My View: The California Air resources Board is quickly becoming the most dangerous bureaucratic organization in California. This latest contempt for a public that questions the validity of their mission is way over the top. As the headline says, CARB is actively considering:
…a proposed regulation which would prohibit dishonest statements or submittals offered to the Board or to its staff.
Guess who gets to determine the “dishonesty” of a “statement or submittal” to CARB?
Of course, it’s OK if CARB makes a 340% error of their own while using false data to impose their will on the people of California. And of course it’s OK to publicly flaunt the ugly hubris of the CARB boss Mary Nichols rubbing her glee in the face of the citizens of California that voted for Prop 23. And of course it’s OK to simply demote a CARB “scientist” who lied about his PhD degree obtained from a UPS store rather than fire his fraudulent bureaucratic butt and then stage a cover up about it. But, when a citizen submits some data or opinion to CARB that they may later find questionable? Well, that’s a whole different matter.
What a bunch of self serving, holier than thou, public sector putzes!
Evidently CARB is contemplating a regulation that would enable penalties for what would be judged “dishonest statements or submittals” provided to it or “staff.” I think one can safely assume that it is aimed at curtailing challenges to CARB’s agenda that are based on alternative scientific information and interpretations.
Here’s a message from their listserver, you just have to read this to believe it:
—–Original Message—–
From: owner-arbcombo@listserv.arb.ca.gov
[mailto:owner-arbcombo@listserv.arb.ca.gov] On Behalf Of wfell@arb.ca.gov
Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 2:31 PM
To: post-arbcombo@listserv.arb.ca.gov
Subject: arbcombo — Air Resources Board Workshop to Discuss Proposed Regulation Relating to False Statements Made to ARB or its Staff
ARB staff invites you to participate in a workshop on December 1, 2010 to discuss a proposed regulation which would prohibit dishonest statements or submittals offered to the Board or to its staff.
The workshop will provide the public with a chance to discuss the proposed regulation and to provide initial comment and feedback
We welcome your participation in this event.
For further information, please view the web page at http://www.arb.ca.gov/html/falsestatements/falsestatements.htm
which contains regularly updated information.
======================================================================
You are subscribed to one of the lists aggregated to make this particular ARB combination listserve broadcast. To UNSUBSCRIBE:
Please go to http://www.arb.ca.gov/listserv/listserv.php and enter your email address and click on the button “Display Email Lists.”
To unsubscribe, please click inside the appropriate box to uncheck it and go to the bottom of the screen to submit your request. You will receive an automatic email message confirming that you have successfully unsubscribed. Also, please read our listserve disclaimer at http://www.arb.ca.gov/listserv/disclaim.htm .
The energy challenge facing California is real. Every Californian needs to take immediate action to reduce energy consumption. For a list of simple ways you can reduce demand and cut your energy costs, visit the Flex Your Power website at www.fypower.org ..
======================================================================
My source for this email (who shall remain nameless) writes:
An attorney-member of our network, (Roger E. Sowell), who is knowledgeable in environmental law and possesses a strong technical background, had the following initial reaction:
There is a Federal law at 18 USC 1001, that provides for a fine and up to 5 years imprisonment for knowingly and willfully providing false information of a material fact, among several other things, to any part of the Federal government. (I’m paraphrasing here). see e.g. http://vlex.com/vid/sec-statements-entries-generally-19190798
As just a sample of the issues, the key words are:
“Knowingly”
“Willfully”
“False”
“Material”
Each of those words has a specific meaning, usually hammered out in court cases. CARB cannot just arbitrarily choose definitions of such words, to suit their purpose. They must comply with the law and legal precedents. Where this gets very, very interesting is in the definition of “false.” We are dealing with scientific information, and science is fairly fuzzy. There are uncertainties in data measurements, to name merely one of several problem areas, as well as experimental design errors, choice of data analysis methods, interpretation of results, etc.
There are almost always factions of scientists that can be found to support almost any view – although a few viewpoints are appropriately discredited as crackpot. The fact is that new data is discovered or developed; new and better explanations for old data are developed; old theories discarded and new theories put forward, showing that science is not settled and that the definition of “false” is slippery when applied to a statement related to science.
