CA Proposition 23 - Global Warming

Created by CitizenTopix on Oct 12, 2010

4,552 votes

Click on an option to vote

Yes

No

Other (explain below)

First Prev
of 398
Next Last

“Sounding off for the citizens”

Since: Oct 10

Mountain View, CA

#1 Oct 12, 2010
Proposition 23, which would Suspend AB 32, the Global Warming Act of 2006, is on the November 2, 2010 ballot in California as an initiated state statute.

Ballot Title: Suspends Implementation of Air Pollution Control Law (AB 32) Requiring Major Sources of Emissions to Report and Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions that Cause Global Warming Until Unemployment Drops to 5.5 Percent or Less for Full Year.

Official summary:
Suspends State law that requires greenhouse gas emissions be reduced to 1990 levels by 2020, until California's unemployment drops to 5.5 percent or less for four consecutive quarters.

Requires State to abandon implementation of comprehensive greenhouse-gas-reduction program that includes increased renewable energy and cleaner fuel requirements, and mandatory emission reporting and fee requirements for major polluters such as power plants and oil refineries, until suspension ends.

How will you vote on November 2nd?
Fun time

Eureka, CA

#2 Oct 12, 2010
It reads like a stupid proposition which mixes apples and oranges.

That's enough detail for me to say no.

Judged:

19

15

13

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
SharontheUnionMo le

Sun City, CA

#3 Oct 12, 2010
JEG

United States

#4 Oct 12, 2010
Fun time wrote:
It reads like a stupid proposition which mixes apples and oranges.
That's enough detail for me to say no.
Poor comprehensive skills.
Chuck

Vancouver, WA

#5 Oct 12, 2010
We need to vote YES on Prop.23 as we will lose up to one milion jobs in the near future and energy prices (gasoline, electricity, natural gas etc.) will skyrocket. Massive State regulations will kill many industies in our State. 35 years ago we had "Global Cooling" and that was an obvious hoax; "Global Warming" advocates are using the same scare tactics that were used by the "Global Cooling" kooks. We don't need any more governmnet intrusion into our lives than we hae already.

Judged:

50

32

17

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Wayne

Fairfield, CA

#6 Oct 12, 2010
The enforcement of AB 32 will cause an economic disaster for California that will keep other states from passing such legislation, and probably do more harm for the cause than it will help the environment.

Points to ponder on AB 32 / Prop 23:

° AB 32 is not a pollution law, it is a global warming law, but it won’t have any effect on global warming.

° Prop 23, in spite of fear-mongering by opponents, does not repeal any clean-air laws. It does not increase local pollution.

° CARB over-estimated diesel emmisions by 340%. What else have they over-estimated?

° Key CARB personnel caught lying about credentials and then failing to reveal this after it is discovered internally before AB 32 passed, until after AB 32 passed. What else are they lying about and with-holding?

° Sacramento State University reports estimated cost of $3734 per year per family due strictly to AB 32.

° CARB has admitted that California alone cannot have an impact on reducing global warming and CO2 emissions.

° US EPA acknowledges that US action alone will not impact the world CO2 levels;

° US EPA (11 July 2010) said that bills in Congress will not reduce the total use of gas and oil of 20 million gallons per day for decades.

° LAO (CA Legislative Analyst Office) stated: CA economy at large will be adversely affected by implementation of climate-related policies that are not in place elsewhere.(Letter to Dan Logue, 13 May 2010)

° Even CARB’s own economic experts have recognized the fact that jobs will be lost because of AB 32. In fact, they recommend establishing a “Worker Transition Program” to provide assistance to people who lose their jobs because of AB 32 regulations.

° AB 32 does nothing for local pollution, nor does Proposition 23 do anything to increase local pollution.

When the loudest objections to any candidacy or initiative are focused on vilifying its financial backers, this often indicates that its opponents’ arguments on its merits are weak.

Vote yes on Prop 23 and suspend AB32.

Judged:

33

19

11

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
As If

Manhattan Beach, CA

#7 Oct 12, 2010
Global warming is a fraud. Damn most people are just plain stupid.

Judged:

35

26

21

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
TurtleDove

La Quinta, CA

#8 Oct 12, 2010
Vote Yes! We need to suspend this potential job killing bill.

Judged:

22

14

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“Rico's Are Everywhere”

Since: Dec 09

Gangland, North America

#9 Oct 12, 2010
YES. f**k the air we need jobs!!!

