Lawsuit challenges California cap and trade program – “…only way to capture CARB’s attention.”

CARB_Mary_Nichols

CARB Director Mary Nichols: Oblivious bureaucrat

While the EU carbon trading market began its death spiral this week, much like the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) where it ended up at a nickel per ton when the exchange died and closed per good, CARB’s director, Mary Nichols, is obliviously pushing forward with the cap and trade program for California. But wait there’s more. From Bloomberg Friday:

California Adopts Regulation to Link Carbon Markets With Quebec

California, the world’s ninth- largest economy, adopted rules to link carbon markets with the Canadian province of Quebec, a move that will allow companies to trade emissions allowances across the border.

California and Quebec are linking even as the emissions- trading system across the European Union falters. EU carbon allowance prices dropped to a record low April 17 after lawmakers voted against a plan to ease a supply glut and resuscitate the world’s biggest emissions market.

Did I mention oblivious?

My local newspaper, the Chico Enterprise Record has a scathing  editorial on CARB this morning:

Our view: If successful, the lawsuit against the California Air Resources Board could force a different attitude on state agencies. 

Less than a month ago, staff from the California Air Resources Board sat in the Chico City Council chambers, invited by Assemblyman Dan Logue, to talk about the state’s diesel regulations.

In the audience were angry farmers and small-business owners caught in a regulation requiring them to update or replace old diesel engines, an expense that few could bear.

Without mincing words, several said they might have to close their doors or leave California. Without empathy, CARB representatives said they knew the situation. They said they’d heard it before.

Ironically, several people that afternoon suggested that lawsuits were the only way to capture CARB’s attention.

One lawsuit apparently was in motion at that time.

Last week, Pacific Legal Foundation filed the suit against CARB to stop the auctioning of carbon dioxide emission allowances. The foundation is described as a donor-supported legal watchdog organization.

Read the entire editorial here: http://www.chicoer.com/opinion/ci_23073612/editorial-lawsuit-could-bring-changes

Here’s the press PLF release:

PLF lawsuit challenges cap-and-trade auction as unconstitutional

Sacramento, CA; April 16, 2013: Attorneys with Pacific Legal Foundation today filed a lawsuit challenging California’s “cap and trade” auction regulation. The regulation creates a quarterly auction program requiring many California employers to bid significant amounts of money for the privilege of continuing to emit carbon dioxide — or be faced with closing their doors in California, laying off their employees, and moving their businesses to other states.

Filed on behalf of a broad spectrum of California businesses, trade associations, and individuals harmed by the regulation, the lawsuit challenges the auction process as an unconstitutional state tax because it was not enacted by two-thirds majorities in both chambers of the Legislature, as required for new taxes by the California Constitution (Proposition 13 and Proposition 26).

As PLF’s complaint states, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) devised the auction plan as a means of raising billions of dollars in revenue, without any instruction or direction from the Legislature. CARB hatched the auction program purportedly to implement AB 32, the 2006 legislation that requires reductions in the emission of carbon dioxide in California by the year 2020. But nothing in AB 32 authorizes creation of an auction process to sell carbon dioxide emission allowances for billions of dollars. Nor does AB 32 authorize the creation of any kind of new tax.

“PLF’s lawsuit holds CARB’s feet to the fire because CARB cannot be allowed to siphon billions of dollars from California taxpayers in violation of the California Constitution,” said PLF Attorney Ted Hadzi-Antich. “CARB must obey the law, just as the rest of us are required to do.”

Clearing the air: The cap-and-trade auction is a tax — enacted unconstitutionally

“The California Constitution is crystal clear that new state taxes require at least two-thirds approval in both chambers of the Legislature,” said Hadzi-Antich. “The ‘cap and trade’ auction program is a new state tax that will generate billions of dollars of revenues for the state on the backs of California taxpayers. Because it was not passed by at least a two-thirds majority vote of the Legislature, it is unconstitutional. Case closed.

“It is stunning that the tax was imposed by bureaucratic fiat,” Hadzi-Antich continued. “CARB wasn’t implementing any provision of AB 32 with the auction program for massive new revenues. It decided to raise billions of dollars for the state by making up a new tax out of thin air. In a representative democracy, we can’t have unelected bureaucrats grabbing legislative power and concocting burdensome new tax programs that siphon even more money from productive, private hands into an already bloated public sector.

