SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Climate Law Survives Prop 23 Challenge at California Polls
Voters overwhelmingly reject a measure that would have put renewable energy plans and a market to cut emissions on hold
Nov 03, 2010
One of the world's most ambitious laws to combat global warming survived a challenge on Tuesday as California voters overwhelmingly rejected a measure that would have put the state's plans for more renewable energy and a market to curb greenhouse gases on ice.
The defeat of Proposition 23 marked a big victory for Silicon Valley investors, who poured millions of dollars into defending California's AB 32 law and protecting their massive investments in green technologies ranging from solar power to electric cars.
After the failure of federal climate legislation in Congress this year, the fate of California's law was viewed as a US turning point - either away from addressing global warming or toward stronger action to curb greenhouse gases.
"This is reaffirmation that we are a country of some enlightenment," said Michael Eckhart, president of the American Council on Renewable Energy, a trade group.
"A majority of Californians, even in great stress of unemployment and economic demise, will still accept this responsibility. Rejecting an attempt to destroy the environment is a good thing."
Opponents of Prop 23 also cheered Tuesday's election of Jerry Brown as California governor. Brown has said he supports a target of deriving 33% of California's electricity from renewable sources like solar and wind.
"With Jerry as governor, the transformation of our electricity sector will have a captain for the ship," said V John White, executive director of the Centre for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Technology, an advocacy group.
Supporters of the measure said it would halt a dangerous rise in energy costs at a time when California - hard hit by the recession, financial crisis and housing meltdown - can least afford it.
"If we can wait until the economy is better, I'm happy to go green," said Dan Pendergraft from Redondo Beach.
When green business is viable "and can pay its own way, I support it", Pendergraft added.
With 48 of precincts reporting, the "no" vote on Proposition 23 stood at 59%, with 41% in the "yes" column.
Prop 23, largely funded by oil companies, would have put AB 32 on ice until double-digit unemployment falls to 5.5% or less for four straight quarters. That scenario has happened rarely in California in the past 20 years, the measure's opponents argued.
The "No on 23" campaign also claimed the measure would have taken critical support away from a green business community that has generated billions of dollars in investment and created millions of jobs in the state.
"AB 32 is a stimulus for economic growth and innovation," said Tom Werner, chief executive of California-based solar panel maker SunPower Corp.
With Prop 23 defeated, SunPower will proceed with a plan to open a San Francisco-area manufacturing facility that will employ 100 people. It would have considered putting the factory in another state if Prop 23 had passed, Werner said.
Silicon Valley investors, who have heavily funded solar and wind energy, biofuels and electric cars, poured money into defeating Prop 23 in recent weeks. In total, the campaign raised more than $25m.
Notable donors to the "No on 23" campaign in the past few weeks included Microsoft Corp co-founder Bill Gates, Google Inc co-founder Sergey Brin, Intel Corp co-founder Gordon Moore and "Avatar" filmmaker James Cameron.
The "Yes on 23" camp, in contrast, raised more than $10m, much of which came from oil companies Valero Energy and Tesoro.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
One of the world's most ambitious laws to combat global warming survived a challenge on Tuesday as California voters overwhelmingly rejected a measure that would have put the state's plans for more renewable energy and a market to curb greenhouse gases on ice.
The defeat of Proposition 23 marked a big victory for Silicon Valley investors, who poured millions of dollars into defending California's AB 32 law and protecting their massive investments in green technologies ranging from solar power to electric cars.
After the failure of federal climate legislation in Congress this year, the fate of California's law was viewed as a US turning point - either away from addressing global warming or toward stronger action to curb greenhouse gases.
"This is reaffirmation that we are a country of some enlightenment," said Michael Eckhart, president of the American Council on Renewable Energy, a trade group.
"A majority of Californians, even in great stress of unemployment and economic demise, will still accept this responsibility. Rejecting an attempt to destroy the environment is a good thing."
Opponents of Prop 23 also cheered Tuesday's election of Jerry Brown as California governor. Brown has said he supports a target of deriving 33% of California's electricity from renewable sources like solar and wind.
"With Jerry as governor, the transformation of our electricity sector will have a captain for the ship," said V John White, executive director of the Centre for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Technology, an advocacy group.
Supporters of the measure said it would halt a dangerous rise in energy costs at a time when California - hard hit by the recession, financial crisis and housing meltdown - can least afford it.