There are other problems with a criminal falsity statute, such as applicability to various situations, and exemptions, also conformity with the Constitution and various standards embodied there. In addition, there are fraud claims that can arise if funding for scientific research led to false statements based upon the research findings.
Also, this could easily be turned around on CARB, by asserting that the “science” they relied on in many of their regulations was false information, knowingly and willfully presented.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
The result of Arnold’s and the Democrat Legislature’s state government policies: click
well,
I suppose they open themselves up for some dilemmas.
If a CAGW person writes them a bunch of false stuff and a skeptic does
and they only persue cases against skeptics…
Seems like one could fill their inbox with all sorts of nonsense from the “sierra club.”
I wonder how they would react to a spamming campaign of CAGW stuff
Unless the legislature gives that power up to the agency as was done. This is part of the overall “progressive” agenda to put more power in the hands of career bureaucrats who can not be thrown out of office for their decisions. The only way to de-fang the agency is to de-fund it because regulations often prevent outright firing of them.
People have been rising up against them:
http://killcarb.org/JohnKenCarb.html
I seem to have forgot to ask the obvious: Wasn’t Dr Terminator supposed to be a republican, you know one of the supposedly rational people?
I really hoped, but alas it probably should’ve been obvious that a former steroid abuser would end up acting paradoxically to his official political belief. Most steroid abusers say they aren’t affected by the steroids it’s just a myth, I just usually ask when was the last time you looked yourself in the mirror?
The real question is , who will follow Fuhrer Schwarnzennegar and will he be of the same Ilk? That surely is the the most important question if there is to be any hope for the future for CA.
Smokey says on November 21, 2010 at 10:24 am
Well, this seems to be more a case of what is Texas doing right rather that CA is doing things wrong because CA is not the worst in percentage terms and there are some nine other large states that have experienced job losses …
However, I am prepared to put it down to big government.
curly says:
November 21, 2010 at 9:53 am
re; lifetime federal court appointments
At least you can choose to move out of the 9th circuit. There’s no way to escape the supreme court.
You probably know all the below by heart but others might not.
This judiciary branch can always be changed by constitutional amendment if they can anger enough of the states or the congress enough of the time. A fast-track appeal process where a state legislature can appeal a supreme court ruling to the legislatures of all the other states and if a 66% majority of the states agree then the ruling is overturned.
Two thirds of state legislatures can call for a constitutional convention anytime. Never been done before but it’s there for a purpose which I figure is it reserves ultimate power to the states and to the people. In a constitutional convention congress is cut out of the decision loop and where either amendment process is used the executive and judicial are of course cut out of the loop.
So you need 33 state legislatures to call for a constitutional convention where an amendment or amendments are floated to all 50 state legislatures Anything that 38 of those legislatures can agree on becomes a ratified amendment.
Congressional approval rating has been down in the dirt for years and dipping into the teens which suggests the needed numbers might be there to just cut them off at the knees and make some changes to the constitution with them out of the loop on it.
For one I’d like to see the commerce and general welfare clauses clarified and narrowed so it doesn’t apply to virtually anything the federal government wants to control. Grandfather entrenched federal entitlement programs for social security and medicare and make it so any grand unlimited power grabs like those in the future can only be enacted by constitutional amendment.
These things which strengthen states rights should be quite appealing to state legislatures as it basically takes power away from centralized government and gives it to them. Why would any state legislature object to increasing its own power to make decisions about the people they represent?
Time for a constitutional convention methinks. Maybe the Tea Party can get the ball rolling given how the lamestream media hangs on their every word. All it would take really, is a tweet from Sarah Palin for gosh sakes, to get the word out everywhere instantly. You betcha.
Just sayin…
Adam says:
November 20, 2010 at 6:00 pm
Anthony, are you going to their workshop to voice your complaints? After all it’s only about 2 hr drive.
REPLY: If I can, yes.
Take the Hummer.
well, G Galileo was nearly beheaded for his heresy. Any religion will defend its core beliefs.
Beware of the red buttons.
