Free Flight New Media

CA Assemblyperson Dan Logue Got Bamboozled In Visit To Texas: This One Is For You! Texas: It's a Complete Republican Led Basket-Case!

CALIFORNIA REPUBLICAN ASSEMBLYPERSON DAN LOGUE HAS BEEN PUSHING "THE WAYS OF TEXAS MIRACLE" ON CALIFORNIA this year. He even took a group of State Legislators to Texas to get some of their "good ideas" about how to help Business flourish (like Texas) first hand. Hopefully someone will read this and help Dan "get it" so we don't have someone representing California look like a complete fool to the entire world. Facts are facts. Logue has been bamboozled by his own party and his efforts to make the CA BIZ community more like Texas has to stop. The CA corporate press must quit giving 1/2 the story. Dan Logue may wanna reconsider his petition to have the Texas Governor run for President, which he started with typical fanfare a few weeks back.

Good Grief!

Dan: This One Is For You

Quoting:

James Galbraith, an economist at the University of Texas, scoffed at the whole narrative, telling AlterNet, “the notion that our state government is a model is almost enough to beckon the spirit of Molly Ivins back from the shades.” Galbraith said “Texas has been a low-tax, low-service state since the time of the Republic,” and noted that it's “therefore impossible that this fact suddenly accounts for its better job performance over the past few years.” (Texas' record of job creation under Perry is the same as it was under former governor Ann Richards, a Democrat.)

“Texas is an energy state benefiting from high oil prices and the incipient boom in natural gas,” explained Galbraith. “That's an accident of nature.” He added that the state “went through the S&L crisis, had major criminal prosecutions and more restrictive housing finance regulations this time around; hence it was not an epicenter of the subprime housing disaster. That's called a learning experience.” Tighter regulation of the lending industry is also anathema to today's GOP.

Arguably the biggest sleight-of-hand in the Texas Miracle storyline, however, is that many of those jobs were a result of a huge surge in the state's population, much of it fueled by immigration from Latin America (rather than liberal hell-holes like California).

Texas' population grew by 20 percent over the past decade, and Hispanics accounted for almost two-thirds of that growth. A surge in people created greater demand for goods and services, which leads to more jobs. But the jobs being created in Texas aren't keeping up with the state's expanding workforce – the Wall Street Journal somehow failed to mention that during the exact same period in which it was adding all those new jobs, Texas' unemployment rate actually increased from 7.7 to 8 percent (it also failed to note that 23 states -- including such deep blue ones as Vermont, New York and Massachusetts -- enjoy lower unemployment rates than Texas).

But perhaps the most laughable claim in this whole narrative is that Texas has been “fiscally responsible.” Perry certainly adhered to the conservative playbook, offering massive tax breaks without the deep cuts in services that might inspire a voter backlash. As a result – an entirely predictable one – the Austin American-Statesman reported that “state lawmakers have spent much of the year grappling with a budget shortfall that left them $27 billion short of the money needed to continue current state services.”

CNN adds that while Perry was railing against the Democratic stimulus package passed over the fierce resistance of conservatives, the state “was facing a $6.6 billion shortfall for its 2010-2011 fiscal years,” and “it plugged nearly all of that deficit with $6.4 billion in Recovery Act money.” The stimulus package created or saved 205,000 jobs in Texas, second only to California. But as James Galbraith told AlterNet, while “the state budget has not yet been cut drastically” due to the stimulus boost, “the key phrase is 'not yet.'” Now that the stimulus has run its course, “if projections for the current budget cycle are correct, things will get much worse in the next year.”

Indeed, those cuts are now on their way. The Texas legislature imposed draconian cuts to Medicaid, cut tuition aid to 43,000 low-income studentsand is weighing $10 billion in cuts to the state's education system. According to Texas state senator Rodney Ellis, D-Fort Bend, the 2012-2013 budget will underfund “health and human services in Texas by $23 billion, 29.8 percent below what is needed to maintain current services.”

But Perry's tax breaks are indeed part of the state's jobs picture; as Time magazine's Massimo Calabresi noted, Perry established several massive business tax breaks “designed to lure companies from other states.”

[But] the funds have been controversial. They have channeled millions of dollars to companies whose officers or investors are major Perry campaign donors and Perry has allowed them to keep their subsidies in many cases even when they fail to deliver promised jobs. More important for the purposes of judging Perry’s job-creating record, even those that do produce jobs don’t necessarily create long-lasting ones, or increase the state’s overall prosperity.

