Greenspace

Environmental news from California and beyond

« Previous | Greenspace Home | Next »

Obama: No on Prop. 23 and 'corporate polluters'

Prop 23 awesome demo foto march thru wilmngton wally skalij

Arnold Schwarzenegger, George Shultz, Robert Redford, Bill Gates, James Cameron, Leonardo Di Caprio and Al Gore have all weighed in to oppose California's Proposition 23, a November ballot initiative. Now comes the uber-endorsement for the No on 23 campaign: President Obama.

"The president is opposed to Prop. 23 -- a veiled attempt by corporate polluters to block progress towards a clean energy economy," White House spokesman Adam Abrams announced Wednesday. "If passed, the initiative would stifle innovation, investment in R&D and cost jobs for the state of California."

But it is not just about the Golden State. Abrams added, "The impacts could affect us all. If successful, corporate special interests will set their sights nationwide."

The White House might well be worried: Both proponents and opponents of the measure, which would suspend the implementation of California's sweeping global warming law, say that as California goes,  so go national prospects for climate change legislation.

Congress last spring killed a comprehensive bill aimed at cutting greenhouse gas emissions and spurring alternative energy, leaving California with the only economy-wide greenhouse gas law in the nation. Scientists say that carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases, spewed into the atmosphere by cars, trucks and industrial plants, are trapping heat in the atmosphere and disrupting the global climate.

Europe has forged ahead with strict curbs, and some U.S. states have adopted more modest laws than California's. California is set to enact rules in December aimed at slashing its carbon footprint down to 1990 levels by 2020.

Proposition 23 would suspend the regulations until unemployment in the state drops to 5.5% for a year -- a level the state has achieved only three times in the last four decades. It is backed by oil refiners that say their electricity costs and other fees would rise dramatically, as well as the California Manufacturer and Technology Assn., a Sacramento-based trade group.

-- Margot Roosevelt

Photo: Protesters march in Wilmington against Proposition 23. Texas-based Valero Energy Corp. and Tesoro Corp., the main funders of the ballot initiative, own refineries in Wilmington.

Credit: Wally Skalij /Los Angeles Times

RELATED:

TV campaign on California climate law revs up

Prop 23: Avatar's James Cameron kicks in $1 million

Meg Whitman wants to "fix" California's global warming law

 

 
Comments () | Archives (28)

The comments to this entry are closed.

If Obama is against it then I'm definetly for it! All Obama wants to do is drive us to third world status as quicklyu as he can, the best answer to the Global Warming issue is to figure out how to live with it, just no way we can stop our carbon emmisions with out a return to stoneage lifestyle. Not something I want for myself or my children.

Can you say slippery slope argument Monica? Im sorry but those who are opposed to prop 23 have not even looked at the laws and economic impact CARB has had and will contiunue to have on this state. AB 32 and SB 375 will do absolutely nothing positive for this state, but at least we can stop the former. I still cant beleive people actually fall for the "stop texas oil" slogans. Can you people not think for yourselves. DO SOME RESEARCH FOR ONCE. If we continue with the CARB status quo this state is doomed.

Okay, so let's say we go ahead and pass prop 23. Millions of people have jobs, they become rich, out state becomes the richest in the world, but then, the unthinkable happens... We all die of lung cancer. Oh but that's okay, because our state was once the richest in the unvierse. How in the world are we okay with this? What's the point of having the riches and the glory when we aren't even healthy enough to enjoy it. Not all the money in the world will give me back the joy of being able to finish a sentence without running out of air. Ever since I was diagnosed with asthma, I've seen things in a different prospective. It's time we see things in the long run instead of just what we think is the best at the moment. let's get our facts straight and becaome a clean nation, starting with California. Vote no on prop 23.

Very few voters have taken the time to read AB 32.

AB 32 was enacted before the facts were known. It simply needs to strip out the Cap and Trade and reliance on GHG assumptions and its potentially a piece of leadership legislation. Sustainability, Clean Energy, and Stewardship are great goals but not at the expense of Common Sense.

AB 32 needs to be suspended and or immediately amended to eliminate the Cap and Trade provisions 70% of America Opposes, eliminate the unnecessary oversight Fees, eliminate the reliance on flawed Global Warming assumptions, correct the vague language that will introduce Environmental Red Tape that will do more damage than good, ensure AB 32 doesn’t undermine The Rule of Law, and make non-governmental agencies like CARB accountable to the taxpayer for their mistakes.

Voting YES on Prop 23 makes the most sense.

This isn’t about Oil vs Solar, its about a poorly crafted piece of legislation that will do more harm than good and about protecting jobs until AB32 is fixed and we can afford it.

@wayne:

"So even obama is willing to sacrifice California at the alter of global warming. California is going to be a lot nicer to live in when a million people lose their jobs."

No, California will be MUCH nicer to live in if there are no regulations and we have chunks of coal ash in our hair and red-smog sunsets like in China. We need to suck it up and make the change to clean technology, or we'll LOSE a lot more than a million people permanently.

Green jobs will continue to be made available at an exponential rate, even if that were not the case, I'd choose losing my job over cancer any day of the week.

If Prop. 23 passes, California's best chance to fight global warming will be put on hold for years, possibly for a generation. A vote for Prop. 23 is a vote to make California unliveable for your children and grandchildren.

I'm voting NO on 23
and to all you sad people that are voting yes just because Obama is opposed to it, or yes because you want your dirty energy jobs, I wish you all could have your own planet to defile and destroy as you see fit.

If Barry supports it - I oppose it.

Simple.

Regarding your story in today's paper:

Did the LA Times analyze the television ads offered by the 'No on 23' campaign?

