More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Ryan Van Lenning

Ryan Van Lenning

Posted: September 25, 2010 01:06 PM

Why Californians Must Crush Prop 23

What's Your Reaction:

By now most people are aware of Proposition 23, called the "California Jobs Initiative" by its oil-slick proponents, despite the fact that it would reduce state revenue and stall the growing clean energy job sector. It has become a lightning rod of debate about the clean energy and air future of not just California, but of the nation. The proposition would suspend California's landmark greenhouse emission reduction law AB 32 (Global Warming Solutions Act), one of the most ambitious in the world. Proposition 23 would suspend implementing the law until unemployment in the California reaches 5.5 percent for four consecutive quarters.

That's a pretty good way of saying, "Kill our clean air, clean energy and green jobs."

Opponents have dubbed it the "Dirty Energy Proposition" because both Texas Oil companies and the billionaire Koch brothers have chipped in most of the millions behind this attempt to kill clean energy investments and green jobs creation in California. According to the New York Times, pro-Prop 23 advocates have given $8.2 million so far, with almost all of it ($7.9 million) of that coming from out-of-state oil companies like Tesoro and Valero.

The New York Times called it a showdown, saying that it has "jolted environmental leaders who are worried that a vote against the law in this state -- with its long history of environmental activism -- would amount to a powerful setback for emission control efforts in Washington and statehouses across the country."

Indeed, it is a showdown, one between Big Oil and out-of-state billionaires and almost everybody else, including health experts, community leaders, consumer groups, business leaders, Democrats (including Jerry Brown), Republicans (including Schwarzenegger), Greens (including Laura Wells), seniors groups, city councils, mayors, firefighters, police officers, unions, teachers, students, churches, and regular citizens all across California.

And we all should be jolted. Here are the 5 top reasons why Californians must crush Prop. 23:

1. Prop 23 is a fraud perpetrated on the people of California by out-of-state oil companies and right-wing billionaires who want to line their pockets while they kill our clean energy future. That's not hyperbole, that's the game. Texas oil knows what's at stake so they are pulling no punches and letting the money pour in about as fast as the Deep Horizon leak. It's no surprise that fossil-fuel industries see efforts to clean up our air and energy supplies as a threat to their bank accounts. Our ballot initiative process was meant to give ordinary citizens a voice in decisions affecting everybody. Are we going to allow out-of-state interests manipulate us?

2. Prop 23 is an insult to the intelligence of the people of California. Every aspect of Prop 23, from its name "Jobs Initiative" to the language in the proposition itself, assumes Californians are simpletons who accept the most basic lie as fact and expects us to accept that they really have our interests at heart. Who among us really thinks that out-of-state oil companies have a real interest in creating jobs for Californians?

Which leads us to reason number 3.

3. Despite its Orwellian name, Prop 23 is a job killer. It has already been shown repeatedly that green jobs and clean tech sector have grown at a significantly higher rate than other jobs and AB 32 is not linked at all to job loss or the unemployment rate. If Prop 23 passes and AB 32 is suspended, investments, loans, and jobs in clean energy will shrink dramatically. Unless you think that building an economy based on oil-spill clean-up and doctors treating asthma is the way of the future, then it's time to expose this one. The supporters are relying on a climate of fear around jobs to push this through.

4. Prop 23 is a threat to state and national security. Just ask former U.S. Secretary of State during the Reagan administration George Schultz. Schultz came out swinging with an editorial in the Sacramento Bee. He says, "Those who wish to repeal our state's clean energy laws through postponement to some fictitious future are running up the white flag of surrender to a polluted environment."

It is not that often a former ranking GOP official and Democrats and Greens sing in harmony. This measure indeed is making for strange bedfellows, with the likes of Van Jones and Schwarzenegger on the same side. But on Prop 23 they have united with the message: clean energy, clean air, emissions reductions, green economy are all paving the path of a more secure future.

5. Finally, Prop 23 would limit Californian's opportunity to be global leader on emissions reductions, clean energy, and energy conservation. Historically, California has often been visionary in its environmental protections and programs. Sometimes we forget that we live in the 7th largest economy in the world and we forget that other states, indeed, other countries, often take cues from us.

All this leads us to the conclusion: in November we all have to come out in force and vote no on the Dirty Energy Proposition 23. And we must not just beat Prop 23, we must pulverize it like the dust beneath our feet. A mere 51% margin will suffice, but I say let's beat it by 75% or higher to send the message that Californians are serious about conservation, clean energy, health, and a clean energy economy.