“Wasn’t Dr Terminator supposed to be a republican”
CARB was created by Jerry Brown last time he was governor decades ago. For people who might not know, Brown has again been elected governor. There is no chance of getting rid of CARB.
Also, the legislative districts underwent severe gerrymandering in the 1980’s which eliminated many Republican districts so there are many fewer Republican seats in the legislature now than there were in, say, the 1970’s.
http://www.nationalpost.com/charity+with+plenty+very+long+tentacles/3859570/story.html
Anthony:
This may have already been mentioned but this is what we are faced with up here in BC.
It is the principle reasons I am getting more involved in provincial politics, (that and my wife won’t let us move south of the border). These people are Opportunity Thieves. They are stealing our children’s future opportunities and liberties. I can’t help but think Tides et al would be behind a lot of CARB’s activities. Lori Culbert at the Vancouver Sun already exposed (http://www.vancouversun.com/life/money+drives+social+change/3371272/story.html) them earlier this summer. The Post article expands it.
If you want to know where a political party’s money came from, look to where our money is going. Here in BC a lot of our tax money is going into green energy subsidies.
It is just more evidence the green movement is not about the environment but wealth redistribution.
Good reading here on history and process of calling for constitional conventions.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_to_propose_amendments_to_the_United_States_Constitution
I hadn’t really been aware (mabye once was but had forgotten) how close it has come in the past especially in recent decades for a convention to propose a balanced budget amendment.
The article also points out that historically speaking congress has chickened out on many ocassions when calls for constitutional conventions got uncomfortably close to the magic number of 34 states and pre-empted by instead proposing the amendment through a 66% vote of congress instead. At least that way congress retains a modicum of control by authoring the language of the amendment. I wasn’t aware of that historical tidbit or had forgotten it since taking Political Science 101 thirty-five years ago.
The rest of the “57 states” need to expel California or secede as it were.
RichieP says:
November 21, 2010 at 10:22 am
I calculate it closer to $8.60 US
DaveE.
This could be why governments are focussed on ‘green’ strategies:
Gold is where you find it: CALPERS is focussed on ‘Green’ investing to increase its returns and reduce its underfunding ration
Governments forcing us to pay CO2 taxed could be their sleight-of-hand way of fixing up the imprudent pension promises they made to (unionised) public employees.
Don’t let it happen.
Looks like a great free speech case for Pacific Legal Foundation!
“I hadn’t really been aware (mabye once was but had forgotten) how close it has come in the past especially in recent decades for a convention to propose a balanced budget amendment.”
You don’t need a convention to propose an amendment. Congress can do that. The problem (well, one of the problems) is that around the early 1900’s the Senate was changed from being appointed by the state legislatures to being elected at large. That basically transferred the political power in the Senate from the States to whichever political machine controls the largest metro area in the state. The state governments then lost their check on federal power and things have become unbalanced as a result. So Los Angeles controls California’s Senate delegation rather than the state legislature. In the past, the Senate would push back against federal unfunded mandates because the states would “fire” any Senator that voted for it when their term expired. This is no longer the case.
What we really need to do is go back to at least one Senator from each state being appointed by the state legislature, even if the other is elected by the people. The state governments need some input on the federal government.
Oh, and I also wanted to say that once you call a convention, the entire constitution is available for re-writing. You don’t just amend it during a convention, you create an entirely new one and that is one Pandora’s box I don’t want opened at this point.
To paraphrase Anthony, “Kneel before Zod!”
1st Amendment of the U.S. Constitution:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
I kinda think we are covered against this sort of nonsense.
It is a bit ironic that this agency, being singularly responsible for discouraging automobile manufacturers from putting diesel motors in cars in the US, is likely largely responsible for perhaps 50% of the CO2 emissions by cars in the US. And at a cost to the economy of…..?
I was recently in the UK and saw a news report that 70% of the new cars being sold were diesels. A colleague with a diesel version of an identical model available in the US was getting somewhere north of 50 mpg or about twice what one would get in a gasoline burning model on this side of the Atlantic!
How do we get the lunacy of this agency exposed and it impact on the entire US reversed?