Judged:

15

12

7

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
the reallist

Santa Clara, CA

#10 Oct 12, 2010
global warming ? thats there machine called haarp warming and causing all these earth quakes,floods and weather changes.they need to start warming up there beds in prison with all that bull that they trying to feed us cause they are going to need it once their getting ass pounded in prison.
People Get a Clue

Azusa, CA

#11 Oct 12, 2010
One of the largest polluters in the state is trucking. The trucking industry is against asking for the suspension of this law because it will force truckers to have smog compliant trucks in the next two years. The trucking industry is for the most part using much older trucks with no pollution controls (the black soot coming from the exhaust). Because they have been slow to upgrade or replace their trucks, they are hoping to get a suspension of this law. They want the law suspended until the unemployment rate reaches a level that we have not seen in this state in decades, and probably won't see again. This will mean that they can keep these older, polluting trucks on the road longer. Many of these older trucks are not safe to operate anymore, and they put the general public at risk. They have known of this law since 2006 and have not complied with it hoping it would be repealed. It will require that the trucking industry will have to comply with smog laws and get "smog" certificates just like every person who drives a car in this state. If you reduce the amount of diesel pollution in this state, you will lower cancer risks to everyone who lives here, Trucking companies will have to buy newer trucks with smog equipment. Newer trucks are also safer trucks as they need fewer repairs and therefore are less likely to have a problem that could lead to a catastrophic accident on our freeways. The trucking companies will not be leaving the state. The law will require trucks from other states comply with this smog law to enter our state. Since these trucks from other states will no longer be allowed into our state, it will create more trucking jobs to bring goods into our state. Our freeways will be safer. 5.5 percent unemployment is not going to happen in our state for 12 months, so basically, truckers will always be allowed to drive these polluting, unsafe trucks on our roads putting all of us at risk.

Judged:

30

15

12

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Wayne

Fairfield, CA

#12 Oct 12, 2010
The diesel retrofit regulations adopted as part of ARB’s Diesel Risk Reduction Plan are not effected by Proposition 23.
Joe

Firebaugh, CA

#13 Oct 12, 2010
*Man-caused Global Warming (AGW) has _no_ scientific peer reviewed validity. It is basically a fraud perpetrated by people and organizations with other agendas, like cripple the developed nations with inane regulations that will do _nothing_ to change the warming or cooling of the climate which is almost entirely solar driven.

*CO2 is _not_ a "pollutant"! It is a necessary component of life on earth. The percentage CO2 in the atmosphere has been much higher in the past and life went on just fine.

*CARB is an outfit out of control, IMHO, inventing new odious regulations for their own benefit with no concern for the cost/benefit aspect of their actions. They are basically trying to perpetuate their own existence long after the major improvements of smog levels in major metropolitan areas have been achieved.

I would suggest a YES vote on Prop 23.

Judged:

15

14

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
wow

Victorville, CA

#14 Oct 12, 2010
Fun time wrote:
It reads like a stupid proposition which mixes apples and oranges.
That's enough detail for me to say no.
That's a near sighted opinion. The implementation of this proposition will devastate California and eliminate over 1 million jobs. The alleged benefit of the Global Warming blah blah blah act will never make up for the damaging effect it will have on the California economy. The future costs to all citizens of this state will cause poverty to rise dramatically and those that can bring the economy back, employers, will flee California by the train load. Is it any wonder that California is the ONLY state, province, country, or any other land mass that contains people and some form of government to implement this draconian measure? This has to be stopped.
wow

Victorville, CA

#15 Oct 12, 2010
Wayne wrote:
° CARB over-estimated diesel emmisions by 340%. What else have they over-estimated?
Everything. CARB needs to be eliminated. They all need to be fired. They're a bunch of frauds with fraudulent data and quack "PHD's" that come up with this crap.

Judged:

13

11

5

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
You get a clue

Corona, CA

#16 Oct 12, 2010
People Get a Clue wrote:
One of the largest polluters in the state is trucking. The trucking industry is against asking for the suspension of this law because it will force truckers to have smog compliant trucks in the next two years. The trucking industry is for the most part using much older trucks with no pollution controls (the black soot coming from the exhaust). Because they have been slow to upgrade or replace their trucks, they are hoping to get a suspension of this law. They want the law suspended until the unemployment rate reaches a level that we have not seen in this state in decades, and probably won't see again. This will mean that they can keep these older, polluting trucks on the road longer. Many of these older trucks are not safe to operate anymore, and they put the general public at risk. They have known of this law since 2006 and have not complied with it hoping it would be repealed. It will require that the trucking industry will have to comply with smog laws and get "smog" certificates just like every person who drives a car in this state. If you reduce the amount of diesel pollution in this state, you will lower cancer risks to everyone who lives here, Trucking companies will have to buy newer trucks with smog equipment. Newer trucks are also safer trucks as they need fewer repairs and therefore are less likely to have a problem that could lead to a catastrophic accident on our freeways. The trucking companies will not be leaving the state. The law will require trucks from other states comply with this smog law to enter our state. Since these trucks from other states will no longer be allowed into our state, it will create more trucking jobs to bring goods into our state. Our freeways will be safer. 5.5 percent unemployment is not going to happen in our state for 12 months, so basically, truckers will always be allowed to drive these polluting, unsafe trucks on our roads putting all of us at risk.
You are an idiot! Let me guess you are a rich fat cat Liberal who thinks ass backwards! Do you honestly think they can afford to get new trucks now with this economy? What do you think they will do with the old trucks just let them rot in a field that is really good for the envirement. Or maybe they will just end up in Mexico still running the roads and the air there is the air here dummy so that just puts double the rigs on the roads. Good one! keep thinking your backwards ways and stay on your rich soap box!

