More

Prop 23: Oil Industry Spills Money Into Effort To Suspend California Climate Law

Prop 23 Oil Industry

ROBIN HINDERY   10/ 6/10 12:36 AM ET   AP

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — With major contributions from the oil industry, supporters of a ballot initiative to suspend California's landmark greenhouse gas emissions law reported a fundraising tally Tuesday of more than $5.2 million in the past three months.

The numbers disclosed by the Yes on 23 campaign reflected the continued backing of three out-of-state oil companies – Valero Corp. and Tesoro Corp. of Texas, and Flint Hills Resources, a Wichita, Kan.-based company owned by Koch Industries.

The companies contributed a combined $5 million during the period ending Sept. 30.

In all, the campaign has raised $8.3 million during the first nine months of the year and has $3.1 million remaining cash on hand.

Opponents of the initiative said they expected the petroleum industry to keep pouring money into Proposition 23 before the Nov. 2 vote.

The initiative would indefinitely suspend AB32, California's 2006 law mandating significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions by 2020.

"We fully expect them to drop nuclear bombs in the coming weeks," Steven Maviglio, a spokesman for the No on 23 campaign, said of the oil companies. "It's going to be David versus Goliath at the end."

Anita Mangels, a spokeswoman for the Yes on 23 campaign, called Maviglio's prediction nonsense and said opponents were trying to "villainize supporters instead of focusing on what the initiative will and will not do."

She said it would result in a temporary suspension of AB32 that would save California jobs and protect small businesses.

The No on 23 campaign reported Tuesday raising $10.5 million in the past three months for a total of $12.6 million during the first nine months of the year. Significant backing came from environmental groups like the Natural Resources Defense Council and Northern California investors Thomas Steyer, founder of investment firm Farallon Capital Management LLC.

Steyer gave another $2.5 million on Sept. 30, bringing his total contribution to $5 million. Venture capitalist John Doerr of the firm Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers and his wife, Ann, gave a total of $2 million.

The campaign reported having $4.5 million in cash on hand.

The climate law is the centerpiece of outgoing Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's environmental legacy. He has described it as crucial to securing California's leadership in clean energy and technology.

Last week, on the four-year anniversary of AB32, the Republican governor came out swinging against the oil companies promoting Proposition 23, saying they were motivated purely by greed.

Schwarzenegger will continue to work to defeat the initiative, said Laura Dixon, a spokeswoman for the governor's ballot-measure campaign committee.

"We always anticipated the oil companies are going to be putting significant resources into winning this thing," Dixon said. "The governor will continue the very hard fight he's been waging against them."

Two recent polls paint an unclear picture of Proposition 23 prospects among California voters. A Field Poll released Sept. 26 found 45 percent of likely voters opposed the measure, while 34 percent supported it.

A Los Angeles Times/University of Southern California poll released the previous week showed 40 percent of voters favoring the measure and 38 percent opposing it – a statistical tie. One in five people surveyed said they had not yet taken a position on the initiative.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST LOS ANGELES

Filed by Billy Silverman  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 69
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3  Next ›  Last »  (3 total)
photo
Publicola
Facts are stubborn things
12:52 PM on 10/07/2010
The Terminator vs. Big Oil
THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN

October 5, 2010

The Terminator, a k a the Governator, is not happy. And you shouldn’t be either.

What has Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger of California incensed is the fact that two Texas oil companies with two refineries each in California are financing a campaign to roll back California’s landmark laws to slow global warming and promote clean energy innovation, because it would require the refiners to install new emission-control tools. At a time when President Obama and Congress have failed to pass a clean energy bill, California’s laws are the best thing we have going to stimulate clean-tech in America. We don’t want them gutted. C’mon in. This is a fight worth having.

Here are the basics: Next month Californians will vote on “Prop 23,” a proposal to effectively kill implementation of California’s Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, known as A.B. 32. It was supported by Republicans, Democrats, businesses and environmentalists. Prop 23 proposes to suspend implementation of A.B. 32 until California achieves four consecutive quarters of unemployment below 5.5 percent. It is currently above 12 percent...

A.B. 32 was designed to put California on a path to reducing greenhouse gases in its air to 1990 levels by 2020. This would make the state a healthier place, and a more innovative one. Since A.B. 32 was passed, investors have poured billions of dollars into making new technologies to meet these standards.

continued...
photo
Publicola
Facts are stubborn things
12:58 PM on 10/07/2010
...continued

“It is very clear that the oil companies from outside the state that are trying to take out A.B. 32, and trying to take out our environmental laws, have no interest in suspending it, but just to get rid of it,” Governor Schwarzenegger said ... “They want to kill A.B. 32. Otherwise they wouldn’t put this provision in there about the 5.5 percent unemployment rate. It’s very rare that California in the last 40 years had an unemployment rate of below 5.5 percent for four consecutive quarters. They’re not interested in our environment; they are only interested in greed and filling their pockets with more money.