More strange idea’s about “skeptics”.
Swiss Academy of Science: Skepticsm is scientific unless it comes from climate skeptics.
http://notrickszone.com/2010/11/21/swiss-academy-of-sciences-swiss-academy-of-sciences-skepticism-is-scientific-unless-it-comes-from-climate-skeptics/
“How do we get the lunacy of this agency exposed and it impact on the entire US reversed?”
The ultimate way is to simply leave the state. The only population growth that California is experiencing currently is from immigration from outside the country. Native born Americans are leaving at a greater rate than they are arriving. For the first time since statehood, California will not gain a house seat from a census. So basically, the political influence of California has peaked while the political influence of other states such as Texas is growing and states such as New York and Pennsylvania are seeing their influence wane as they gain or lose House seats as the case may be.
Ronald Reagan said that the people should be free to vote with their feet and apparently they are.
Dave Springer says:
November 21, 2010 at 11:31 am
curly says:
November 21, 2010 at 9:53 am
re; lifetime federal court appointments
At least you can choose to move out of the 9th circuit. There’s no way to escape the supreme court.
You probably know all the below by heart but others might not…..
__________________________________________________________________
David thank you for the information.
I too would love to see Wickard v. Filburn, the Supreme Court’s ruling on the meaning of the Commerce Clause, reversed. That has to be the worst ruling ever made by the supreme court as far as its effects on the every day life of Americans.
“The Court’s opinion must be quoted to be believed:
[The wheat] supplies a need of the man who grew it which would otherwise be reflected by purchases in the open market. Home-grown wheat in this sense competes with wheat in commerce.
As Epstein commented, “Could anyone say with a straight face that the consumption of home-grown wheat is ‘commerce among the several states?'” ….”
http://www.fff.org/freedom/0895g.asp
Anthony,
ARB legal says it is aimed at importers filing reports on their out-of-state activities, like producing ethanol for use in CA gasoline.
It should probably be narrowed to that end.
California offered $10 Billion of bonds for sail (IIRC the quantity correctly) last week or so. The offering was only 60% subscribed when it ought to have been way over subscribed and the interest rate was rocketing upward. The “Bond Bullies” are not interesting in funding the nonsense in California.
With revenues dropping a startling rates and the credit card getting cut back, there is little hope for California to continue this kind of stupidity. The only hope was a Fed bail out, and with Republicans in the House, that’s now a dead duck too….
Only options I can see as likely are:
1) The Fed buys California bonds. (Unlikely)
2) California collapses and does a reset (most likely, but takes a decade or so).
3) California “gets clue” and votes in folks with an understanding of economics. (Hah!)
I expect #2 expedited by a new round of taxes under Governor Moonbeam as they desperately slide down The Dark Side Of The Laffer Curve… eventually ending in fiscal collapse, bankruptcy, and defunding of a few hundred agencies. Hopefully CARB among them…
From: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE59766N20091008
They couldn’t get it all sold, and the interest paid had to rise a lot to get that much moved… The eventual goal is $14 Billion … so 4 down and 10 to go… Rates will rise apace…
As far as I’m concerned, the faster they do stupid things like this and totally destroy the State economy, the better. It will be over that much sooner.
(BTW, teachers are currently taking a half dozen or more “furlough” days – that is, unpaid days off – as the State has no money to pay them. Further, we have cities like Governor Moonbeam’s present “Gig” in Oakland proposing “Industrial Scale Marijuana Farms” in the hopes that selling dope can pay the bills (they can’t pay their cops at the moment… though with the city being the Old Dope Grower, one wonders what the cops are doing…)
http://globalganjareport.com/content/oakland-approves-industrial-marijuana-farm-measure
“California, The Land Of Fruits and Nuts!”…
FWIW, I’ve started moving some of my operations out of state. Have a place and car in another state now, working on the legalities and paperwork… Anything I do that generates significant income will NOT be in California. Welcome to The Laffer Curve…
If you generate income in this state via things like, oh, a web site or book sales, I suggest a corporation in another state and only paying to yourself (resident here) any profit left over after the ‘travel and expense’ bills are paid…