In a report written for Perry last spring, Michael Porter of Harvard Business School noted that such tax breaks “ultimately don’t support long-term prosperity,” because companies that can move easily “are looking for the best deal and when the deal runs out they move” again, taking their jobs with them.

He also found that Texas’ per capita income growth was the eighth slowest of any state in the country between 1998 and 2008. That's because, as the American Independent's Patrick Brendel noted, “Texas has by far the largest number of employees working at or below the federal minimum wage,” and the number of crappy jobs has exploded while this supposed Texas Miracle was taking place. “From 2007 to 2010, the number of minimum wage workers in Texas rose from 221,000 to 550,000, an increase of nearly 150 percent,” wrote Brendel. As a result, Texas is now “tied with Mississippi for the greatest percentage of minimum wage workers, while California had among the fewest (less than 2 percent).”*

The complete story with more FACTS for Assemblyperson Logue is at the link below.

A Big, Texas Sized, Hat Tip To Alternet For The TRUTH.

Texas Is a Shining Example of Right-Wing Governance in Action and That's Why It's a Complete Basket-Case | | AlterNet

Democrats & Progressives & Green & Republican & Independents Voter Guide: Vote The Opposite of Tea Party Express Endorsement List (This List Is For Western U.S.)

TEA PARTY EXPRESS IS PROUD TO RELEASE PART I
OF OUR NATIONAL ENDORSEMENT LIST FOR CONGRESS
PART I: Western United States

The Tea Party Express (website: http://www.TeaPartyExpress.org) is proud to release the following list of endorsed candidates for the House & Senate as Part I of our three-part national endorsement list.

The Tea Party Express will be directing its 400,000+ supporters to not only vote for these candidates, but volunteer on their campaigns in the days leading up to the November 2nd election.

Also, the Tea Party Express will also be making sizable financial contributions to a number of these campaigns in addition to sizable independent expenditure efforts on behalf of a number of these candidates.

via noisyroom.net

I pondered if putting this up would be of value to readers of this blog for a while. It is here because I ask you to CIRCLE the candidate the Tea People suggest as winners. Further, note the plan to mobilize the membership. If you have not found a way to help turn the Tea Party candidates or propositions written by Tea Party like candidates (Think Dan Logue-Republican in first term in CA assembly who is also the writer of and front man for Proposition 23), your time is NOW.

I left the ad links up on purpose, too. If you need more reasons to vote against a Tea Party candidate, perhaps the ads will do the trick.

Click on the blue link above for complete list(s).

Imagine The Vote Counting Nightmare If The Tea Party Was In Charge Of Counting Votes

	Dear Friend, Do you want the Tea Party to count the votes in 2012? With less than three weeks left until the election, many Secretary of State races in key battleground states hang in the balance. Whoever is elected now will be in charge of counting the votes for President Obama's re-election. Not surprisingly, the Tea Party has made Secretary of State elections a key priority. If they win, vote suppression, demands for excessive ID requirements and sheer hysteria would rule the day in 2012. Former Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris and Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell would fit right in! You can prevent this debacle in 2012 by acting today to defeat Tea Party endorsed candidates for critical election positions. Here are just three examples: In Ohio, Tea Party endorsed1 Republican Jon Husted is running to take back this seat for conservatives. Husted would be a giant step backwards for this key battleground state. In Michigan, Ruth Johnson won the Republican Secretary of State nomination after courting tea party supporters.2 In Iowa, Tea Party member3 and conservative Republican Matt Schultz is running to repeal Iowa's innovative same day voter registration and other election reform. Fight back against the Tea Party by donating to the Secretary of State Project now. You can make a difference in these critical races. Dollar for dollar, the SoS Project is one of the most effective political investments you can make. We run smart, targeted campaigns with proven results in key battleground states. By making a small contribution today, you can make sure the Tea Party is not in charge of counting the votes later. Thank you for all that you do to help protect the vote! -Laura Packard and the rest of the team Sources: 1. Portage County Tea Party website, as of September 29, 2010. 2. "Tea party storms gates, but Snyder gets running mate", Detroit Free Press, August 29, 2010. 3. "Tempest in a tea party", Stateline.org, March 12, 2010.

This whole idea of a Tea Party member in charge of vote counting makes ones skin crawl to you? Have you had a Tea Party connected person in your neck of the woods running for County Recorder (or in any other capacity)  where they would be involved in vote counting or vote count certifications? 

Things gettng a little clearer now in NORCAL?

BREAKING: California’s small businesses barely affected by AB 32 Report: Year's worth of tortillas to cost mere pennies more!