“And they are very deceptive when they say they want to go and create more jobs in California,” the governor added. “Since when has [an] oil company ever been interested in jobs? Let’s be honest. If they really are interested in jobs, they would want to protect A.B. 32, because actually it’s green technology that is creating the most jobs right now in California, 10 times more than any other sector.”...

Fortunately, Californians from across the political spectrum are trying to raise money to defeat Prop 23, but the vote could be close. George Shultz, a former secretary of state during the Reagan administration, has taken a leading role in the campaign against Prop 23. (See: www.stopdirtyenergyprop.com.)

continued...
photo
Publicola
Facts are stubborn things
01:04 PM on 10/07/2010
...continued

“Prop 23 is designed to kill by indefinite postponement California’s effort to clean up the environment,” said Mr. Shultz. “This effort is financed heavily by money from out of state. You have to conclude that the financiers are less concerned about California than they are about the fact that if we get something that is working here to clean up the air and launch a clean-tech industry, it will go national and maybe international. So the stakes are high. I hope we can win here and send a message to the whole country that it’s time to put aside partisan politics and get an energy bill out of Washington.”

Dan Becker, a veteran environmental lobbyist, echoes that view... "If the people of California see through the misrepresentations of the oil industry, it... opens the door for a return to a science-based approach to the climate. It would be a triumph for the National Academy of Sciences over the National Academy of Fraud.”

The real joke is thinking that if California suspends its climate laws that Mother Nature will also take a timeout. “We can wait to solve this problem as long as we want,” says Nate Lewis, an energy chemist at the California Institute of Technology: “But Nature is balancing its books every day. It was a record 113 degrees in Los Angeles the other day. There are laws of politics and laws of physics. Only the latter can’t be repealed.”
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
truth67
11:16 AM on 10/07/2010
ok, so if the goverment's estimate of the leaking oil was off by 2 million barrels a day, do you question their judgement when saying the seafood is safe?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Richard2
10:50 AM on 10/07/2010
Valero is not just an oil company. It is also the third largest producer of fuel ethanol in the United States. Valero operates ten modern ethanol plants that each produce at least 110 million gallons of ethanol per year. This is more bio-fuel than is produced in California by the state government and all private companies combined. Flint Hills has recently purchased two 100 million gallon ethanol plants in the state of Iowa. Ethanol produced by these companies is being blended into the gasoline that people purchase at gas station, which reduces oil imports.

These out of state oil companies are not going to be paying higher monthly electricity bills that will result from AB32. The California public will be. The out of state companies don't have to operate in California if they don't want to.
photo
Publicola
Facts are stubborn things
12:48 PM on 10/07/2010
R2: "These out of state oil companies are not going to be paying higher monthly electricity bills that will result from AB32. The California public will be."

Who pays you to constantly disinform and lie for Big Oil and their allies here on HuffPo, R2?

R2: "The out of state companies don't have to operate in California if they don't want to."

Are you seriously trying to suggest that Valero and other out of state oil companies would boycott the largest economy in the U.S. and the 9th-largest economy in the world if my state, CA, doesn't fall for the anti-environmental disinformation and lies that they and you relentlessly spew, R2?
04:23 PM on 10/12/2010
The question in our minds is: which particular fossil fuel interest do you work as a shill for, Richard2? Valero? Exxon? the Koch Brothers?

Or is it some consortium like the Western Fuels Association or Petroleum Institute?

Or is it more indirectly via some fossil fuel funded think tank, like the Heritage Foundation, Cato Institute, Mercatus, Marshall Institute, Americans for Prosperity, Fraser Insitute, American Enterprise Institute? There are dozens of them. So, be a sport. Which ones are you drawing from? Don't keep us in suspense!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Malcolm Hensley
Last of the Reagan Republicans
12:53 AM on 10/07/2010
Oil industry spills money in effort to suspend AB32. With Witless spending $145 million; spill is a good term. Kind of like when you sit in your car and pocket change falls out. That would qualify for the kind of money big oil is spending on this measure! POCKET CHANGE!
photo
mlaiuppa
Pres. Sarcasm Society. Like we need your approval.
09:15 PM on 10/06/2010
Chicken feed.

