AB 32: Measure to Kill California Climate Laws Qualifies for November Ballot
In 2006, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed into law Assembly Bill 32. This landmark climate change bill catapulted California into an unassailable lead in the clean energy movement. It demanded that the state reduce its greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 and set up, for enactment in 2012, the nation’s most aggressive cap-and-trade program for carbon dioxide emissions.
This election year, AB 32 is coming under intense attack from opponents led by wealthy Texas oil companies. Yesterday, a group aimed at paralyzing AB 32 submitted enough signatures to get a measure on the November ballot that would do just that. The initiative comes with a well-spun title that only the slick PR wizards working for oil companies could contrive, The California Jobs Initiative.
The measure would suspend enforcement of AB 32 regulations until California unemployment falls below 5.5 percent. Unemployment stands at 12.4 percent as of May.
What the Proponents Say
Proponents of the measure, which include oil refiners Tesoro Corp., Valero Energy Corp., Occidental Petroleum Corp. and the National Petrochemical and Refiners Association, say the bill will unfairly raise utility rates and fuel prices for consumers and families in California.
The Opponents Fight Back
Ironically, say the measure’s opponents, the bill would seriously harm job prospects in California’s cleantech industry, the state’s fastest growing economic sector. It would also increase pollution and stunt growth toward a clean energy future.
Those standing up for AB 32 include George Schultz, former Secretary of State under President Ronald Reagan, Google Inc. and other tech companies, public health organizations, and governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, who is apparently incensed by the measure. 
Here is the governor’s statement issued on Tuesday following the news that CJI would be on the November 2 ballot:
“This initiative sponsored by greedy Texas oil companies would cripple California’s fastest growing economic sector, reverse our renewable energy policy and decimate our environmental progress for the benefit of these oil companies’ profit margins. I will not allow this to happen on my watch. We will continue moving this state forward with our comprehensive energy policy that creates jobs, reduces our reliance on foreign oil and ensures the California we love will be the California we hand over to the next generation.”
According to Californians for Clean Energy and Jobs, the group opposing the CJI measure and co-chaired by George Schultz, over $3 million has already been spent on the measure by energy-related special interests, including the Texas oil companies that are its primary backers. Environmentalists fear that up to $50 million may be spent before election day comes, a PR budget nearly impossible to match for cash-strapped environmental advocacy groups, although contributions from the likes of Google and other profitable Silicon Valley companies could help.
The passage or failure of the California Jobs Initiative will have far-reaching repercussions. It will either embolden or deeply bruise opponents of climate change legislation and renewable energy expansion across the country and would slow to a crawl progress on climate legislation in other states. If the measure fails, then California will continue on its path toward becoming the national testing ground for cap-and-trade policy.
Source: BusinessWeek
Photo Credit: the paper, DealBreaker & College View
Posted on June 25th in Solar Politics by Dan.
August 7th, 2010 at 9:32 am
The efforts to get folks to look at energy conservation , pay for themselves products, ia an agonizing up hill battle of education. Credibility is hampered by the mindless brainwashing of Madison Avenue over the past 50 years. When folks go to the supermarket each week they are influenced subconsciously by what they saw in advertising. When is the last time you bought ABC Soda?? magazines and Trade publications will brag and report with gusto, what ever their advertisers want them to publish. Quid Pro Quo. So where does somrthing new come into the mix. It took Microsoft 8 years to get off the ground. Has it not been for the contract to run IBM PC’s they might still be in the dark. Sustainability is a poor choice of words. It is mis used and not understood. For the extremists, It’s all or nothing. Folks aks their mechanical folk about it, and the mechanics know nothing. They have their licsence to steal. What more do they need? The consumer will fall back on what they know. What they are told. What they are told is who spends the most money telling them, in advertising and information sources. Information sources will tell you what ever their heavy advertisers tell them to tell you. You do what you are told. Whgat else is there? We are all resistant to change. Advertisers know that. They will spend what ever they have to to protect their current way of doing things. The energy field is no different. Be it Oil, Gas, or electric, there is little will or need to change. To them global warming is not even in the mix. They just write blogs to defeat what ever is reported, true or false. If your a new technology, it is the fellows with the advertising budgets that will determine how you do. If they buy you it will be for little or nothing. You will not go anywhere without the advertising budget. If you go it alone your costs will exceed your profits. If you have a patent, the big guys will let it expire or steal it. If they steal it, they have the budget to keep you in court till your broke.
Problem: How to influence the big guy with the advertising budget. Don’t count on Government. They are just like the magazines. Lobbies control what government does. Look at BP and the Bureau of mines. The entire Industry blew them off.