This is a surprise, a major TV station in Los Angeles pushes back against the California Air Resources Board AB32 bill aka California’s Global Warming Solutions Act. I urge readers to drop him a letter of support at the email address included in the transcript below.
Transcript follows.
LOS ANGELES – KTTV Vice-President and General Manager Kevin Hale takes a look at how one well-intentioned Climate Change Bill might damage our economy beyond repair in this P.O.V.
When Governor Schwarzenegger signed AB 32 six years ago, it was pre-recession. And that legislation, California’s Global Warming Solutions Act, despite its good intentions, will wreak havoc on our state’s economy.
The California Air Resources Board, under AB 32, recently approved the nation’s first “cap and trade” system, which effectively charges the state’s industries fees for emissions when they exceed a cap—in effect a tax—with the aim of curtailing California’s greenhouse gases.
The bill was passed for all the right reasons but the reality is, right now we are in a down economy, and AB 32 is a business killer. It effectively will be looked at as a back door tax that will push even more California businesses to move out of state.
California, although a leader on environmental issues, cannot solve the problem of greenhouses gases alone. When AB 32 was sold to voters, the promise was that other states would follow our lead. So far, none have.
A study by California State University, Sacramento, commissioned by the California Small Business Roundtable, estimates AB 32’s total cost to be more than $182 billion in lost output, raising living costs by $3,857 per household by the year 2020.
In light of these devastating numbers, I am asking Governor Brown and the legislature to put a moratorium on AB 32.
Look, we all agree that saving the environment is of the utmost importance but I believe that we should revisit this legislation when the economy improves and when other states are ready to join us.
Thanks for listening. I’d like to hear your Point of View. Go to myfoxla.com and click on P-O-V or send me an email at POV@fox11.com
Read more: http://www.myfoxla.com/dpp/news/pov/pov-climate-change-bill-2012-03-15#ixzz1pIClmX6Q
I know California is different, but I fail to see how enforced support of Voodoo is well-intentioned, except in extremely backward regions such as Berkeley.
Oh oh. He is off the meme.
His argument has been stated before, many times. The thing is that the Econuts, and the ARB don’t give damn about economic impacts. They have a higher calling – SAVING THE PLANET! And the objective is to impoverish, or cause to die, everyone except them and their slaves in order to fulfill their Utopian Fantasy. They are such sweethearts (for Totalitarians).
What bothered me about this CAGW thing a few years ago was not the taxation or the socialist intent or the windmills or the government largess to the NGOs. It was the perversion of Science.
If ‘they’, the Team, etc. back down because ‘it is not a good time now’ or ‘the economy is bad’ then Nothing has been accomplished. The people must come to understand that 1) There never was a potential catastrophe; and 2) That the human effect on the climate is just noise compared to natural variability. Unless and until that happens, people like this guy claiming they did it “for all the right reasons” simply perpetuate the Lie that is the manifestation of this perversion of Science and thus conceal their own responsibility for the unfounded scare they propagated.
Getting the right anwser for the wrong reason does not cut it.
“Look, we all agree that saving the environment is of the utmost importance but I believe that we should revisit this legislation when the economy improves and when other states are ready to join us.”
————————————————————————————————————————–
When those other states don’t join, What then?
Comment sent.
No matter what level of government….they are always looking for ways to collect more of our money
LOL. People actually believed this promise?
“California, although a leader on environmental issues, cannot solve the problem of greenhouses gases alone. When AB 32 was sold to voters, the promise was that other states would follow our lead. So far, none have.”
Sigh. I hope this gains traction, for the sake of my good friends who moved to San Francisco recently.
I tried to tell then CA was not a good choice before the cap and trade mess, and after last fall I pleaded, there are 48 other states that aren’t Texas if you feel you must leave, that haven’t yet passed this disastrous legislation. I fear for their security when the mobile development bubble bursts (which the couple largely works in).
“The energy-saving light bulb ends up as hazardous waste, too much insulation promotes mold and household drains are emitting a putrid odor because everyone is saving water. Many of Germany’s efforts to protect the environment are a chronic failure, but that’s unlikely to change.”
http://www.spiegel.de/international/business/0,1518,821396,00.html
[When AB 32 was sold to voters, the promise was that other states would follow our lead. So far, none have.]
When HAS any other state followed CA’s incompetent lead. Hey Dudes, what’s your debt up to now?
