Anti-Energy Rationing Initiative Makes It Onto California Ballot

Ronald Bailey | June 25, 2010

California blowing in the wind The “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 Initiative, [PDF] will appear on the November ballot in California. The Chico Enterprise Register reports:

Assemblyman Dan Logue, R-Linda, was elated this week to learn his initiative to suspend the state's anti-global warming law made the November ballot.

In a phone interview, Logue said he found out Tuesday the initiative had enough valid signatures.

He said the initiative needed 440,000 signatures and it got 800,000. The names were collected by volunteers and paid "signature gatherers," he said.

AB32 became law in 2006. It provides that between 2012 and 2020, greenhouse gas emissions will be reduced to the levels they were in 1990.

Logue's initiative would postpone the implementation of AB32 until the state's unemployment rate stands at 5.5 percent for a year. Now the jobless rate is around 12 percent.

Suspending AB32 only makes sense, Logue said. "We can't afford it. We'll lose another million jobs. It will drive business out of the state."

Robin Huffman, advocacy director for the Chico-based Butte Environmental Council, expressed the opposite view.

Suspending AB32 is not necessary, she said. The law "is the very encouragement and incentive that is needed to create the jobs that we need for the new green economy."

She called AB32 "a very, very reasonable law" and "a step in the right direction."

"I'm sad that it's gotten on the ballot," she said of Logue's initiative.

Whole CER story can be read here. You may also want to take a look at my earlier analysis of the likely effect of California's energy rationing scheme on job creation in the Golden State. Precis: Probably not helpful.

Reason needs your support. Please donate today!

Try Reason's award-winning print edition today! Your first issue is FREE if you are not completely satisfied.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment or disable your ability to comment for any reason at any time.

¢|6.25.10 @ 4:27PM|#

Weigel!

I mean—

You should put a "PDF" warning on that first link. Phones and netbooks frequently hang up on those.

|6.25.10 @ 4:31PM|#

Done.

|6.25.10 @ 4:48PM|#

In Dave's memory, I propose that we call posting a PDF link without warning "Weigeling" the link.

What the heck, lets throw in posting any link without warning (PDF, NSFW, you name it) "Weigeling" the link.

Satan|6.25.10 @ 8:32PM|#

RC, you're fucking cruel-I think I like you.;-)

|6.25.10 @ 4:32PM|#

Ronald, COME ON! With the alt texts! You can do better!

Caption Contest!

"Only 100 gazillion more to go and we can power half of Orange County...sometimes."

|6.25.10 @ 4:38PM|#

"The super-blender can turn an entire state budget into a huge fluffy deficit in only 30 seconds."

The Gobbler|6.25.10 @ 4:41PM|#

"Rare Red Kite Found Dead at Wind Farm 'Harmless to Wildlife'"

http://thescotsman.scotsman.co.....6383830.jp

|6.25.10 @ 4:42PM|#

"THAT'S MY BACKYARD, YOU NIMBY FUCKERS!"

|6.25.10 @ 4:43PM|#

Oh yeah, how many watts of Turbines and Panels do you have Ron?

EscapedWestOfTheBigMuddy|6.25.10 @ 4:47PM|#

"No tulips."?

Bureaucrat in Central Control|6.25.10 @ 4:48PM|#

Actually, all we need is a centralized electric grid to move production from areas where the wind is blowing to areas where the wind is not blowing.

In Central Control there is always a stiff hot wind blowing.

Jeffersonian|6.25.10 @ 5:04PM|#

The solution is obviously to erect massive blowers to keep these windmills turning.

Silentz|6.26.10 @ 2:10AM|#

Coal fired blowers?

|6.26.10 @ 10:25AM|#

The wind must blow all the time in California since California sucks.

BeesInTheBrain|6.26.10 @ 1:37AM|#

"Ronco Bird Blenders"

P B|6.25.10 @ 4:34PM|#

I REALLY hope this doesn't pass, so we are able to test out these assine policies!

Can't know how it works till we pass it, right?

P B|6.25.10 @ 5:47PM|#

Exactly! We can always trust our "betters".

|6.26.10 @ 2:19AM|#

"Better", you keep using this word, but it doesn't mean what you think it means..

Duckworth-Lewis|6.25.10 @ 4:37PM|#

The Assemblyman has a new book coming out - "Going Logue"

|6.25.10 @ 4:45PM|#

Robin Huffman, advocacy director for the Chico-based Butte Environmental Council, expressed the opposite view.

Suspending AB32 is not necessary, she said. The law "is the very encouragement and incentive that is needed to create the jobs that we need for the new green economy."

Advocates of carbon emission rationing do themselve no favors when they assert that driving up the costs of energy will somehow create jobs.

Convince me that the inevitable reduced productivity and resulting loss of jobs is a tradeoff that's necessary to combat AGW. At least try to convince me. I'm a firm believer that AGW is occuring and this blowing smoke about "green" jobs is really pissing me off.

If you can't be honest in your advocacy, please STFU before you embarrass yourself any further.

|6.25.10 @ 4:51PM|#

blowing smoke about "green" jobs is really pissing me off.

Amen, J sub D.

Unless they're talking about everyone (except themselves, of course) working dawn to dusk as peasants in the fields.

Joe M|6.25.10 @ 5:04PM|#

blowing smoke about "green" jobs

Awesome.

|6.25.10 @ 5:44PM|#

Advocates of carbon rationing do themselves no favors discussing green jobs with rational humans. Unfortunately, shockingly few people are familiar with the broken window fallacy, and shockingly high numbers of people seem to buy into the green jobs idea.

|6.26.10 @ 2:21AM|#

"shokingly" you keep using this word but......GODDAMIT i'm tiresd of typing out the Princess Bride quote.

FUCK YO COUCH, THEY NEVA SHOULDA GAVE YOU NIGGAS MONEY

|6.25.10 @ 4:47PM|#

Robin Huffman, advocacy director for the Chico-based Butte Environmental Council,

So he's the face of the council, right? Or to be brief, the Butte-face?

You punning scumbag. That was terrible. If I could give you a charlie horse right now, I would.

|6.25.10 @ 4:53PM|#

You're just jealous. And I already have a charlie horse, thank you.

Your idiot brother-in-law|6.25.10 @ 4:52PM|#

Suspending AB32 is not necessary, she said. The law "is the very encouragement and incentive that is needed to create the jobs that we need for the new green economy."

Same can be said about a carbon tax. We have to manipulate the people into our version of a clean society w/o fossil fuels. Despite the fact that there's no money for it.

j.i.am|6.25.10 @ 4:53PM|#

Assemblyman Dan Logue, R-Linda

This is CA, his chances improve if you refer to him as "Assemblyperson Dan 'R-Linda' Logue.

johnl|6.25.10 @ 7:12PM|#

Do those windmills in Palm Springs *ever* turn? Have they bothered picking up the ones that had broken apart in 2008? How is sticking huge hunks of metal in the desert supposed to make the world colder? When they never make any power?

juris imprudent|6.27.10 @ 4:36PM|#

Do those windmills in Palm Springs *ever* turn?

You obviously don't spend much time in Banning Pass.

BeesInTheBrain|6.26.10 @ 1:41AM|#

Someone needs to point out to Ms. Huffman that "the new green economy" only applies to the federal government and then only because they can print greenbacks. Otherwise it doesn't exist.

Reason.com