California Prop 23 – Why You Should Vote NO

15 Oct

No on CA Prop 23

It doesn’t matter if you believe in global warming or not. It doesn’t matter if you are conservative, liberal, libertarian, moderate, own a business, go to school, a parent, not a parent, jobless, homeless, black, white, brown, yellow, green… it doesn’t matter. If you believe in clean air, clean water, better paying and new jobs, a healthier environment and brighter future;  If you don’t like the idea of supporting despots, dictators, human rights atrocities, and terrorists through our dependence on foreign oil;  If you want to pay less in energy costs (in actual price as well as in environmental and health costs). If you believe in California and the United States and our uncanny ability to innovate, change paradigms and lead the world – than you need to vote NO on Proposition 23.

“Prop. 23 is designed to kill California’s effort to clean up the environment. [Proponents] 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.

George Shultz

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.”

—George Shultz, Former Secretary of State under Reagan, Co-Chair of the No on 23 Campaign, New York Times, Tom Friedman’s Column, October 7, 2010

Prop 23 suspends California’s landmark legislative bill AB 32, which was put in place to reduce emissions, not only to help stave off global warming, but to protect and preserve our precious natural resources, reduce ever rising energy costs, make a healthier environment for our elderly – our children – all of us, as well as to grow our economy promoting clean and renewable energy and technologies.Solar Panels

Here are 15 points to ponder as you make this important decision to help us to step ahead and lead the world or choose to stagnate in an unsustainable and unhealthy future and lag behind the world as investment and jobs migrate elsewhere:

  1. Innovative energy policies beginning in the 1970s have saved Californians $56 billion in electricity and natural gas costs, averted the construction of 15 large power plants and created 1.5 million full-time jobs with a payroll to the tune of $45 billion.
  2. Most of the state’s largest employers support implementation of AB 32, including Google, eBay, Applied Materials, Waste Management, the California Ski Industry Association, and Virgin America.
  3. Google’s “clean-energy czar” Bill Weihl calls AB 32 a key to creating the companies of the future for California.
  4. Air pollution taints the air we breathe, our water and our food, which is a major factor in our extraordinarily high rates of asthma and cancer.kid with asthma
  5. Prop 23 supporters are hanging their hats on a discredited study by a Sacramento Consultant,  Sanjay Varshney, as well as a study by the Pacific Research Institute that was funded by Valero, a Texas Oil company who is the largest contributor to Prop 23. Not to mention when Varshney was  asked whether he stands by the report’s findings, and to comment on AB 32, he declined. “I haven’t really kept up with the debate,” he said. “It will be difficult for me to comment.”
  6. Since 2005, California green jobs have grown 10 times faster than the statewide average.
  7. California’s clean technology sector received $9 billion in investment capital from 2005-2009, and despite the economic recession received $2.1 billion in 2009 alone – 116 deals which amounted to 60 percent of the total in North America and more than five times the investment in our nearest competitor, Massachusetts.
  8. A new report by the nonprofit, nonpartisan group Next 10 shows that despite the down economy, more clean tech businesses are starting up in California versus shutting down or leaving the state. The third edition of the “California Green Innovation Index” also shows that the state collected 24 percent of global clean tech venture capital funds.
  9. Analysis from University of Californian researchers estimates that AB 32 policies could increase household incomes by $48 billion and create about 400,000 jobs.
  10. The implementation of AB32 has been one of unparalleled collaboration and an open process where everyone from John Q. Public to the Oil Companies to the environmental companies having had and still have a seat at the table.refinery
  11. Valero (Texas Oil), Tesoro (oil company) & Koch Industries (Coal Industry) have contributed $6,606,273.20(74% of contributions) to support Prop 23. They understand that a new economy is coming and they aren’t apart of it, especially if California is leading the way.
  12. “While [some Americans have] turned “climate change” into a four-letter word — J-O-K-E — China’s Communists also turned it into a four-letter word — J-O-B-S.” – Thomas Friedman (Are We Clever?).
  13. If businesses haven’t already adopted measures to reduce their emissions and energy use, they are already behind the curve and will not be able to compete in the world.  The wine industry and organic farmers are at the forefront of sustainable practices and are leading the way to more healthy and practical agricultural operations.
  14. You might hear this disingenuous argument, among others, that humans exhale carbon dioxide, well we do, but human exhalation of carbon dioxide is part of a closed system. There can be no net addition of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere because the amount of carbon dioxide we exhale can’t be greater than the carbon we put into our bodies by eating plants, or eating animals t hat eat plants. The plants received the carbon from the atmosphere via photosynthesis. This closed system is true for any animal,  not just humans. The reason why burning fossil fuels is a concern is because it is not a closed loop over human time scales. Extracting coal and oil and burning them puts carbon back into the atmosphere that plants removed millions of years ago.
  15. By passing Prop 23 and staying primarily dependent on fossil fuels, private electricity costs in California would rise $100 per person in 2020, making electricity up to 33% more expensive. These added fossil fuel costs will shrink the economy by $84 billion and over a half million jobs in 2020.

So I ask you, What’s wrong with reducing our reliance on foreign oil, which supports our enemies, people like Hugo Chavez and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, as well as terrorists?  Without the support of oil money they would never be capable of pushing forward their agendas and controlling their people.  What’s wrong with making polluters reduce their emissions, encouraging and giving incentives to clean technology, helping move California into the future in this new, healthy and innovative economy?   As has been said before,  AB 32 feels “like a breath fresh clean air”, let’s not stink it up.

No on Prop 23Prop 23 Resources:

No on 23 – Stop the Dirty Energy Prop – Official No on 23 site.

The Triple Pundit – An ongoing series about California’s Proposition 23

Impartial Analysis of Prop 23 – From Smart Voter – The League of Women Voters.

Small Business Majority – released an in-depth report on Oct. 18, 2010, that focuses on the opportunities AB 32 provides to California’s small businesses.

Report Touting Prop. 23 ‘Simply Nonsense’ — Stanford Prof – Debunking report by Pacific Research Institute partially funded by Valero.

Next 10 – Nonpartisan think tank focusing on innovation and the intersection between the economy, the environment, and quality of life issues for all Californians.

Yes on 23Read the bottom of the page, misleading name by calling it a “jobs initiative”, there are no jobs being created by this prop.

Meet Koch Industries -One of the top 3 contributors to Prop 23.

California Bright Spot – is sponsored by the California Business Alliance for a Green Economy which supports the implementation of California’s clean energy policies, including AB 32, by the California Air Resources Board and other public agencies.

Are We Clever? The push for green in China is a practical discussion on health and wealth. There is no need to emphasize future consequences when people already see, eat and breathe pollution every day.

Comments are closed.