Study after study shows that AB 32, California’s landmark climate change law, will benefit the economy and help business.  A new report from The Brattle Group shows that AB 32 and a Renewable Energy Standard will have a minimal effect on most businesses while fostering innovation and investment in clean tech industries that will ultimately create more jobs.

PRNewswire has the story:.

The message of the report is clear: “we find that even making extreme assumptions about the range of possible energy price increases that might result from AB 32 the impact on a typical California small business remains negligible.” In fact, the potential cost impact of AB 32 was found to be well within the range of year-to-year variation in historic energy costs.  Inflation will cause far more significant price increases than meeting emissions targets and implementing a statewide Renewable Energy Standard or carbon trading system.

The Brattle study calculated the potential implications of emission reduction targets and an RES on energy prices on revenue streams and profit margins of small businesses.  This is an updated version of a report completed in 2009 that uses newly released energy price data to provide the most accurate projections under different scenarios.

AB 32’s Potential Effect on Energy Prices

On average, California’s 700,000+ small businesses (those generating maximum annual revenue of $7 million) are currently spending 1.4% of their revenues on energy. If AB 32 were suspended with the passage of Proposition 23 in November, the price of electricity, transportation fuel and natural gas are still expected to increase significantly between 2010 and 2020 due to inflation, scarcity and other factors.

Average electricity rates are expected to increase from 13.3 cents per kWh in 2008 to between 20.6 cents and 21.8 cents by 2020 (in nominal terms assuming 2.5% annual inflation), representing an increase of 55% to 64% without implementation of an RES.  By contrast, enforcement of the a 33% RES is predicted to result in an additional average rate increase of only 1.21 cents per kWh, or a 9% increase relative to 2008 rates. The effect of inflation and other “normal” market forces generate price increases that are five to six times as severe as the imposition of an RES.

Mercado International 2010: A Case Study

Brattle chose to examine Mercado International as a case study example precisely because its higher-than-average energy intensity to illustrate the negligible effects of AB 32 on small grocers and food vendors, a very competitive business sector with razor thin profit margins.  The case study showed that, “Even using pessimistic assumptions about energy price increases, the entire impact of AB 32 on the grocery store can be completely offset by retail price increases of, at most, 0.1 percent—so small as to be virtually unnoticeable to customers.”

Mercado International, located in Chula Vista, is a Mexican food and beverage store that sells meat, produce, and other products in addition to preparing specialty menu items. Average energy intensity for the food and beverage sector in California is 2.1% of revenue, slightly higher than the state average of 1.5%. Based on the study’s projections, Mercado’s energy costs will increase from 1.9% of revenues in 2009 to 2.7% in 2020, reflecting higher inflation in energy costs, in particular of gasoline and electricity, in the absence of AB 32. Implementation of AB 32 is projected to add an additional 0.08% to 2.67% according to the conservative case; and an additional 0.55% to 3.14% in the extreme case.

The store can easily recover these minor cost increases without alienating customers or sacrificing competitiveness because rival grocers will be equally affected by increasing energy prices. For example, Mercado currently sells a pound of tortillas for 59 cents; customers who buy a pound each week will spend roughly $30 per year. Mercado can recover the additional energy costs created by AB 32 by charging customers an additional 3 cents per year. This tiny price increase pales in comparison to the effect of inflation. A typical increase in inflation of 2 percent per year would add $6.57 to the customer’s annual $30 tortilla expenses between 2010 and 2020.

The Bottom Line

Contrary to the gloom and doom forecasts touted by the oil companies that support Proposition 23, The Brattle Group finds that AB 32 will increase electricity rates by a mere 2.46 cents per kWh (11.9%) by 2020. Price increases resulting from these policies will only be between 1 to 5 cents in a given year, an increase that will go unnoticed to consumers. Even under the extreme scenario, the potential cost impact of AB 32 is well within the range of year-to-year variation in historic energy costs.

Opponents of AB 32 (mostly state oil companies) claim that AB 32 will cause irreparable economic damage that will plunge California into a deeper recession with skyrocketing unemployment.  Proposition 23, dubbed by its creators as the California Jobs Initiative, will effectively kill AB 32 by preventing its’ mandates from taking effect until statewide unemployment rates drop to 5.5% for four consecutive quarters.  This has only happened four times in the past 30+ years and current unemployment rates are hovering around 12 percent.