Judged:

13

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
wow

Victorville, CA

#17 Oct 12, 2010
People Get a Clue wrote:
One of the largest polluters in the state is trucking. The trucking industry is against asking for the suspension of this law because it will force truckers to have smog compliant trucks in the next two years. The trucking industry is for the most part using much older trucks with no pollution controls (the black soot coming from the exhaust). Because they have been slow to upgrade or replace their trucks, they are hoping to get a suspension of this law. They want the law suspended until the unemployment rate reaches a level that we have not seen in this state in decades, and probably won't see again. This will mean that they can keep these older, polluting trucks on the road longer. Many of these older trucks are not safe to operate anymore, and they put the general public at risk. They have known of this law since 2006 and have not complied with it hoping it would be repealed. It will require that the trucking industry will have to comply with smog laws and get "smog" certificates just like every person who drives a car in this state. If you reduce the amount of diesel pollution in this state, you will lower cancer risks to everyone who lives here, Trucking companies will have to buy newer trucks with smog equipment. Newer trucks are also safer trucks as they need fewer repairs and therefore are less likely to have a problem that could lead to a catastrophic accident on our freeways. The trucking companies will not be leaving the state. The law will require trucks from other states comply with this smog law to enter our state. Since these trucks from other states will no longer be allowed into our state, it will create more trucking jobs to bring goods into our state. Our freeways will be safer. 5.5 percent unemployment is not going to happen in our state for 12 months, so basically, truckers will always be allowed to drive these polluting, unsafe trucks on our roads putting all of us at risk.
Who cares? You're going to sacrifice 1.2million jobs for a couple trucks that spit out a tenth of the "pollution" that trucks in any other major metropolitan area, let alone other countries? Why does the state of California have to bare ALL of the burden for this hoax they call global warming? And why do the citizens of this state have to suffer because of the lunatic rantings of CARB?
Wayne

Fairfield, CA

#18 Oct 12, 2010
You get a clue wrote:
<quoted text> Do you honestly think they can afford to get new trucks now with this economy?
They don't have to get new trucks. They can retrofit old ones.

It's a moot-point though, because that is not part of Proposition 23, and it is being implemented regardless.
guest

Moreno Valley, CA

#19 Oct 12, 2010
vote yes 23 we need to feed our families
Wayne

Fairfield, CA

#20 Oct 12, 2010
People Get a Clue wrote:
This will mean that they can keep these older, polluting trucks on the road longer. Many of these older trucks are not safe to operate anymore, and they put the general public at risk.
The diesel retrofit regulations adopted as part of ARB’s Diesel Risk Reduction Plan are not effected by Proposition 23.

The older trucks can be retrofitted. The Diesel Risk Reduction Plan has NOTHING to do with safety, just like our SMOG inspections have nothing to do with safety, which blows my mind, coming from states that had annual safety inspections.

Your post is yet another example of the misunderstandings that the No on Prop 23 groups are purposely sowing.

Prop 23 doesn't do a thing to increase pollution, it suspends the Global Warming mitigation regulations that are extremely expensive and don't help one bit to stop global warming.

Judged:

13

12

3

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 398
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Sierraville Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
CA California seeks to ban free, single-use carryo... (Jun '10) 4 hr free for all 5,081
CA Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex ma... (Aug '10) Fri broombroom 200,976
CA Jury reaches verdict in Oakland BART shooting t... (Jul '10) Fri scoop 2,273
CA California Proposition 19: the Marijuana Legali... (Oct '10) Sep 18 Pizza 16,000
Obama Nation (Jul '12) Sep 16 xxxx 632
Review: E & H Hobby Enterprises (Oct '12) Sep 14 Brad Diaz 2
Witches Cemetary (Oct '08) Sep 1 pete the dragon 41
•••
•••
•••

Sierraville Jobs

•••
•••
•••

Sierraville People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Sierraville News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Sierraville
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••