“CARB’s auction program isn’t just unconstitutional, it’s also an assault on economic and environmental common sense,” Hadzi-Antich continued. “California cannot even hope to address global warming issues without widespread participation by other governments. Yet except for the isolated Canadian province of Quebec, no other governments are promulgating similar regulations. As the costs mount and businesses move out of California, other states will welcome them. There’s got to be a better, more rational way to deal with the issues than CARB’s all-too-transparent scheme to generate billions of dollars for the state through an illegal tax.”

The plaintiffs in the case include:

The Morning Star Packing Company, headquartered in Woodland, California. Morning Star’s three tomato processing facilities emit carbon dioxide, and Morning Star participated in both of CARB’s auctions held to date, purchasing 31,000 allowances at a total cost of $379,860, a sum that could have been better used to increase production and hire more employees. Because CARB will collect revenues at carbon emissions auctions quarterly for the foreseeable future, Morning Star will be required to spend even more for the right to emit carbon dioxide.

Merit Oil Company, a third-generation California family business whose operations include storing, transporting, and selling a variety of petroleum products, including gasoline, diesel fuels, solvents, kerosene, and lubricants.

California Construction Trucking Association (CCTA), a nonprofit California trade association representing nearly 1,000 members who own and operate on-road and non-road vehicles, engines, and equipment, primarily in connection with construction projects. Approximately 60 percent of CCTA’s members are sole proprietors of one-truck operations.

Dalton Trucking, Inc., a California corporation in the business of operating and leasing loaders, dozers, blades, and water trucks. In addition, Dalton Trucking performs specialized services in open top bulk transportation, lowbed, general freight on flatbeds and vans, as well as rail and intermodal services.

Loggers Association of Northern California (LANC),a California nonprofit trade associa­tion whose mission is to support, promote, and advocate for the logging industry in Northern California. LANC has 160 members, many of whom are family logging businesses that have been involved in logging operations in California for generations.

Buzz Eades, Executive Director of LANC, issued this statement: “Logging has been an important part of the California economy for many generations, and family logging businesses have provided substantial economic benefits to this state. To strike at loggers now with these ill conceived regulatory taxes, at a time when the recovery is still very, very shaky, is an example of the worst kind of governmental abuse. Our competitors in the Northwest, most notably Oregon and Washington, aren’t being hit with these new taxes, either directly or indirectly. Who benefits from imposing these new costs on businesses in California? Nobody.”

Ron Cinquini Farming, a farming operation in Chico, California, owned and operated by Ron Cinquini. Mr. Cinquini personally owns and farms 30 acres, farms another 125 acres under contract, manages his family’s farm of 400 acres, and performs custom farming work on another 600 acres.

Robinson Enterprises, Inc., a California company headquartered in Nevada City, California. Robinson Enterprises is engaged in several businesses, including logging, petroleum products storage and transportation, construction services, heavy equipment fleet operation and manage­ment, and trucking.

Construction Industry Air Quality Coalition (CIAQC),a California trade association founded in 1989 by four Southern California trade associations: Associated General Contractors, Building Industry Association of Southern California, Engineering Contractors Association, and Southern California Contractors Association. CIAQC provides its members with information concerning environmental regulatory issues and provides regulatory agencies with information regarding the impacts of environmental regulations on the construction industry.

Also among the plaintiffs are three individuals who are challenging the auction process because it increases their own personal utility and fuel costs:

Norman R. “Skip” Brown,of Sacramento, has resided in California his entire life. As a homeowner, he understands that the auction program will increase his utility expenses because his suppliers of natural gas and electricity must participate as bidders for carbon dioxide emis­sions allowances and will pass on the cost of purchasing these allowances to their customers. His fuel costs as a motorist will be affected for the same reasons.

Skip Brown issued this statement: “I’m retired and I supplement my fixed income only by part-time consulting. In other words, I’m like millions of other Californians who have to watch our family budgets carefully. But now state bureaucrats have imposed a burdensome new tax, without authorization, that will raise basic living costs for me and all Californians. I am frankly concerned that the continued government-generated cost increases in this state may require my wife and me to move out of California. We dearly don’t want to do that, because our children and grandchildren live here, but CARB isn’t making life in this state any easier for us and for millions of others like us.”