 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 41
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
12:09 PM on 10/06/2010
Just posted a video of Van Jones doing his best Oil Company executive impression and talking about Prop 23:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1SveYy4-Lwg
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Malcolm Hensley
Last of the Reagan Republicans
01:32 AM on 10/02/2010
Look I drive a Honda CNG and believe in the principles of AB32. However I run a manufacturing plant in L.A. The LADWP in going green. It has raised my electricity rates from $0.088/kwh to $0.141/kwh in 3 years! We have had to lay off 100 employees out of 400 to cover the higher utilities. I took a 12.5% cut! Our politicians are well intentioned put this Hail Mary Pass on AB32 making green energy jobs is something thought of by novelist or lawyers! China has captured much of the green energy market melting silica and making solar arrays and making steel for wind mills with dirty coal energy! The only Californian green jobs are installers! My former employees still come back asking if we will hire them back some through attrition have come back but the future is not bright with ever increasing energy cost. For 400 fellow employees I beg you to vote yes on Prop 23!
01:48 PM on 10/08/2010
Alternatively you could proactively hedge your utility price exposure by locking in a 20 year PPA rate and put some clean, renewable solar on your manufacturing facility, while I bet, creating Year 1 savings in your utility rates.
photo
FTracy3
My micro-bio is as empty as the rest of my life.
12:53 PM on 09/29/2010
It might lose but it's going to be hard to pulverize something that's currently leading in the polls.
03:17 PM on 09/29/2010
No, Prop 23 is not leading in polls. It is behind and will lose: http://www.baycitizen.org/blogs/pulse-of-the-bay/poll-proposition-23-lags/
09:29 PM on 09/27/2010
Any proposal backed by big oil is inherently against the people of California...vote this prop 23 down.
10:27 AM on 09/27/2010
You need only one reason to stomp this bill to death....the Koch brothers! Show them who's in charge!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Hardyman1966
The antonym of liberal is INTOLERANT.
12:29 AM on 09/27/2010
Timing is everything and a lot will happen in the coming weeks.  People have had it with greed, oil and unqualified candidates lying through their teeth.

Send 23 and Carly Fiorina out to sea where they belong.  It's time for California to reclaim its title as a pioneer, especially now that there are so many elsewhere that wish to send us back 50 or 100 years if given the chance.
08:35 AM on 09/27/2010
At what cost Hardyman? We can't affor AB32. Prop 23 will not set us back at all it will just put AB32 on hold until we can afford it.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
RyanCSmith
Locke for people, Hobbes for corporations
03:18 PM on 09/27/2010
The only people who can't "afford" AB32 are the oil companies. The same oil companies that have consistently worked to screw over California, undermine our economy, and turn us into a helpless cash cow.

Not going to happen! The oil companies aren't going to buy out California and they're not going to kill our emerging green jobs!
09:15 PM on 09/26/2010
Voting yes on 23 will do nothing for jobs, as it is sponsored by oil companies whose only interest is to keep the oil flowing with the least cost. What is wrong with "New Energy" jobs, requiring all fields: researchers, manufacturers, shippers, installers, maintenance, .... that sounds more like jobs, whereas this bill only stalls the creation of these jobs until unemployment reaches 5.5% for one year, which is a long, long way off. Catch-22 anyone?
Some claim that the earth is not getting warmer, and if it is, we are not causing this change. Well, what happens when we discover that they were wrong? Will it be too late to start making the necessary changes? Indeed it will be. Why not simply be cautious with out one earth and work towards New Energy sources. The USA is / was a technologically advanced country at some level. Or perhaps we will let the Old Energy companies continue to win in the political realm so that they can keep their profits going for a few more years- they will fail when the climate is ruined, and take everyone else with them.
Ask your legislators to kill Proposition 23 and support the current AB 32. Better to be cautious with our planet than to make a global mistake.
09:25 PM on 09/26/2010
plantiful read this analysis by 2 professors at CSUS and do a little research.
The Varshney-Tootelian study concludes that when the scoping plan is fully implemented:

California families will be facing increased annual costs of $3,857 and consumers will be forced to cut discretionary spending by 26.2 percent in order to cope with the increased costs generated by the scoping plan.
The average annual loss in gross state output from small businesses alone would be $182.6 billion, approximately a 10 percent loss in total gross state output. This will translate into nearly 1.1 million lost jobs in California. Lost labor income is estimated to be $76.8 billion, with nearly $5.8 billion lost in indirect taxes. The decline in revenues will have a severe impact on future state budgets, the authors said.
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
JessWonderin
10:46 PM on 09/26/2010
Prop. 23 would kill clean technology jobs, innovation and billions of dollars of investment in California and kill competition from California’s newly emerging clean energy businesses – wind, solar and other renewable energy and clean technologies
Rolling clean energy standards back, California would lose hundreds of thousands of jobs and billions of dollars in investments to other states.
State Legislative Analyst’s Office, rolling back AB 32 could “dampen additional investments in clean energy technologies or in so-called ‘green jobs’ by private firms, thereby resulting in less economic activity.”
500,000 employees work in clean technology or green jobs
Since 2005, California green jobs have grown 10 times faster than the statewide average.
California’s clean technology sector received $9 billion cumulative venture capital investment from 2005-09, including $2.1 billion in investment capital in 2009 – five times the investment in our nearest competitor, Massachusetts.

