California Proposition 23

I occasionally break from the nonstop frivolity that is 23 Breaths to weigh in on important topics of the day.

With elections I usually limit my comments to encouraging the voting population to first study the issues and candidates and then to actually get out and vote.

First let me say that my personal approach to government is both liberal in social areas (why have a government if it doesn't help people) and financially conservative. Quite often these goals conflict and you have to give some thought to the issues and go with the solution that does the least harm.

If we were sitting down enjoying a cup of coffee discussing the issues of the day, you would walk away with the impression that "this dude's a tree hugger".

I provide this preamble to the discussion because in my opinion people who don't tell you up front where they are coming from later try to BS you.

So now you know.

The text of Prop 23 follows below.  I copied it from Ballotpedia   

++Text of Proposition 23 begins here++
This initiative measure is submitted to the people in accordance with the provisions of Section 8 of Article II of the California Constitution.
This initiative measure adds a section to the Health and Safety Code; therefore, new provisions proposed to be added are printed in italic type to indicate that they are new.

California Jobs Initiative

(a) In 2006, the Legislature and Governor enacted a sweeping environmental law, AB 32. While protecting the environment is of utmost importance, we must balance such regulation with the ability to maintain jobs and protect our economy.
(b) At the time the bill was signed, the unemployment rate in California was 4.8 percent. California’s unemployment rate has since skyrocketed to more than 12 percent.
(c) Numerous economic studies predict that complying with AB 32 will cost Californians billions of dollars with massive increases in the price of gasoline, electricity, food and water, further punishing California consumers and households.
(d) California businesses cannot drive our economic recovery and create the jobs we need when faced with billions of dollars in new regulations and added costs; and
(e) California families being hit with job losses, pay cuts and furloughs cannot afford to pay the increased prices that will be passed onto them as a result of this legislation right now.
The people desire to temporarily suspend the operation and implementation of AB 32 until the state’s unemployment rate returns to the levels that existed at the time of its adoption.
Division 25.6 (commencing with Section 38600) is added to the Health and Safety Code, to read

38600. (a) From and after the effective date of this division, Division 25.5 (commencing with Section 38500) of the Health and Safety Code is suspended until such time as the unemployment rate in California is 5.5 percent or less for four consecutive calendar quarters.
(b) While suspended, no state agency shall propose, promulgate, or adopt any regulation implementing Division 25.5 (commencing with Section 38500) and any regulation adopted prior to the effective date of this division shall be void and unenforceable until such time as the suspension is lifted.

++Text of Proposition 23 ends here++

So if you made it through the prop congratulations

Here is the condensed version

Prop. 23 Suspends Air Pollution Control Laws Requiring Major Polluters to Report and Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions That Cause Global Warming Until Unemployment Drops Below Specified Level for Full Year. (Source: Official Voter Information Guide)

So who would be interested in suspending the air pollution control laws?  No one likes pollution and I think that people and businesses that create pollution should have to manage it as cost of doing business.
So who are the top contributors in support of Prop 23?
(this is always the first question I ask anymore)
In Support of Prop. 23

In review, 
we have a bunch of oil companies 
that given the high unemployment rate in California  
think it's a great time to argue that having to report and control the mess they make 
is preventing anyone from adding new jobs.  

I don't see the connection.
In fact it just seems like an opportunistic play to repeal some overhead costs to make the oil business more profitable.  
If you think the oil business is unprofitable check out EXXON's P& L statement some time.
I will be voting NO on Prop 23.

(oh and next time you want to pollute where I live can you pick a different prop number?)


Mike W said…
oh wow, I hope that proposition doesn't get up.
Climate change will bring about far more 'job losses'

Popular Posts