Joanne L. Brown is married to plaintiff Skip Brown and, like her husband, she understands that the auction program will raise her utility costs, as well as her fuel costs as a motorist. She does not wish to move out of the state because California has been her home for over 50 years, her children and grandchildren reside in the state, and she wishes to remain near them.

Robert Michael McClernon is a California taxpayer who objects to the illegal imposition of new taxes on Californians and whose fuel costs and utility costs will be increased because the suppliers will be hit with new expenses because they must participate in the auction process.

Finally, petitioners include one of the nation’s most prominent taxpayer defense organizations:

The National Tax Limitation Committee (NTLC), headquartered in Roseville, California, is one of the oldest and most strategically oriented pro-taxpayer/entrepreneur organizations in America. Established in 1975, NTLC grew out of the work that Founder and President Lew Uhler, in alliance with California Governor Ronald Reagan, undertook to devise strategies to control the size and growth of government. NTLC’s mission is, “To make structural changes in fiscal and governance practices at all levels of government, and to limit and control taxes and spending, so as to enhance the power and freedom of individuals and their enterprises.”

Filed in Sacramento County Superior Court, the case is Morning Star Packing Company, et. al. v. California Air Resources Board.

About Pacific Legal Foundation

Donor-supported Pacific Legal Foundation (http://www.pacificlegal.org) is a watchdog organization that litigates for limited government, property rights, individual rights, free enterprise, and a balanced approach to environmental regulations in courts nationwide.

=============================================================

From 2009, still worth the same amount today:

CarbonCreditCertificate

About these ads

54 thoughts on “Lawsuit challenges California cap and trade program – “…only way to capture CARB’s attention.”

  1. It must surely be obvious to all that the goal of these zealots is in fact to put people out of business or have them leave the State. This is what single-minded bureaucracies inevitably do. The extreme becomes the norm when individuals are tasked with single issues.

  2. CARB efforts have been aided by an EPA ruling on Sulphur in diesel from natural 500 PPM to near zero. The Sulphur provided some lubrication to mechanical fuel injectors, valves and piston rings. Removal, to prevent ‘acid rain’ has reduced engine life in older irrigation pumps, farm and construction equipment. Forest fires create more atmospheric Sulphur than the previous diesel fuel component. If you are in farming, it is impossible to relocate your farm. You may relocate your equipment, but vast areas of productive agriculture are being forced to go fallow….reinforcing the True agenda of the greens….to stave humanity in the dark.

  3. Isn’t it time that American Partisans threw CARB and other illegally taxed products into the Charles River? After all, you did it to us Redcoats and we weren’t half as bad as this insanity!!

  4. If you want to hook your wagon to Quebec there is no helping you. If it wasn’t for the ROC (rest of Canada) Quebec would be a third world country. Quebec is french for Greece…sigh. Ontario isn’t far behind.

  5. The idiot liberals in California believe people don’t have a choice, and will play by their rules no matter how extreme they legislate their environmental rules. Just in case people do start leaving in droves (which some already are), they are proposing implementing an exit tax to punish you on the way out! What they don’t realize, is that they are killing the goose that lays the golden egg.

    Pat says:

    April 21, 2013 at 9:45 am

    It must surely be obvious to all that the goal of these zealots is in fact to put people out of business or have them leave the State. This is what single-minded bureaucracies inevitably do. The extreme becomes the norm when individuals are tasked with single issues

  6. pat says:

    April 21, 2013 at 9:45 am

    – is right.

    I’m still not certain that the Phoney B.Liar (we called him Tony B.Liar)/Gordon Brown Administration was actively involved intrying to hobble the UK; certainly it looks that way!
    Their, and Moscow’s, allies in the teaching professions – and the teacher training professions, especially – have, over half a century, dumbed education down so that about one in five ‘poor white boys’ leaves primary school, at 11, unable to functionally read or write [or do arithmetic].
    That in England.
    And there seems now to be a generation of mangerial social-democrats, whose have their own section of scoiety and aren’t democrats [Good schools, and no referendum of EU membership]; plus, for the Dim-Lebs, an arrogant denial of equalizing constituency sizes, when their agreed sop [referendum on proportional representation was huiliatingly thrown out by the electorate].