Meg spent a lot more than that on her failed campaign. You telling me she's got more money than Big Oil?
08:43 PM on 10/06/2010
The air pollution (especially the particulate particles) in the Central Valley of California, has the worst air in the nation. 1 out of 5 children have asthma. Schools suspend outdoor recess and activities when the "air index" (measurement of just how bad the air is) is in the un-healthy range; which is most of the time, all year long. The local news stations reported a "health story" which stated that life expectancy past 65, is lower for people living in the Central Valley, due to the polluted air. Big Oil is spewing crap into the air ( you can SMELL chemicals and oil at various times; especially in the early morning hours) and they don't want to suspend their pocketbooks and super-profits to clean up the dirt they help put into the air people breathe. If they win Prop. 23, lungs be dammed; moratoriums on clear air measures have been rolled over too many times, and now with "secret" financial backers from politicians to everything....we're in trouble. We're living in an Oligarchy, that's turning Fascist.
photo
Publicola
Facts are stubborn things
07:17 PM on 10/06/2010
Schwarzenegger Blasts Oil Companies

September 27, 2010

California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger used his appearance at the Commonwealth Club in Santa Clara today to "put a spotlight" on what he called the "self-serving greed" of oil companies Valero, Tesoro, and Koch Industries. These companies, two of which he described as among the state's top polluters, are bankrolling Proposition 23 for their own gain, while trying to hide behind a false claim that the initiative would be good for the state's economy, said the Governor. Prop 23 would suspend California's Global Warming Solutions Act, AB 32, which authorizes incentives and regulations for reducing the state's greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020...

"They are creating a shell argument that this is about saving jobs," said Schwarzenegger. "Does anyone really believe that these companies, out of their black-oil hearts are really spending millions and millions of dollars to protect jobs? It's not about jobs at all. It's about their ability to pollute and thus protect their profits."

He said that green jobs in California have grown ten times faster than the statewide average since 2005, and that they now comprise the single largest source of jobs in the state. Passing Prop. 23, would kill investment in the strongest sector of California's economy, said the Governor.

"The old oil companies are all out for Prop. 23. Silicon Valley is overwhelmingly against it," he said. "Which side do you believe our economic future as a nation is on?"
photo
Publicola
Facts are stubborn things
07:28 PM on 10/06/2010
"This is a corruption of the democratic process," he said. "Texas oil companies have descended upon California to overturn a California law...

"The effort is similar to the conspiracy hatched among oil companies in the 1920s to get rid of light rail systems. Then, the companies bought up the easements for light rail systems in 45 cities and then systematically dismantled them.

"Today, Valero and Tesoro are in a conspiracy. Not in a criminal conspiracy, but a cynical one about self-serving greed. Does anyone think in their black oil company hearts that they want to create jobs?

Valero and Tesoro want to stop the movement from old energy to new energy because its means lost market share...

"And while they're not creating a shale company, they are creating a shell argument that this is about saving jobs... it's not about jobs at all, ladies and gentlemen, it's about their ability to pollute and thus protect their profits...
photo
Publicola
Facts are stubborn things
07:31 PM on 10/06/2010
"Here's what they don't want to tell you. the cost calculations doesn't include the increased of cost doing business their way, the old way,

"They don't include the cost of rising oil prices as the developing world demands more and more oil.

"They don't include the costs of job losses that is rising oil prices will force.

"They don't include the costs of hundreds of billions of dollars in tax breaks that have gotten and continued to get.

"They don't include the costs of pollution that are already causing -- the cost, for instance, to hundreds of thousands of Americans who die every year from smog-related diseases.

"They don't include also the cost of 6.5 million hospital visits a year for smog-related illnesses.

"They don't include the cost of the NEXT War over Oil.

"And believe me, eventually it will come as we become more and more dependent on Oil. i mean, i think that we have had enough wars in the Middle East because of Oil."

http://conversations.blackvoices.com/entertainment/99435682aaea4564b24369ed6fc90973/schwarzenegger-spee%20.../75837acb9edd4e59bdf617dae3181812
08:45 PM on 10/06/2010
Valero and Tesoro are criminals, and they do conspire with one another! See my comment above. F&F.
Genders
Love, Tolerance, Enlightenment
08:36 PM on 10/06/2010
Arnold often seems like a liberal, who thinks he is a conservative.
jishosan
Average Everyday Everyone
09:48 PM on 10/06/2010
What's funny is, Arnold is actually the classic or "Rockefeller" Republican. Before Reagan and the Bush Dynasty corrupted the term. Sure, there are lots of things we still wouldn't agree on, but todays Repubs have the Wall Street mentality, where only immediate results matter. Arnie is looking at it and truly believes that green power and infrastructure investment will build business more than just funneling money into their pockets in Tax Breaks. The Tax Break culture benefits only existing businesses, but it does not create new wealth like building entirely new business sectors does.
07:52 PM on 10/08/2010
Really? EPA? Nixon. Clean Air Act? Nixon. Federal Water Pollution Control Act? Nixon. The original Cap & Trade? Bush Sr. And they're not exactly "liberals".
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Richard2
06:56 PM on 10/06/2010
California benefits from relatively inexpensive electricity generated by natural gas powered plants within the state, and coal fired plants out of state in the Southwest.

