dioxide emissions would be to tax it. A hefty carbon tax combined with a flexible electric utility infrastructure would do more to reduce emissions than compelling one particular house design over another.

Given that one of America's political parties has rejected the scientific evidence behind anthropogenic climate change and more or less equates taxation with theft, I don't foresee a carbon tax in the US any time soon. Compelling people to buy solar panels isn't a good law, but it might be the closest we can get in the current environment.

[KekDemaga]

My thoughts are it seems that you either have to pick "mandate solar panels on homes" or "build more affordable housing" as both views don't seem to work together.