    I doubt that Michael Mann is a socialist, and surely not an extreme socilaist – but he and his ilk [innocently, but devastatingly] seem to be determined to do the far-left’s dirty work for them.
    Stop manufacturing and cut CO2.
    Stop transportation – and cut CO2 Etc.
    Let’s all kill ourselves, and the lucky remaining millions go back to live in caves, with a hnter-gatherer, subsistence lifestyle.
    Hmmm – ‘lifestyle’ may be better, and that is a hard hard row to hoe!

    I’ll end here before my blood-pressure registers on the modified-Mercalli scale!

    Auto

  7. In the EU the green zealots don’t bother to conceal their true nature anymore.

    Wake up America. Don’t betray Reagan’s legacy – a world largely free of Communism.

  8. LOL, just the other day there was a thread about foretold disasters that never came to pass. The death of California is one of them.

    I shook the dust off my feet at the Arizona border 20 years ago but I’ve yet to see that many more following in my footsteps. The few who do seem devoted to exporting their tax-it-all, regulate-it-all attitude to wherever they relocate.

  9. When so many people imagine their world is dominated by “greedy” corporations and wealthy citizens, it is so very easy for them to imagine that it is this “excess profit” that will pay for these taxes and that everyone else will be immunized by their lack of greediness.

    Widespread ignorance about how the economy works is partly to blame for the success and support for lunacy like this where business must pay for the privilege to operate.

  10. AN “exit tax”, aside from scaring any company with plans of moving to California, would seem
    to be an instance of regulating interstate commerce, which the sates are forbidden from doing.

  11. Destroy the infrastructure, destroy the economies of scale, destroy the industry, destroy the state. A Progressive schedule of societal entropy. Californians should probably expect to see toll booths on the highways soon, too. The robber barons are back and this time they are the government.

  12. Where does Quebec fit into this? I’ve not herd a thing about it in either official language.

  13. What is it about the new majority in California that makes them trust incompetent government bureaucrats but hate successful private enterprise, which, along with the weather, has made California the envy of the world? What has convinced them to think bureaucrats are angels with no ulterior motives? Is it because they identify with paper-pushing bureaucrats who produce nothing of real value? Or is it because they are so jealous of success they want to punish it? If they can’t be rich and successful without working for it, then nobody can. Is that it? I will never be able to understand such a selfish and destructive mindset.

  14. The only money a company has comes from consumers, directly or indirectly. So how dumb are those who think they aren’t taxing the public, only “businesses.” ? California : fiscally and now intellectually bankrupt.

  15. Groups seek Supreme Court review of EPA’s GHG regulations; Unconstitutionality should be obvious — even to Chief Justice Roberts
    Posted on April 19, 2013 by Steve Milloy | 2 Comments
    This should be a no-brainer for the Supremes. Only Congress is Constitutionally authorized to change the law. EPA acted illegally by unilaterally changing the emissions threshold for greenhouse gases.
    Read more at the Oil & Gas Journal.

  16. Robert of Ottawa says:
    April 21, 2013 at 10:46 am
    Where does Quebec fit into this? I’ve not herd a thing about it in either official language.

    =================================================================
    Quebec has entered into a carbon trading scheme with California (and McLiar had given support). Originally it was also with many eastern seaboard states but one by one they came to their senses and dropped out before being committed but Quebec is forging ahead….with other people’s money as usual. This was Jean Charet’s commitment from Copenhagen.

  17. “…a regulation requiring them to update or replace old diesel engines, an expense that few could bear”.
    ———————————————-
    CARB’s diesel regulations are based upon fraudulent research, and one of their lead scientists had a phoney degree, yet they are allowed to continue their anti-business jihad.

    The rule of law is dead.

  18. I believe it was Mark Levin who said that leftists are like a bunch of locusts. They devour one state and then move on to devour another. I was at a HOA meeting last summer when a family of move-ins from California demanded that we change our rules to be more like what they had in California. One of the things they demanded was to ban children from riding bikes down their street. They thought it was a safety issue and didn’t like having to deal with it for some reason. Afterward, I asked them why they moved out of California. They told me it was just becoming unbearable to live there anymore. My first thought was, “why then do you want to make our community unbearable to live in by turning us into California?” But since they had been unsuccessful in their bid to change our HOA rules, I held my tongue.