Economists and business leaders agree that clean tech investments will power economic growth in the 21^st century.  California’s landmark climate legislation serves as a guiding light for the rest of the nation (unless you are a wealthy oil tycoon trying to protect your market share). AB 32 will lay the framework for the creation of vibrant new industries that will solidify California’s place as a leader in the global economy.

Here are five things you can do to win this fight:

1. Visit the “No on 23″ website, learn the facts & sign up:  www.StopDirtyEnergyProp.com.
2. Educate yourself on how California’s climate & energy laws have created companies & jobs:  www.CABrightSpot.com.
3. Tell your friends by email, on Facebook, at work, & everywhere else.
4. Participate in the debate. Write letters to the editor and post comments on blogs & websites.
5. Contribute (click here). The other side’s leader, right-wing California Assemblyman Dan Logue, has publicly said he expects the oil companies to spend $50 million.

Read more…

A big hat tip to the folks at Climate Progress

Corporate Ethics FAILURE -- The United States Chamber of Commerce Sell Out Of YOUR America: Foreign Influence (BUYING YOUR U.S. SENATE OR HOUSE MEMBER) SHOULD = SIGNIFICANT JAIL TIME?

CORPORATE ETHICS (or the complete failure of ethics)

The Chamber's Foreign Influence

Following the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision in January, the right-wing U.S. Chamber of Commerce has taken record-breaking steps to influence the 2010 midterm elections. Pledging to spend an unprecedented $75 million this year, the Chamber is in the midst of launching one of the largest partisan attack campaigns to defeat Democrats, including candidates like Jack Conway (KY), Sen. Barbara Boxer (CA), Jerry Brown (CA), Rep. Joe Sestak (PA) and  Rep. Tom Perriello (VA). Having aired more than 8,000 campaign ads on behalf of GOP Senate candidates alone and having spent 85 percent of its current expenditure on Republicans, the Chamber's spending has "dwarfed every other issue group and most political party candidate committee spending." It is well-established that the Chamber has used dues from corporations like health insurance giant Aetna to try to defeat health care reform, received contributions from bailed-out banks to lobby against Wall Street reform, and solicited funds from Fox News' parent company News Corporation for its election season attack campaign. But a new ThinkProgress investigation reveals that the Chamber is leveraging foreign companies to help fund its activities. Foreign corporations that join the Chamber pay dues that go into the Chamber's general account, which the Chamber then employs to fund its attack campaign. The Chamber "firmly denies the charge, saying its internal accounting rules prevent any foreign money from being used for political purposes." But, as a New York Times editorial notes today, foreign money is fungible, so "it is impossible for an outsider to know whether the group is following its rules." "We want to know what the system is. Basically, they claim they have a system, it's not enough to simply trust them, we need to verify," said ThinkProgress' Editor-in-Chief Faiz Shakir on MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews yesterday. While Congressional members and watchdog groups are calling for further investigation into the charges, such campaign actions fall into "something of a regulatory netherworld" leading campaign finance watchdogs, lawyers, and current and former federal officials to believe regulatory agencies like the IRS or the FEC will not examine them closely. Thus, with the Citizens United ruling and the Chamber's abuse of its 501(c)(6) standing, the Chamber is set to use "unlimited money from donors who have no fear of disclosure."

HOW IT WORKS: Under the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA), it is illegal for "foreign nationals" to "directly or indirectly" contribute, donate, or spend funds in connection with any federal, state, or local election in the U.S. It is also illegal to "solicit, receive or accept contributions or donations from them." The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is a trade association that qualifies as a 501(c)(6) organization which can engage in limited political activity, lobbying, and accept dues from foreign members. While regular dues from American companies like Aetna or News Corp. can be used for any purpose deemed necessary by the Chamber leadership, 501(c)(6) organizations, like any organization, cannot use foreign funds to advocate for a political candidate or cause. What the ThinkProgress investigation found is that the Chamber has spearheaded efforts "to raise money from foreign corporations, including ones controlled by foreign governments" and funneled that money into its general 501(c)(6) account. Foreign members send money either directly to the U.S. Chamber or to their country's local American Chamber (AmCham), which then transfers dues payments back to the Chamber's H Street office in Washington, D.C. While the Chamber may claim to have internal controls, foreign funds are fungible and all dues go to the same general account, which is then used to fund the Chamber's political attack campaign. Essentially, as Shakir pointed out , "they're acting as a [Political Action Committee]" which "run[s] ads against political candidates. But the difference here is PACs disclose where they get the money from." The Chamber refuses to disclose its donors.