Looks to me like he has sipped the coolaid and finds the taste a bit yucky. So, he wants to set it aside for a while and then try it again to see if his taste buds were just off that day.
I’m disappointed to hear this. I like train wrecks, and, the California CARB deserves to be one. Everything else CA is doing is wrong on so many fronts, and, they influence the rest of the country. I want to see them sprial down in flames. Without cautionary examples of this sort, petty officials will continue to see “Green” and “Sustainable” as voter-friendly buzz words.
No kudos from me. He still believes “that saving the environment is of the utmost importance” and when “the economy improves and when other states are ready to join us” (which I hope is never), they will institute Cap & Trade in CA.
He is another CA enviro-whacko, the only difference is that he being somewhat pragmatic.
It took great courage to put forward even this limp-wristed opposition. But I don’t see it as being able to accomplish anything. If we’ve learned anything from FakeGate, it’s that they will do anything to win their argument.
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/american-life-retracts-apple-episode-says-daisey-fabricated-175638428.html
awesome reasoning…even for someone who believes AGW is real and that this legislation would help if all states enacted it.
“The bill was passed for all the right reasons”
.
It was not.
Far too much common sense – absolutely no chance the rank and file greenies will accept this until the economic collapse they engineered starts to hit their state paid benefits/grants etc.
There is even hope for the BBC. The local BBC TV news has specifically blamed carbon taxes for the closure of an aluminium smelter in North East England.
I guess Richard Black will need to have a word.
It’s bad out here in California. How bad?
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2012/03/california-tax-revenues-plunge.html
They keep raising taxes and instituting regulation and businesses keep fleeing and tax revenues keep dropping. Tax revenue down a whopping 22% in one year. 1/3 of all welfare recipients in the US are in California. California has the third highest unemployment rate in the country. Business flight last year was more than 5x what it was in 2009. Worse, businesses that might wish to relocate to California aren’t and new businesses aren’t starting here. California is business hostile and 100% of a state’s tax revenue finds its roots in business.
California should be taking exactly the opposite approach. Slash taxes in half, in fact, eliminate taxes on business and cut regulations. That would result in an explosion of business activity that would fill the tax coffers. But no. They are determined to destroy the economy of California by the most efficient means possible: strangulation.
One thing California does is to discriminate against business in a very sneaky way. They create generally hostile business conditions and then they offer certain fair-haired child businesses special major tax breaks. Solyndra, for example, was given huge sales tax breaks. They had to pay no sales tax on the equipment for their facility in Fremont. Twitter gets special payroll tax breaks that other companies don’t get. They were going to leave San Francisco but got special breaks that other businesses don’t get because they were such a high profile example that the politicians were fearful that Twitter’s leaving would cost he supervisors their jobs.
California is a perfect example of why “Progressive” policy is unsustainable. It ends up wiping out its own source of cash. It declares war on its own food supply. In short, it is stupid.
In cult suicide rituals, you don’t want to go first and trust that the others really will follow you…
We know where the road paved with good intentions leads to, right?
If you’re going to cure global warming by wrecking the economy, or wreaking havoc on it, does it matter if the economy is bad right now?
Kevin has the right approach. If you want to convince the “believers” that they need to hold off on implementing AB32, then you have to give them a reason they can be comfortable with. Walk it back one step at a time. Whatever works. The non-believers don’t need convincing. They already know it is a dumb idea.
Just get somebody to run the climate models with AB32, then compare the model results without. That ought to be enough to stop this nonsense.
Mind you, I think the models are wrong, but what I expect this to show is AB32 won’t make any noticeable difference. If that doesn’t kill it, then run a cost-benefit analysis on the results.
Once you kill AB32, do the same thing with any of the global climate control schemes and you’ll see similar results.
Quote: “The bill was passed for all the right reasons but the reality is, right now we are in a down economy
,..
Look, we all agree that saving the environment is of the utmost importance …
Sorry, but first, I do not agree that the bill was passed for all of the right reasons at all. I’m not even sure I’ll agree that there was any “reasoning” applied at all.
And, look, many of us agree that curtailing CO2 emissions won’t do a thing toward “saving” the environment and we also accept that increased CO2 in the atmosphere has many beneficial aspects.
I will agree however, that a moratorium on AB 32 followed by appealing it would be in California’s best interest.