  19. The socialist republic of california continues to commit suicide.but then countries and states that have IDIOTS for voters that elect bigger idiots to run them always end up that way. What is funn y is there are still those that ask me the same stupid question “why did you pack up and leave california” My answer is always the same. California is too stupid to put away the shovel and stop digging their hole deeper.

  20. The problem with lawsuits is that even in the best case event he taxpyer/public loses. A simple review of a victory in court would look like.

    Yes the cCRB would be overturned… for a little while.

    1. The taxpayers would of course be on the hook for millions in court fees.

    2. The businesses would have to pay the lawyers they hired… or the taxpayer will have too.

    3. If the courts decide to pay the businesses damages then the taxpayers get that bill.

    4. CARB members will still make huge sums in pay from the taxpayer for losing the taxpayer huge sums of money through illegal regs.

    5. CARB members will not goto jail.

    6. CARB is highly unlikely to be disbanded and thus will take revenge and will find other ways to enact the regs they way…. all while being funded by the taxpayer.

    In the end the socialist nutters still win. Until people start going to jail and paying out of pocket for the damages they cause the taxpayers lose, the socialists win and the steady march toward genocide remains… wel steady.

  21. @ouis -
    The sad fact is that bureaucrats and entitlementy recipients in Calkifornia are now numerous enough to decide elections. California no longer has the (small-R) republican form of government prescribed by the Constitution of thre United State, which the federal government is bound to maintain and protect. The Obama Administration is looking to do to the country what the left has done to California, to leave us all with a government that elects itself and is accountable only to itself, so of course it will not step in to restore representative government in California.

    As for CARB, we need usurpation laws that would immediately bring down not just civil, but CRIMINAL penalties on its functionaries for the things it is doing. We also need laws that make bureaucrats personally respponsible and financially liable for harm they do to businesses and citizens.

    I do not believe that there is any such thing as unintended consequences of government actions. The effect of a government action defines its intent. If we don’t follow this principle, government can get away with anything. If harm is done, harm is intended and should be punished. SEVERELY.

    CARB is a rogue agency that exists only to provide “jobs” – sinecures – for sluggards who don’t have anything better to do than harass businesses and citizens, and to enable them to demonstrate their power over people in classic Orwellian fashion by subjecting them to hardships. CARB should be disbanded, and the people who “work” there should go find some honest, real work to do – that is, if they shouldn’t really be working at the prison rockpile making little ones out of big ones.

  22. As a Texan, I have to say that it would be just fine for me if CARB wins. Let them destroy your businesses, most of your productive people have fled here already – I’d love to see CARB force the rest to follow!

    Burn, Kalifornia, Burn!!!

  23. Just think about how much fun it’ll be when they get it linked and up and running. They’ll have to have everything in two languages. The Californians probably don’t know yet that Quebec is going to want equal parity with the English language. They’ll find out. But, then Quebec probably doesn’t realize that they may end up having to put the thing in Spanish too. Now, think about those two bureaucracies dealing with each other. And they get to deal with the exchange rates in three languages. But, far and away, the juicy best is the aforementioned bureaucracy part. How delightful to think of a bureaucracy actually having to deal with…well, a bureaucracy. Oh, and let us not forget the scam artists who will look at all this nonsense and see visions of yachts, mansions, fast cars, and the other trappings of the good life as they scheme ways to bamboozle money out of this monstrosity. And they won’t even have to be particularly creative at it. And then let us look at…oops, gotta go.

  24. Last I checked making treaties with foreign governments is the exclusive power of the President, with advice and consent from the Senate.

    Does Barry know that California is cutting him out of the loop? He’d probably go along with it, but would the court approve?

  25. Bob Mount says:
    April 21, 2013 at 9:49 am

    Isn’t it time that American Partisans threw CARB and other illegally taxed products into the Charles River? After all, you did it to us Redcoats and we weren’t half as bad as this insanity!!
    Aw, we didn’t dump any products into the Charles, much less any Redcoats, but some tea got dumped into Boston Harbor. We Americans never were much for tea.

