Posted on 09/12/2006 2:57:39 PM PDT by calcowgirl
Even by California standards, the number of ill-conceived, deceptive propositions on the ballot this November is unusually high. A perfect example is Proposition 87, which would impose a tax on in-state oil production and expire when $4 billion had been generated to pay for a variety of alternative energy programs.
Proponents' TV ads, which assail the high cost of gasoline and tout Proposition 87 as a means of relief, are hopelessly confused. The primary effect of adding billions to the cost of oil produced in California would be to ensure that state refineries look for cheaper oil on the global market, thus discouraging the production of oil in California, the third-largest oil-producing state. So Proposition 87 would both increase the state's dependence on foreign oil and lessen global supplies, driving up the price. How on earth does this make sense?
Beyond the basic flaw in Proposition 87's logic, there are three other strong reasons to reject the measure.
The first is that it is so sloppily crafted that it amounts to an invitation to endless litigation. According to the Legislative Analyst's Office, the initiative language detailing how much each barrel of oil would be taxed can be read in two ways, one of which would yield far more revenue than the other. Talk about a basic mistake.
The second is that the most generous sponsor of the initiative's petition drive – Silicon Valley billionaire Vinod Khosla – stands to directly benefit from its passage because of his huge investment in an ethanol manufacturing plant near Fresno. So much for Proposition 87's idealistic veneer.
The third is that it is simply not true that research into alternative energy needs even more subsidies. With oil more than $70 a barrel, the private sector has massive incentives to come up with a cheaper energy source – and it is responding.
The bottom line: Khosla's get-richer-quick scheme is a stain on the ballot. Vote No on Proposition 87.
Tuesday, September 12, 2006
Oil Tax Initiative Strikes It... GreenThere's more evidence that the campaign against, and for, Proposition 87 might end up being the most expensive initiative battle this fall.
The "No on 87" campaign reported more than $2.5 million in contributions yesterday, and almost all of that was from just two oil companies.
To date, the campaign against Prop 87-- which would impose a new tax on inland oil drilling and use the money for alternative energy research-- has raised more than $35 million dollars. About $24 million of that has been raised just in the last two months. TV ads opposing Prop 87 are already on the airwaves.
Today, contributions were reported from Houston-based Plains Exploration & Production (whose website proclaims its goals of oil exploration "onshore and offshore California") and California-based Occidental Petroleum Corporation, which has donated more than $6 million so far to the effort to defeat 87.
Of course, the "Yes on 87" campaign is no slouch, either-- hauling in almost $22 million dollars. Like their opponents, most of that, about $17 million, has come in recently.
Meantime, a different initiative may give Prop 87 a run for its money, no pun intended. The forces for and against Proposition 86-- the increase in tobacco taxes to fund health care programs-- have amassed a combined $51 million in campaign contributions so far.
And the election is still eight weeks away.
I fall out of my chair shocked at how misguided CA is (sarcasm). I moved out of that state for reasons similiar to this. If you care about specifcs let me know.
Here is the ramifications of CA's prop 87. Oil companies don't do business there, thereby removing any tax revenue that currently exists. Those evil big oil companies go to Florida, Texas, Alaska, Louisiana, Georgia, etc. and "send" gasoline and oil to California. California will be so outraged at the mass exodus of "big oil" that they will pass a law saying that only gas produced from oil in CA can be sold in CA. Then, citizens of that state will be forced to pay a larger % more for their fuel then they already are. Then, everybody else will continue to leave the state in larger numbers.
Talk about economic degenerates. I asked it before of CA politicians, I'll say it again, "What are they thinking?"
If they were really smart, they would give tax breaks to big oil and offer further tax breaks on "alternative fuel" production. That would bring those big evil oil companies in along with all their obscene proffits and revenue. They might even need more workers to pay. Those employees might make enough to pay the rediculous income taxes of CA. Oh the humanity.
This particular one isn't the politicians (at least, on the surface). It is sponsored by a group of venture capitalists that have discovered a big piggy-bank funded by the California taxpayer. They use their millions to sponsor and market initiatives on the ballot, and then reap the rewards.
If they were really smart, they would give tax breaks to big oil and offer further tax breaks on "alternative fuel" production.
No, no, no... we couldn't have that! Global warming and all, ya know? (That you can blame on the politicians!)
I don't care what they're thinking.
Unless they pass a law forbiding US citizens to leave the state, that is exactly what I'm planning to do!
I agree that mosr California residents can (or won't due to a variety of things), but just about every retired person can.
Bump!
They can't for an obvious reason. They'd initially have to cut spending.
Legislative Republicans have been promoting this approach, cutting spending to finance productive incentives, but Schwarzenegger and the Democrats have turned a cold shoulder and a clenched fist to these outlandish proposals.
"Cut spending when we already have a good structural deficit going? Never!" is the stock answer, offered in unison, by the legislative majority and the governor.
That's three times we agree. :-)
(No more Olmert! No more Kadima! No more Oslo! )
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.