The Climate initiative forces utilities to buy solar or wind power at prices several times the cost of electricity from modern gas or coal fired power plants. When the cost of this power is blended in, everyone's monthly utility bill will skyrocket.

In addition, solar and wind power fluctuates with the time of day or night, or with the increases or decreases in the wind. To deal with a night time situation with no wind blowing, utilities will have to purchase expensive back-up natural gas or coal fired plants that can somehow adjust themselves rapidly to the changes in the "renewable" energy. Someone will have to pay for these expensive back-up energy plants.

Californians are the persons who will get stuck with the much higher blended cost of "green energy" plus the cost of the new back-up energy plants, that will attempt to somehow blend in their power to the always fluctuating green power.

Having previously benefited from modern gas fired turbine power, Californians will have to suffer from the great inefficiencies of the alternative green power plus flexible back-up power that is mandated by AB32.

Vote "Yes" on Proposition 23, and continue to enjoy the wonderful amenity which is inexpensive and reliable electricity from modern gas turbine and coal fired power plants.
photo
Publicola
Facts are stubborn things
07:09 PM on 10/06/2010
R2: "The Climate initiative forces utilities to buy solar or wind power at prices several times the cost of electricity"

Bullsh!t.

Who pays you to constantly lie for Big Oil and their allies here on HuffPo, R2?
photo
Publicola
Facts are stubborn things
07:13 PM on 10/06/2010
R2: "In addition, solar and wind power fluctuates with the time of day or night, or with the increases or decreases in the wind. To deal with a night time situation with no wind blowing, utilities will have to purchase expensive back-up natural gas or coal fired plants that can somehow adjust themselves rapidly to the changes in the "renewable" energy. Someone will have to pay for these expensive back-up energy plants."

In addition, this too is deception and lies.

Who pays you to constantly lie for Big Oil and their allies here on HuffPo, R2?
photo
AGooglyMinotaur
Ahh, Theseus. It appears you are out of thread.
03:07 PM on 10/06/2010
Godspeed to the good people at ARB, and everyone who's taking a stand against climate change. I hope this proposition goes down in flames! And that someone plants a tree to offset the emissions from those flames. :)
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Elbrando
The dream shall never die - Ted Kennedy
01:21 PM on 10/06/2010
Why would any Californian vote for this. They need to fund Texas's economy instead of their own? They should instead pore billions into alternative energy like solar (sespecially with all of their deserts) and blow fossil feuls off as much as possible. It will create jobs and lower their dependency.
photo
LogicalMathMan
Math, Finance, English, Business Instructor
02:22 PM on 10/06/2010
CA is well on their way to pioneering alternative resources. It was the first state to harvest wind energy and the first state to have solar farms. Now, if only we could get dem farmers to grow corn, soy and sugarcane and have our border brothers do the harvesting for bio-fuels, we'll be set.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Waldo the WonderCat
09:22 PM on 10/06/2010
Corn, soy and sugarcane don't reap the money that avocados, almonds, and citrus do.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Silverwolf72
Are We There Yet?
01:21 PM on 10/06/2010
Hmm cause premature deaths or make a little less money. Nice to see priorities.
maxfax
Taa - dah!
12:31 PM on 10/06/2010
Look at the Gulf of Mexico and Hungary, these corporations are not the friend of the living.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Elias Maxwell
One of the 99% that is PISSED
12:25 PM on 10/06/2010
Welcome to the Roberts Court campaign era.

Who owns you?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
11:29 AM on 10/06/2010
The fossil-fuel industry RUNS OUR COUNTRY!
maxfax
Taa - dah!
12:32 PM on 10/06/2010
Au contraire, they "ruin" our country.
06:34 PM on 10/06/2010
ya they do! and they can get a law removed with money. aint capitolism great?
10:53 AM on 10/06/2010
I would like to know exactly what air these oil executives expect their grandkids to breathe?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
11:29 AM on 10/06/2010
They do not care.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
nelly55
it's alive!
12:03 PM on 10/06/2010
yup
maxfax
Taa - dah!
12:33 PM on 10/06/2010
They'll make their own on another planet.  They certainly have the money for it.