  26. An average human exhales about 200 lbs of CO2 per year. Will CARB force every citizen to buy carbon credits?

  27. The farmers mentioned in the newspaper editorial are having to replace expensive diesel engines due to a CARB regulation based upon faulty statistical analysis of mortality and particulate matter or dust. Statistician Matt Briggs discusses the problems with the statistics behind CARB’s rule at about 14:15 here:

    http://www.bishop-hill.net/blog/2013/4/6/briggs-on-statistics.html

    and from Briggs’ blog

    http://wmbriggs.com/blog/?p=4353

    where he states “It is therefore extremely unlikely that any of the models would have showed statistical significance.”

    Thus CARB is costing California’s farmers and truckers perhaps billions of dollars based upon faulty statistical techiques. The hockey team is not alone in manipulating data for a desired outcome.

    Briggs is also known as William Briggs whose blog is linked on WUWT.

  28. Trial Balloon for the US EPA to do the same? hmmmmmmmm… not that the CXX and it European twin that is dieing a rapid death haven failed already… they want to do it again…

    Insanity: doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result..

    Nothing Liberals do would surprise me..

  29. In reference to the CARB diesel regulations, and as a reminder to those who live outside this formerly wonderful state:
    It has been well documented that new diesel regulations, which will destroy many farmers and other businesses, are based on a fraudulent study by CARB employee, Hein T. Tran, who purchased a fake PhD from “Thornhill University”. This debacle was made public and the report was completely debunked by Dr. James E. Enstrom, PhD (real one), a prominent epidemiologist from UCLA.

    CARB’s response? Hein Tran was “demoted”, Mary Nichols kept her job, and CARB’s punitive diesel regs are still being implemented. Oh, and Professor Enstrom was fired from his position after 34 years. Political incorrectness has its cost in the State of California. It appears that CARB will not halt their relentless agenda to destroy the state’s economy unless a court steps in. Good luck to all involved on the side of truth. Certainly, the government of California has no interest in something so inconvenient.

  30. Reading the above comments has revealed misconceptions regarding the trucking and farming industries’ objection to CARB policies. Those industries do not like the requirement obliging them to retrofit existing diesel engines with expensive diesel particulate filters on the diesel engines originally manufactured to CARB standards. These filters serve to trap unburnt hydrocarbons (seen by the public as black smoke) emitted from the exhaust system.

    Today’s diesel engines are very efficient in converting fuel into power, leaving little visible black smoke for the motoring population to see or breathe. As noted above, the studies pertaining to the hazards of particulate matter adopted by CARB to pursue their objectives were flawed to begin with and should have not been allowed to influence their decisions.

  31. I second the person who said they want the farm land. How dare anyone presume to privately own and farm their own land if they aren’t oen of the ruling elite? That would guarantee liberty and we can’t have that because it means some are beyond control.

  32. @Harold Pierce -
    I think you are way understating the amount of CO2 exhaled by humans. 15 respirations/minute x 1440 minutes/day x 365 days/year x 750 ml per exhalation x 4.5% CO2 in exhaled breath works out to about 520 kg per year per person, or 1, 145 lb. So the 7 billion of us emit something like 4 billion short tons of CO2 each year. Most other animals emit considerably more CO2 than humans, in proportion to their body weight. But as a conservative estimate, if humans are 1 percent of total animal biomass and only average emitters, total animal respiration emissions of CO2 would run to 400 billion short tons, or 40 times the residual CO2 from fossil fuels – and it could conceivably be much more than that.

    Hence the “fart tax” on farm animals in New Zealand.

  33. Why did anyone think a lawsuit would help? Federal judges are major players in the whole Wall Street scam, including the Carbon subscam. We know which side they’re on: Always on Satan’s side.

    Only a total loss of money will end this mess, as is now happening in EU.

    Worst possibility: A lawsuit could lead to a Consent Decree which will absolutely lock the crime in place regardless of any monetary considerations. Even if the state gov’t turns tail and wants to close it down, the federal decree won’t let it.

  34. It was Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger who pushed for and signed AB32.
    My guess is Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs had their influence as well.
    Cant blame “socialists” Democrats or Obama for this one.

  35. Then in 2010 there was a state proposition 23 which was voted down which would have suspended AB32 until the economy recovered.
    TV ads said vote against prop 23 which is supported by “Texas oil
    money”.
    Ad never even mentioned what AB32 was.
    After Prop 23 lost ,I read that those negative ads were paid for by Morgan Stanley.

