Posted on 08/04/2015 5:44:43 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Take notice if you drive to and from work each day in California. SB 350, known as the California Gas Restriction Act of 2015, (de León) requires a 50% reduction in petroleum, 50% increase in renewables for electricity generation, and a 50% increase in the energy efficiency of buildings by 2030. SB 350 will also grant the Air Resources Board significant authority to adopt regulations that will result in a 50% reduction in petroleum use in cars and trucks by 2030.
In short, unelected regulators will be able to limit how far you can drive, ration gas, increase costs, and penalize drivers for using too much gas.
Opposed by energy producers and allied groups, a full court effort has been launched by the California Drivers Alliance that is circulating a petition to pressure lawmakers to oppose SB 350 passage.
Radical environmental groups like California Climate Leadership Stemming from the notorious passage of AB 32 during the forgettable Schwarzenneger governorship, SB 350 joins a raft of AB 32 enabling legislation, including SB 375 (emissions reductions), climate adaption (SB 246, 379), plus overarching agricultural restrictions and transit fiats.
In its defense, SB 350 proponents say that SB 350 requires the California Air Resources Board, to be cost effective and technologically feasible (page 4, line 19; its actions be based on validated scientific and engineering data (page 5, line 12); and explicitly requires an economic analysis that takes into account impacts on fuel manufacturers, consumer acceptance, the state’s competitive position with other neighboring states, and the costs to consumers (page 5, lines 30-34)
The campaign on both sides has become nasty and misleading. For instance, an image of Assemblywoman Susan Bonilla appears on a California Drivers Alliance ad on Drudge touting its petition opposing SB 350. This does not mean Bonilla is an opponent of SB 350. Oh hell no. For Bonilla has authored and voted for numerous environmental and energy laws that dovetail with AB 32. Rather, the ad hopes to pound Bonilla with petition from signers within her district to bring pressure on her to — hope-against-hope — oppose SB 350 legislation when it reaches the Assembly floor.
Meanwhile, the Greenbelt Alliance is also asking its supporters to put pressure on Bonilla and other legislators to vote for SB 350.
Accept no imitations! You can fill out a form that will send an email or Tweet to Susan Bonilla to support AB 350
In one of his first votes as State Senator, Glazer voted for SB 350. Glazer recently defeated Bonilla in a special election for the vacant 7th California Senate seat vacated by now Congressman Mark DeSaulnier.
According to proponents propaganda concerning “renewable targets,” it took nearly a decade for California so-called green fuel sales to grow from 12- to 25 percent of sales. So it is certain that Californians will be reliant on fossil fuels for decades to come, despite the specious claims and data manipulation of climate alarmists is used by politicians and an increasingly unfettered state to bypass voter preferences in favor of increasing central control over the lives of the polity.
In short, a mandated 50% reduction in petroleum will have a significant impact on transportation in California, but also on future jobs and valuable tax revenue. An analysis of the petroleum industry’s economic contributions to California shows SB 350 would devastate the California energy economy in that supports:
– 468,000 direct, indirect and induced jobs – $220 billion in direct economic activity statewide – $21.6 billion in state and local tax revenues statewide – $14.7 billion in sales and excise taxes statewide – 104,000 jobs in Los Angeles County alone – Los Angeles County alone receives $5 billion in state and local tax revenues
Killing the California economy to raise prices of fossil fuels to make green energy more competitive is not the sane or right way to go to improve air quality and help improve pollution controls for clean water, and environmental safety.
(VIDEO-AT-LINK)
Kansas is open. But only to conservative refugees.
Same goes for Texas.
The Earth could not open fast enough on the place.
Let’s just outlaw cars and farming in California.
To offset the loss in revenue we’ll send home the Guv and the rest of the State Government.
That will cap State Spending and ensure no further tax increases.
It is but to laugh...CARB is a dumping ground for those who've earned favors in government, these aholes are completely unaccountable and are idealogues, not scientists...just a few years ago, some douche on CARB was found to have falsified information regarding CO2 and it was discovered that his "degree" was purchased from some mill in Israel.
http://calwatchdog.com/2012/11/05/carb-scandal-also-shames-california-media/
Ham trees. This bill needs to mandate that everyone grow a ham tree in their yard. And subsidize flying unicorn farms. That means subsidies for the production of magic pixie dust to power thier flying unicorns. Of course the magic pixie dust will be produced “somewhere else” and delivered to Californians in unlimited quantity at no cost.
Just like they think happens with electricity.
$2.14/gallon here today.
“Just like they think happens with electricity.”
They may have small concentrations of fairly sharp people, but several years ago (during the Exxon crisis) a survey discovered that a good number of Californians believe that electricity came from “Power Points”.
I know that some people reading this are, or were until they retired there, hard-working Californians who paid their taxes and took care of their own business. If you live there and pay taxes there, you are supporting and feeding the monster, and that monster adversely affects the rest of the country.
“In short, unelected regulators will be able to limit how far you can drive, ration gas, increase costs, and penalize drivers for using too much gas.”
As mandated by the ELECTED officials.
All the more reason that Progressives should flock to California .... live the communist dream!!!
To offset the loss in revenue we’ll send home the Guv and the rest of the State Government.
Don't need to; Moonbeam will run to DC for disaster funds and postpone legitimate governance for another year.
That will cap State Spending and ensure no further tax increases
You're posting from Colorado, right?
This will be adopted as soon as possible:
...a 50% reduction in petroleum, 50% increase in renewables for electricity generation, and a 50% increase in the energy efficiency of buildings by 2030.
This will be ignored in its entirety, especially if it slows down the reductions above:
In its defense, SB 350 proponents say that SB 350 requires the California Air Resources Board, to be cost effective and technologically feasible (page 4, line 19; its actions be based on validated scientific and engineering data (page 5, line 12); and explicitly requires an economic analysis that takes into account impacts on fuel manufacturers, consumer acceptance, the state’s competitive position with other neighboring states, and the costs to consumers (page 5, lines 30-34)
California, you get what you deserve
JimRob, you are welcome here in Texas any time.
California Freepers, get out before Moonbeam turns the state into Norkland.
Wall in the state and do it.
Idiots.
Mexifornia just keeps finding ways to drive people out of the state
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.