Californians have begun to vote. There are dozen of important races -- but California's the only state where global-warming policy is actually on the ballot. Two big Texas oil refiners (Valero and Tesoro) linked up with right-wing political forces and the Koch family interests to spend millions putting Prop 23 on the ballot. Prop 23 would, effectively, repeal California's pioneering climate change legislation, AB 32, under the guise of delaying it until the economy recovers. But as the first voters send in their ballots, I'm going to call this -- Prop 23 is going down.
The latest field poll shows that in only a few weeks the polling numbers have moved from a dead heat to an 11-point deficit for Prop 23, which is now getting only 34 percent of the vote. At this stage, ballot measures that don't have a majority almost always lose. Significantly, this was also the week when Valero, Beacon, and Koch needed to make massive television buys if they were going to to turn the tide. They didn't. Instead they went dark -- no television buys at all. Assemblyman Dan Logue, one of the major political backers of Prop 23, conceded, "The private sector is spread thin. Resources have diminished more than we thought."
Logue's phrase "the private sector" of course, means only "the out-of-state oil industry." Because most of California's private sector, in contrast to the Texans, opposes Prop 23 as the kiss of death for California's clean jobs future. Just yesterday 70 major investment firms declared their opposition to Prop 23, with Deutsche Bank's Kevin Parker saying that Prop 23 would "undermine investors' willingness to invest in the state's renewable energy future." The failure of federal climate legislation makes it "more critical than ever that the states continue to build their own frameworks ... I fear that if Prop. 23 succeeds it will be a signal to other states and the U.S. government" to reverse course on climate change policy.
But even if Prop 23 is headed for defeat, the oil industry still has other irons in the fire. Their backup effort was always Prop 26, which would make it virtually impossible to fund California's clean-energy program simply by making taxpayers, not polluters, underwrite the costs of enforcement and other needed oversight programs. In a state facing an almost impossible fiscal deficit, something like Prop 26 makes even less sense than Prop 23 -- but it's a more complex issue, and it hasn't benefited from the scale of public education that is turning the tide on Prop 23.
So here in California, as everywhere, it's all still too close to call. What matters now is whether we and our friends vote. Vote early, if you can (to "vote often" is illegal, but you can get the same result by encouraging some friends to go to the polls with you).
This time around, it's all about who shows up on Nov 2.
Follow Carl Pope on Twitter: www.twitter.com/CarlPope
Clint Wilder: Elvis Costello's New Economy vs. Big Oil's Old One
Thanks to US, there will be more money for Hezbollah and for Al Qaeda
There will be more money for Iran's Ballistic Missile Programs and for Iran's Nuclear Program
Proud to say I voted (by mail) and was able to convince a friend it was time to vote again. He had not voted in many years. VOTE.
President Vaclav Klaus: Climate Control or Freedom?
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/10/20/president-vaclav-havel-climate-control-or-freedom/
If you thought Chevron was staying out of the election, not true. They have put their money behind Prop 26, so we have to have a 2/3 vote for fees. This will hamstring the ability of the legislature to implement AB 32 that may require fees on big oil. Clearly, they are planning to circumvent requirements, counting on this to pass so they don't have to clean up or pay for it.
VOTE NO ON PROP 26
A Luddite
Using U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) records of U.S. unemployment data, the impact of U.S. environmental regulations upon unemployment can be seen in the 30 years before, and after, the 1970 enviro-policy explosions:
• The average U.S. unemployment rate from 1940 (excluding WWII) to 1970 was 4.5%;
• The average U.S. unemployment rate from 1970 to 2000 was 6%;
• As environmental regulations expanded after 1970, 30-year average unemployment increased by 33.3%.
California voters can delay the California Global Warming Solutions Act (AB 32) by voting for Prop. 23 on November 2nd. Prop. 23 would suspend implementation of AB 32 greenhouse gas controls until the state’s unemployment rate is reduced to below an unemployment rate benchmark of 5.5%.
California’s Prop. 23 benchmarking of future environmental regulations to economic performance (recovery) should be a model for U.S. Government environmental regulations. The “new” U.S. Congress should pass legislation to suspend all pending and future environmental regulations until U.S. unemployment recovers to the post-1970 average of 6.5%. The U.S., and each state, must reset the reckless pace of environmental regulation to an economic benchmark. The so-called ”new green economy” is a green fantasy that should not be a national (or state) priority.
According to a report by the US Army, oil output may dip causing massive shortages by 2015
General James N Mattis :
"By 2012, surplus oil production capacity could entirely disappear, and as early as 2015, the shortfall in output could reach nearly 10 million barrels per day,"
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/apr/11/peak-oil-production-supply
All these environmental initiatives take us one step closer to energy independence. And just think what $1,000,000,000,000- the cost of the Iraq war- could have bought us in energy independence?
The actual cost of the 2 unfunded wars will reach $3,000,000,000,000 when equipment replacement and VA medical cost are added to the $1,000,000,000,000. In essence, imagine what $3,000,000,000,000 could have purchased toward renewable energy independence?
Oh, thats right, you'll just stand there with your hands out pleading " Please Uncle Sam, we only need 20 billion to balance our budget".
I have been to california 6 times or so and loved it. So what is the economic plan for your state?
Taxes and regulations are driving out business left and right.
No new energy production.
Here in Texas we grew 210,000 jobs this year alone, while California lost 120,000 this year alone.
Hey Dawn, you know what one of the most important emerging industries in the world is? Renewable energy.
http://www.azcentral.com/community/glendale/articles/2010/09/10/20100910glendale-peoria-home-solar-installation.html
2. For now, at least it puts installers to work.
3. Those jobs in China would be done in THIS country if we could outlaw the republican party so they won't block clean energy legislation on command from their masters at Koch Industries.
The cost of everything is high when it is new. Look at PCs. Look at any electronic component.
My first VCR cost me $850 dollars in 1982, probably equivalent of $1200 today.
It has to be a complete effort, even if the government has to seed it and then sell it to private industry.
If you try to over analyze every dime and every job, sure it won't make sense.
A hundred years ago they yelled at people "Get a horse" when their automobile was stuck in mud.
- 9 700 Americans have been killed and 48 000 wounded since 1967 because of the Middle East.
- There are about 1 300 amputees from Iraq and Afghanistan.
http://www.medcitynews.com/2010/07/neuros-medical-gets-1-5m-award-to-pain-blocking-device-for-military/
- Approximately 250,000 of the 697,000 veterans who served in the 1991 Gulf War are afflicted with enduring chronic multi-symptom illness
- There have been 4 oil crisis followed by 4 economic recessions since 1973.
- Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan could cost $2.4 trillion dollars
According to a Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report published in October 2007, the U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan could cost taxpayers a total of $2.4 trillion dollars by 2017
-