OUTSIDE PLAYERS: The Chamber has aggressively cultivated foreign business connections to raise significant sums to augment domestic funds in its general account. In 2006, the Chamber created the "U.S.-Bahrain Business Council" (USBBC), a local office of the Chamber's 501(c)(6) trade association to help Bahranian businesses take advantage of the Chamber's "network of government and business relationships in the US and worldwide." Many of the USBBC board members are Bahranian, including Bahrain Martime & Mercantile International, Aluminum Bahrain, and the state-owned Bahrain Petroleum Company. USBBC's membership form explicitly states that foreign-owned firms are welcome and directs applicants to send or wire dues directly to the Chamber. With each USBBC board member contributing at least $10,000 annually, the Chamber of Commerce raises well over $100,000 a year in funds from its operation in Bahrain. The Chamber also operates a "U.S.-India Business Council" (USIBC) in its U.S. headquarters that includes some of India's largest corporations like the state-owned State Bank of India and the ICICI Bank as members. Annual membership dues range from $7,500 to $15,000 or more, and the funds are funneled directly into the Chamber's 501(c)(6) bank account. The USBIC, which advocates changing American manufacturing policy to help guide U.S companies to India, generates over $200,000 a year in dues from foreign businesses. While foreign "AmChams" operate outside the Chamber's direct sphere, they nonetheless send dues back to the U.S. In the Middle East, for example, the AmCham in Egypt calls itself one of the Chamber's "most active affiliates" and Abu Dhabi AmCham -- which includes a subsidiary of the state-run Abu Dhabi National Oil Company -- claims it is a "dues paying member" of the U.S. Chamber. The AmCham of Russia's relationship to the U.S. Chamber is less clear because many of the dues-paying members are Russian state-run companies, like VTB Bank, and controlled by the Russian government. When asked if members do pay dues, the Russia AmCham membership development manager replied, "Unfortunately, the information that you require is closed for the public." And in what looks like an attempt to raise money for election from foreign nationals, the Chamber also commissioned former U.S. Ambassador to Singapore and McCain-Palin campaign aide Frank Lavin to speak before foreign Chamber affiliates to talk about the stakes for the midterm elections. If such solicitation occurred, it would be a clear violation of FECA law.

TRUST AND DON'T VERIFY: Following ThinkProgress' report, Sen. Al Franken (D-MN) wrote to the FEC -- a federal agency that has ironically "been rendered toothless by its Republican members" -- to launch an investigation and insist that foreign companies prove whether their funds had been used in campaign activities. He also asked the FEC to change its regulations allowing foreign companies that are incorporated in the U.S. to spend on elections. Rep. Tom Perriello (D-VA) also repudiated the funding as "fundamentally un-American and undemocratic" and called on his Republican opponent to denounce the ads. And finding Lavin's actions to amount to "indirectly soliciting contributions from foreign nationals for the use in U.S. elections" thereby violating the FECA law prohibiting anyone "to solicit, accept, or receive" contributions, the public advocacy group MoveOn.org requested the Department of Justice yesterday to launch a criminal investigation. The Chamber, however, has responded to the allegations by claiming it does not use foreign funds for political activities, calling ThinkProgress' report "completely erroneous" and a "partisan" "smear." But instead of rebutting the actual allegations with evidence, Chamber spokeswoman Tita Freeman offered unverifiable assurances that the Chamber complies "with all applicable law." "We have a system," she said, that ensures AmChams "are not government-controlled entities." But as for addressing whether the AmChams transfer money from government-controlled entities, the Chamber was demonstrably silent. Indeed, as ThinkProgress' Lee Fang noted on MSNBC's Countdown with Keith Olbermann Tuesday, "what's alarming is the Chamber of Commerce hasn't put out any documentation. They haven't proved that there's a firewall. They're just saying, 'hey, trust us.'" What's more, with the Citizen's United decision and the Chamber's successful effort to kill a campaign finance reform bill mandating disclosure, the Chamber could continue to use foreign dues while funding more attack ads against Democrats without ever having to reveal any of its foreign contributors. Still, the Chamber insists that its unverified "system" should be enough to quell concern. As the Washington Monthly's Steve Benen puts it, "there's nothing like vague, terse responses from an already-secretive, conservative lobbying group to set minds at ease."

THE INFORMATION including links and more on this is at pr.thinkprogress.org

The sellout of America by the UNITED STATES CHAMBER OF COMMERCE just makes me ill, so I am very sorry if you are reading this before a meal. Please share this with your family and friends and don't let them vote Republican in November. Do it NOW as early and absentee voting is just now beginning in most of the Country. Call for jail time for all involved, too. Write your elected representatives and call them to make sure they know you will not put up with this....not in my America and Not in YOURS.