. . AND re: "Varshey-Tooletiain study" --" . .independently analyzed the economic projections made by Sanjay Varshney and Dennis Tootelian -- Cal State Sacramento business school dean and marketing professor, respectively -- and came to this conclusion: Their estimates are highly biased and based on poor logic and unsound economic analysis. The costs they predict are far too high. . . . . Varshney and Tootelian's report, which was paid for by the California Small Business Roundtable," --- L.A. Times 24 Mar 2010

"California Small Business Roundtable" is a conservative group with large energy industry funding and refuses to disclose it's list of donors or Board.
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
JessWonderin
11:05 PM on 09/26/2010
RE Varshney-Tootleian:
"1. The Varshney/Tootelian report only included projected costs; they discounted the savings from fuel efficiency as too speculative to consider. Sweeney argues that savings will accrue because they are based on federal standards of fuel efficiency. Using the same CARB data, but including savings, Sweeney finds a gain of $15.5 billion to the state.

2. Varshney/Tootelian inflated the cost passed down to consumers by assuming that businesses will charge customers double the actual costs to businesses.

3. Varshney/Tootelian chose to ignore the economic stimulus of new green energy companies and construction and only focused on jobs lost.

Guess when you are funded by energy biased conservative "groups", you can make "data" say anything . . .'cept the truth.
07:38 PM on 09/26/2010
Just when things are going so well,people want to stop it.
09:08 PM on 09/26/2010
AB32 hasn't taken effect so all the "things that are going so well" have been going on for years.
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
JessWonderin
10:49 PM on 09/26/2010
It will negatively effect:
If we roll back our clean energy standards, California would lose hundreds of thousands of jobs and billions of dollars in investments to other states.

According to California’s nonpartisan State Legislative Analyst’s Office, rolling back AB 32 could “dampen additional investments in clean energy technologies or in so-called ‘green jobs’ by private firms, thereby resulting in less economic activity.”

Clean energy businesses and technologies are exceptional bright spots in our economy. California's clean energy and clean air law has put California in a unique position to lead the clean energy and technology market, both in the United States and abroad.

500,000 employees work in clean technology or green jobs in Claifornia

Since 2005, California green jobs have grown 10 times faster than the statewide average
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Gnostic Priest
07:03 PM on 09/26/2010
YES on 23
photo
GiannaX
“Imagine, Create, Become”
05:29 PM on 09/26/2010
NO to the Koch Bros. NO to Texas Oil interests! NO, NO, NO on Prop 23!!!
Californians won't be 'Enron-ed' again!
NO on Prop 23!
05:10 PM on 09/26/2010
Yes JOBS , Yes 23 , Yes California , Yes 23 , Yes JOBS
Yes 23 is a Yes for California JOBS. Let's make solar panel in California and not China.
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
JessWonderin
11:23 PM on 09/26/2010
NO on 23 it will KILL JOBS in solar . . . and YES let's make solar panels HERE in Cali (jobs):

Prop. 23 would kill clean technology jobs, innovation and billions of dollars of investment in California and kill competition from California’s newly emerging clean energy businesses – wind, solar and other renewable energy and clean technologies
Rolling clean energy standards back, California would lose hundreds of thousands of jobs and billions of dollars in investments TO OTHER STATES . . and countries..
State Legislative Analyst’s Office, rolling back AB 32 could “dampen additional investments in clean energy technologies or in so-called ‘green jobs’ by private firms, thereby resulting in less economic activity.”
WE have 500,000 employees working in clean technology or green jobs
Since 2005, California green jobs have grown 10 times faster than the statewide average.
California’s clean technology sector received $9 billion cumulative venture capital investment from 2005-09, including $2.1 billion in investment capital in 2009 – five times the investment in our nearest competitor, Massachusetts.

NO on 23 keeps California Clean AND Competitive . . . .
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Malcolm Hensley
Last of the Reagan Republicans
01:49 AM on 10/02/2010
Jess you are willing to sacrifice several million current manufacturing jobs for a 500,000 installations jobs! Do you know how energy intensive making a solar array is? You have to melt the silica; tons of it in a manufacturing plant. Those big steel wind turbines take immense amount of energy to make and they are made in ?China using dirty coal!
12:38 PM on 09/26/2010
AB32 will cost us BILLIONS of dollars and MILLIONS of jobs. WE CAN'T AFFORD IT!

Yes on prop 23!
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
JessWonderin
03:55 PM on 09/26/2010
he said. cashing the Koch Bro Industies check at the 7-11 . . . . .
09:07 PM on 09/26/2010
2 things Jess if you were wonderin - #1 I'm not a man #2 I don't work for big oil.
08:44 AM on 09/26/2010
It's a poorly reasoned column,and I was going to rebut.SInce no ones reading it, I won't bother
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Scott Zwartz
09:15 PM on 09/25/2010
Pollution is good for society. By making people deathly ill, it provides jobs for doctors and nurses.

Really sick people, (let's feed asbestos to school children), use lots of medicines and that creates more jobs with Big Pharma. When when people die prematurely, the homes go on the market helping real estate and with the vacate jobs with people kicking the bucket early, we will have less unemployment.
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
JessWonderin
03:58 PM on 09/26/2010
. . toss in the shortened life saves SAVE a lot on SS too . . . .
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Doug Watt
Not ready for 2012
04:02 PM on 09/25/2010
You're right, we need to overwhelmingly crush this proposition to send a message to Texas oil: Hands Off California. We had enough rotten exports from Texas with the Bush debacle.