  36. Ironic point .
    60 Minutes referred to Morgan Stanley as the “worlds largest oil company”

  37. Heres one more and Ill shut up.From what Ive gleaned from the internet ,I speculate…

    The WORLD C&T market was a glimmer in Ken Lays eye because Enron ran a C&T sulfur program in Ca.
    Lay used his influence to get Greenpeace and Al Gore behind him to support Kyoto.
    He lobbied for the US climate change legislation that has had the US spend almost $100 Billion over the past few decades.
    Enron went belly up in disgrace .
    The Enron traders didnt commit Hari Kari out of shame.
    The Enron traders moved on.
    Now Goldman and Morgan Stanley push for Cap and Trade.

  38. in addition to what “Tom J says: April 21, 2013 at 12:34 pm” says ;
    Quebec if successful will transfer/scam billions from California coffers since Quebec has virtually no CO2 footprint due to their 100% Hydro/(and some nuclear) powered provincial infrastructure!! Quebec has been attempting to run this scam on ROC (the rest of canada) for a few years now in an attempt to siphon billions from the Alberta oil patch. Quebec politicians are virtuosos at getting other Canadian provinces to pay for their social programs, it will be interesting to see if they can scam the international community as effectively !!!

  39. MojoMojo said:
    April 21, 2013 at 5:20 pm
    It was Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger who pushed for and signed AB32.
    My guess is Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs had their influence as well.
    Cant blame “socialists” Democrats or Obama for this one.
    ——————————————–
    AB32 was written by Fran Pavley & Fabian Nunez, two dems, and Arnold was a RINO.

    Yes I can and do blame the left, and anyone on the right or in the center who abets them.

    As to obama, AB32 was a state bill, not a federal issue – but he is up to his gizzard in the AGW hoax.

  40. They will write books on the dismantling of the once (briefly) 5th largest economy in the world.

    http://econpost.com/californiaeconomy/california-economy-ranking-among-world-economies

    Don’t leave out Uncle Jerry’s Energy Commission. Disband them with prejudice.

    http://www.energy.ca.gov/

    It would be great if we could extend the legal argument to include the Renewables Portfolio Standard. What a scam!

    http://www.energy.ca.gov/renewables/

    Smart grid is another dangerous tool. Unfortunately, that legislation is Federal. I doubt any of the hacks in DOJ or DHS will listen to a privacy argument concerning data mining to inform government what we do in our homes.

    http://energy.gov/oe/downloads/title-xiii-smart-grid-sec-1301-1308-statement-policy-modernization-electricity-grid

  41. @ Mark and two Cats says:
    April 21, 2013 at 6:26 pm

    It wouldn’t surprise if some day it’s reported that Arnold’s housekeeper son was found out during oppo research leading into the 2006 election, then the info was used to coerce Schwarzeneggar’s signature on AB32.

  42. There has been some success in the past fighting CARB by going after the representatives that fund CARB. Bumpers stickers on trucks calling out the reps by name saying that CARB will cost them their business.

  43. My understanding is that the same people who owned the Chicago Climate Exchange also owned the Montreal Climate Exchange. Blood and Gore.

  44. Wow, selling carbon certificates. Just photocopy a few thousand certificates and sell them online to unsuspecting buyers. I sure would love to get in on that sweet business. Its only the fraud part that holds me back.

  45. When it becomes obvious to even the most militant of Greenies that a little bit of carbon dioxide is not going to destroy the world, will those that have had to buy these carbon credits try to recover their money????

  46. Lol – A bankrupt State of California – agrees with a bankrupt Province of Quebec = The loony left Coast – meets the loony French separatist. What language are they going to communicate in. Parlez-vous Français or spanenglish. The French Canadian’s don’t like communicating in anything but French. Remember Pastagate and the Quebec language police!
    Popcorn time!

  47. RE: “The California Constitution is crystal clear that new state taxes require at least two-thirds approval in both chambers of the Legislature,” …

    Currently the Democrats hold a 2/3s Super-Majority in both chambers of the Legislature, so even if the lawsuit is successful, they will vote again with the Super-Majority and put the tax back on the books. Currently California is tied with another state for unemployment, if the carbon tax passes, they will move to the #1 position for unemployment.

Comments are closed.