 

 

Nevada County, CA - Dan Logue (R), The Face of BIG OIL, Represented County ***** STAinNC.org Fights Dan AND Tom McClintock's Sponsored Proposition 23 -- With Facts

Save The Air in Nevada County (STAinNC.org) was formed in 2006 by residents concerned about high levels of airborne ozone and its deleterious effects, particularly on our children.

For several years now, both the federal EPA and the American Lung Association have ranked Nevada County among the dozen most ozone-polluted counties in the United States.

Ozone is toxic to humans. It irritates the eyes, air passages and lungs. It causes and exacerbates bronchitis and asthma. By 2004, more than one-sixth of Nevada County’s children from infancy to seventeen years suffered from asthma, an incidence significantly higher than the state’s average.

According to public air quality agencies, only a small fraction of our ozone is generated locally. Most of it is transported here through prevailing air currents from the Sacramento Valley and the San Francisco Bay Area.

STAinNC’s mission is to protect our children and ourselves by collecting reliable ozone data, educating the public, and advocating for air pollution control measures. Toward those ends, we obtained non-profit tax status and coverage from the local media, convinced the city councils of Grass Valley and Nevada City to pass supportive resolutions, and convened a regional air pollution summit. We monitor ozone levels in several sites and maintain productive communication with local, state and federal agencies.

As writer of this story and a resident of Nevada County I see this local organization mission -- PROTECTING OUR QUALITY OF LIFE -- the short version of the purpose of STAinNC.org. emphasis on OUR. Mickey Harrington, (D), seeking the Assembly Seat currently held by Dan Logue, (R), can use your vote and the vote of your friends and family and your church members and, well everyone you know. It should be noted that Congressperson Tom McClintock, (R), is partner with Dan Logue in pushing this horrible initiative. SO. It doesn't get any clearer than this....our need for change (of representatives) in our little corner of the world. Now why this organization recommends a no vote on Proposition 23. Comments concerning elected officials or candidates for local office are NOT positions of STAinNC.org.

 

NO ON PROP 23

On November 2 California will vote on Proposition 23, the initiative which, if passed, would stall implementation of a clean air law we badly need, called AB32. Both the American Lung Association and the EPA rank Nevada County in the top dozen counties in the nation for ozone pollution. Ground-level ozone is toxic: one of every six of our children — well above the state incidence — has asthma.

Most of the ozone we breathe results from burning petroleum products. AB32 will decrease our current oil dependence, reduce greenhouse gases and other air pollutants, and result in cleaner air. When this bill was originally passed, it received bipartisan support and was signed by Governor Schwarzenegger.

Proposition 23 proponents, desperate to shift focus away from the toxic effects of air pollutants, claim that AB32 will result in decreased employment, even calling the measure the “California Jobs Initiative.” However, the Clean Economy Network — a coalition of businesses, investors, and other clean energy advocates — recently published a report concluding that Proposition 23 would undermine California’s clean energy industry, jeopardizing a half-million jobs, twelve thousand companies, and billions of dollars in private investment. The uncertainty around Prop 23 has already made investors hesitant to invest in California’s clean energy projects because they sense that the policies that support these new industries may disappear.

Proposition 23 is not a grassroots measure. It’s financed by large oil companies, mainly from out of state, concerned that AB32 will affect their sales. Its biggest boosters are legislators who happen also to be funded by Valero Energy, Occidental Oil, ExxonMobil, ConocoPhillips, and Chevron.

“California Jobs Initiative?” It ought to be named “Sell Our Children’s Health to Big Oil.” Don’t be misled. Check out the California Air Resources Board’s AB32 information sheet at:

www.climatechange.ca.gov/publications/factsheets/2010-03-01_AB32_Myths.pdf

Proudly supporting the implementation of AB32, STAinNC strongly recommends a “NO” vote on Proposition 23.

 

WHEN YOU ARE IN THE VERY TIP TOP OF HORRIBLE AIR QUALITY (READINGS IN THE TOP 12 OF THE NATION) YOU DON'T NEED YOUR OWN ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES SELLING YOU OUT TO BIG, OUT OF STATE OIL, OR TO ANYONE ELSE, FOR THAT MATTER.

FOR MORE INFORMATION - A PRESENTATION - ON NEVADA COUNTY AIR – click here.

LINK: http://vimeo.com/6918034

More Facts Here: via www.stainnc.org