| Submit your comments on this article |
| Economy |
| Job-killing cap-and-trade rules on hold everywhere but California, |
| 2010-03-10 |
| In September 2006, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Democratic legislative leaders treated AB 32's enactment as a huge milestone. Meant to reduce the emissions that contribute to global warming, the law forced a shift to cleaner-but-costlier forms of energy. This shift would be accomplished with a "cap-and-trade" system in which companies would buy and sell their emission rations, creating market incentives to reduce pollution. The landmark legislation was meant to inspire other states, the federal government and the rest of the world to follow suit with similar laws. The governor was so sure this would happen that he declared the bill "will change the course of history." Forty-two months later, this claim looks silly. No other state has imposed a similar law. The Senate has grown increasingly cold to a measure the House approved last summer. Most tellingly, a December summit in Copenhagen meant to build a global cap-and-trade consensus went nowhere. Why? Because there is a widespread assumption that it is not a good idea to suddenly force the use of costlier energy during an economic downturn that has wiped out tens of millions of jobs around the world. This common sense is on display in Washington. On Jan. 20, seven Senate Democrats -- including California's Dianne Feinstein -- called for "cap-and-trade" to be put aside in favor of an intense focus on jobs and reviving the economy. But in Sacramento -- even with unemployment at a 70-year high of 12.7 percent -- this common sense is assailed. Even as the respected, nonpartisan Legislative Analyst's Office warns that AB 32's implementation would force the loss of jobs, proposals to suspend AB 32 by Republican lawmakers and GOP gubernatorial candidates are ridiculed by the governor and the likely Democratic candidate to replace him. Schwarzenegger calls the idea a throwback to the "Stone Age." Attorney General Jerry Brown is similarly contemptuous. What is driving this immense disconnect? Why would they dismiss what looks like common sense to the rest of the world? Why are they so blithe even as the LAO warns AB 32 is likely to make the state's astronomical unemployment rate even higher? The answer with Schwarzenegger lies in his abiding conviction that the 2006 law will lead to his being remembered as a global green giant -- even as the evidence accumulates that its main effect was not to inspire the world but to kneecap California's economy. The answer with Brown lies in his determination to woo greener-than-thou West Los Angeles and Bay Area liberals -- even as the evidence accumulates that AB 32 will destroy blue-collar jobs held by the folks Democrats are supposed to care most about. Either way, these key leaders aren't helping Californians. Perhaps when state unemployment reaches 15 percent, what's common sense to the rest of the world will finally register with the governor and his would-be successor. |
| Posted by:GolfBravoUSMC |
| #1 its main effect was not to inspire the world but to kneecap California's economy. The INTENT of the global equivalent is to kneecap the US economy. California is demonstrating the effectiveness. |
| Posted by: Glenmore 2010-03-10 13:00 |