The upcoming election in California is filled with all kinds of election propositions, laws presented directly to the voters for approval or denial. According to the California Secretary of State Voter Guide, propositions approved by the voters become laws, a simple majority of the total votes cast is all that’s required. Prop 23 is one I support and one that is getting more and more attention as election date nears.
Now as a disclaimer, I don’t have a horse in this race. I’m not involved with either the environmental movement that is fighting this proposition, nor am I involved in any industry or organization that will be affected by it. I support the green movement and preserving the environment, but never at the cost of jobs. With so many people in trouble financially and out of work, I agree drastic measures are necessary.
The proposition is quite simply, according to the Los Angeles Times, California’s 2006 Global Warming Solutions Act, known as AB 32, is the most aggressive law in the country aimed at controlling pollution from fossil fuel burning. To comply with it will cost business and industry millions of dollars. According to the article, the law would slash greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 through new laws that would force utilities to get a third of their electricity from renewable sources such as solar and wind plants, force auto makers to improve the fuel efficiency of automobiles and cap emissions from industrial plants.
The logic behind it is that this new Global Solutions Warming Act if implemented, will have high costs on industry and business to comply with the tough regulations. These costs will translate to lost jobs and higher prices for consumers. Prop 23 says to hold off on these expensive new regulations until the unemployment rate drops under 5.5 percent for a year, tangible proof of an economic recovery.
Problem is the current rate is 12 percent and the article indicates the state has rarely, if ever been below 5.5 percent, so the number may not be realistic, even if the logic behind the law is. I support Prop 23, I think things are so bad out there, we need to do whatever is possible to support business and create jobs for people.
The law has even attracted celebrity involvement as Avatar and Titanic director James Cameron has contributed $1,000,000. of his own money to the movement against Prop 23. The Los Angeles Times article quotes the No on Prop. 23 spokesman Steve Maviglio as commenting “Mr. Cameron is not only a filmmaker with a conscience,he is willing to put his money where his mouth is when it comes to a fight for California jobs and our clean energy future.”
Although I like his movies, James Cameron’s involvement won’t sway me, I’m still supporting Prop 23.
Margot Roosevelt Prop 23: Avatar’s James Cameron Kicks in $1 million Los Angeles Times via latimes.com
California Secretary of State Website Voter Guide http://www.sos.ca.gov