"If we can wait until the economy is better, I'm happy to go green," said Dan Pendergraft from Redondo Beach.
When green business is viable "and can pay its own way, I support it", Pendergraft added.
With 48 of precincts reporting, the "no" vote on Proposition 23 stood at 59%, with 41% in the "yes" column.
Prop 23, largely funded by oil companies, would have put AB 32 on ice until double-digit unemployment falls to 5.5% or less for four straight quarters. That scenario has happened rarely in California in the past 20 years, the measure's opponents argued.
The "No on 23" campaign also claimed the measure would have taken critical support away from a green business community that has generated billions of dollars in investment and created millions of jobs in the state.
"AB 32 is a stimulus for economic growth and innovation," said Tom Werner, chief executive of California-based solar panel maker SunPower Corp.
With Prop 23 defeated, SunPower will proceed with a plan to open a San Francisco-area manufacturing facility that will employ 100 people. It would have considered putting the factory in another state if Prop 23 had passed, Werner said.
Silicon Valley investors, who have heavily funded solar and wind energy, biofuels and electric cars, poured money into defeating Prop 23 in recent weeks. In total, the campaign raised more than $25m.
Notable donors to the "No on 23" campaign in the past few weeks included Microsoft Corp co-founder Bill Gates, Google Inc co-founder Sergey Brin, Intel Corp co-founder Gordon Moore and "Avatar" filmmaker James Cameron.
The "Yes on 23" camp, in contrast, raised more than $10m, much of which came from oil companies Valero Energy and Tesoro.
One of the world's most ambitious laws to combat global warming survived a challenge on Tuesday as California voters overwhelmingly rejected a measure that would have put the state's plans for more renewable energy and a market to curb greenhouse gases on ice.
The defeat of Proposition 23 marked a big victory for Silicon Valley investors, who poured millions of dollars into defending California's AB 32 law and protecting their massive investments in green technologies ranging from solar power to electric cars.
After the failure of federal climate legislation in Congress this year, the fate of California's law was viewed as a US turning point - either away from addressing global warming or toward stronger action to curb greenhouse gases.
"This is reaffirmation that we are a country of some enlightenment," said Michael Eckhart, president of the American Council on Renewable Energy, a trade group.
"A majority of Californians, even in great stress of unemployment and economic demise, will still accept this responsibility. Rejecting an attempt to destroy the environment is a good thing."
Opponents of Prop 23 also cheered Tuesday's election of Jerry Brown as California governor. Brown has said he supports a target of deriving 33% of California's electricity from renewable sources like solar and wind.
"With Jerry as governor, the transformation of our electricity sector will have a captain for the ship," said V John White, executive director of the Centre for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Technology, an advocacy group.
Supporters of the measure said it would halt a dangerous rise in energy costs at a time when California - hard hit by the recession, financial crisis and housing meltdown - can least afford it.
"If we can wait until the economy is better, I'm happy to go green," said Dan Pendergraft from Redondo Beach.
When green business is viable "and can pay its own way, I support it", Pendergraft added.
With 48 of precincts reporting, the "no" vote on Proposition 23 stood at 59%, with 41% in the "yes" column.
Prop 23, largely funded by oil companies, would have put AB 32 on ice until double-digit unemployment falls to 5.5% or less for four straight quarters. That scenario has happened rarely in California in the past 20 years, the measure's opponents argued.
The "No on 23" campaign also claimed the measure would have taken critical support away from a green business community that has generated billions of dollars in investment and created millions of jobs in the state.
"AB 32 is a stimulus for economic growth and innovation," said Tom Werner, chief executive of California-based solar panel maker SunPower Corp.
With Prop 23 defeated, SunPower will proceed with a plan to open a San Francisco-area manufacturing facility that will employ 100 people. It would have considered putting the factory in another state if Prop 23 had passed, Werner said.
Silicon Valley investors, who have heavily funded solar and wind energy, biofuels and electric cars, poured money into defeating Prop 23 in recent weeks. In total, the campaign raised more than $25m.
Notable donors to the "No on 23" campaign in the past few weeks included Microsoft Corp co-founder Bill Gates, Google Inc co-founder Sergey Brin, Intel Corp co-founder Gordon Moore and "Avatar" filmmaker James Cameron.
The "Yes on 23" camp, in contrast, raised more than $10m, much of which came from oil companies Valero Energy and Tesoro.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.