When they refer to '...some of California's largest polluters...' the TV ad shows an image of a refinery. However, the image shows steam -- not smoke or pollution -- being emitted. The steam - which is either helpful or at least benign for the environment - is part of a clean air program within the refinery. Of course, no one bothers to clarify that. The hope by the "No on 23" side is that the mis-informed public will see "steam" and think "smoke" and say..."that's horrible --- No on 23!"

Let's hope that the mislead No on 23 voters don't lose their jobs as a result of their decisions. If they do, they can look forward to their $30. per hour job being replaced with a "green" job that pays $12. per hour.

That's called progress by an informed electorate?

I forgot the most important point:

Please vote NO on Prop 23. It really is about the economy and jobs.

Allow me to make the economic case...

Two of the most essential cornerstones of free market capitalism are innovation and competition. These ideals are alive and thriving in the Cleantech industry and are garnering support from investors. It is the Cleantech industry that is working to find renewable ways to power our lives and make our economy more efficient through the wiser use of scarce resources. The Cleantech industry and our need to move away from non-renewable energy sources, has also spurred California policy makers into action, and is proof positive that Republicans and Democrats can work together to allow free market forces to succeed in the creation of clean-tech. Yet, these fundamentals of free market capitalism are under attack and may fall prey to Texas oil interests, in the form of Proposition 23.

The passage or failure of Proposition 23 has significant implications for the rest of the United States as California has become a model with respect to how other states may begin to deal, in ways that foster growth, with the realities of climate change. What is most disconcerting about Proposition 23 is that it represents an attempt by capital to protect where it is invested currently, rather than where the entrepreneurial spirit and innovation says it needs to be invested. It is less expensive for these capital interests to throw money into support for this Proposition then to attempt to remain competitive in our market economy. Such actions are quintessentially un-American and not in line with the principles upon which our market economy was founded.

Intelligent rebuttals are welcome.

I love how everyone is talking about the global warming and pollution in America but no one is talking about the gross pollution the other countries are making to produce and ship straight gasoline to america. In the end we will be left with more pollution and american dependence on foreign gasoline that we voted for.

Looks like Obama is against creating jobs now. I love how the democrats make it look like its the oil companies that are just going to be loosing money but it will be everyone. Green Jobs are a scam and only account for 3 % of jobs right now. Everything is made in China and produced overseas. How are you creating jobs if everything is made over Seas? The only green jobs here are the people that assemble them which is maybe 10 % of the whole process. We need to have a rules that state any green technology we use needs to be made here so we can actually put people back to work.

@dhume12, @ No23: As if you two clowns don't have your political leanings. I'd bet a Big Gulp that both of you "political professionals" were quick to oppose anything George Bush supported -- Just like every Democrat in DC -- The minute the GOP proposes something, the Dems immediately oppose it.

Obama should be cautious of where he lends his support. There is tepid enthusiasm for Obama these days, and if he's not careful, he'll endure the same lame-duck status that plagued GWB his last year in office.

BTW, Vote YES on 19
Can we agree on that at least? ;)

It's idiots like sarge, Rob, and Cigarbat that are so blinded by their prejudices that their sub-standard minds decide to vote yes on a measure like this. herp derp

UNLESS.....they tithe most generously to the corrupt Demo Party, of course. Just look at what got the Lockerbie bomber off!!! Any guess as to WHICH Big Polluter got the goodies? Same again here, with BOTH Parties. Let's get some fresh new faces on BOTH sides of the aisle!!

So even obama is willing to sacrifice California at the alter of global warming. California is going to be a lot nicer to live in when a million people lose their jobs.

Spain found that 2.2 jobs were lost for every "green" job that was created, but the "green" jobs were often not permanent. It put their economy in the tank and caused endless suffering. Of course we arrogant Americans, and even more arrogant Californians, figure we can make it work.

It's almost funny how Texas has created over 100,000 jobs, while California has lost over 100,000 jobs, and at the same time, has built TRIPLE the wind powered electrical generation as California. Did Texas need a job-killer AB 32 to do it? Of course not.

We need to become more business friendly, but AB 32 will make us even more hostile to business. We have already lost over a hundred billion dollars in revenue and income due to the hostility toward business. Let Prop 23 pass and watch the floodgates open even further as business flees.

Please vote Yes for Proposition 23. It really is about the economy and jobs.

Tesoro doesn't own any refinery's in texas. They own 1 in the LA area 1 in the bay area, and 1 in washington, alaska, north dakota, hawaii and utah.....just trying to set the record straight.

I'll be voting YES on 23, then by year end, me, my family, my money, and my business, will have moved to a more business friendly (and less taxes) state.

I'll be voting YES on 23. Then by the end of the year, my business, my money, and my family will have moved out of California. I don't want to be here when/if Brown takes over. At the very least, taxes are going up majorly.

they're just boys dhume12...no doubt they oozed over from the ABC7 site

Well, the POTUS is against it, it must mean that it could save me money.
So, I'm for it.

I guess I'm now voting Yes on 23.

Thanks Barry....

@rob @cigarbat etc--- that's a real mature way to decide how to vote...it's attitudes like that which undermine the efficacy of our democracy

Yes to Prop 23!
Let do some drilling california!
Lets all work together to get some cheap gas on our dinner tables.
Gas/Petrol/Fuel at a cheaper cost should be our priority. Imagine a world without gas!! We shall die of starvation and our kids without future!

Thanks for making up my mind Mr. President. Anything you oppose, I support.

YES on 23

If Obama is against it, I'm voting for it.

Thank you, Comrade Barry. An endorsement would have been the kiss of death!


Connect

Recommended on Facebook


Advertisement

In Case You Missed It...

Video

Recent News
Invitation to connect on LinkedIn |  December 12, 2013, 9:58 am »
New Cook Islands Shark Sanctuary proposed |  December 8, 2011, 8:00 am »

Categories


Archives