Prop 23 Update: Schwarzenegger’s global warming is over, but the economic horror continues!

Russ Steele

With news that Grass Valley will be moving the assembly and testing of their switchers out of Nevada County, and maybe even the state, one has to wonder if this is just local event, or part of a much larger exodus of manufacturing from the state due to excessive regulations and the pending cost of AB-32, the Global Warming Solutions of Act of 2006.

The California Manufacturers and Technology Association (CMTA) released a new report last week that suggests costs associated with AB 32 may be a lot higher than previously estimated. CARB issues an economic impact report in 2010, not not much analysis have been done since that CARB report was soundly criticized for being vague and incomplete.

The CMTA commission Andrew Chang & Company to conduct a fiscal and economic impact study on the economic impact of AB-32. They found that the average California family will end up paying an additional $2,500 annually by 2020 when AB 32 is fully implemented. Based on the most conservative estimates the state is expected to lose an additional 262,000 jobs, 5.6 percent of the gross state product, and a whopping $7.4 billion through decreased annual state and local tax revenues as a result,.

Here are the Key Findings of the Study:The Fiscal and Economic Impact of the California Global Warming Solutions Act (AB 32)

 In our optimistic case, AB 32 will cost consumers $135.8 billion cumulatively by 2020. This is equivalent to almost two-and-a-half times the annual spend on K-12 education. 

 Annual AB 32 direct costs total $35.3 billion in 2020. This is equivalent to about 40 percent of California’s General Fund revenues, and exceeds the General Fund collections for Sales and Use Tax, Corporation Tax, Motor Vehicle Fees, Insurance Tax, Estate Taxes, Liquor Tax and Tobacco Tax combined. 

 26 percent of emissions reductions will stem from the economic slowing caused by AB 32. 

 AB 32 lowers California’s 2020 GSP by $153.2 billion, amounting to a loss of 5.6 percent of GSP. 

 California will have 262,000 fewer jobs in 2020 because of AB 32. 

 By 2020, increased energy prices will increase household expenses for the average family by $2,500 per year. 

 AB 32 will reduce state and local tax revenues by over $7.4 billion annually in 2020. $6.8 billion is lost from state revenues and $640 million from local revenues. The State losses are roughly equivalent to the amount that is needed to fund the Governor’s entire Local Realignment initiative or more than a decade of funding Children’sMedical Services program under the Department of Health Care Services. 

“These policies will create a large but hidden tax on families and will add new burdens to a fragile state economy,” said Jack Stewart, President of the California Manufacturers and Technology Association (CMTA). “This new tax is not what we need while Californians struggle to find jobs, meet mortgage payments and maintain a reasonable quality of life.”

While many larger corporations will cope with the increased tax burden and just pass the cost on to the consumer, small Nevada County businesses lack that flexibility.  The only solution maybe to just go out of business, or in the Grass Valley case just move operations to a more cost competitive location.

According to John Kabateck, California Executive Director of the National Federation of Independent Business:

“This comprehensive report tells us that small business will get hit from all sides.  Consumers will have less money to buy our products, employers will be forced to purchase more affordable products outside of California, and our own energy costs will make it nearly impossible to stay in business.”

While policy makers need to seek more cost effective solution to reduce GHG, they may also need to review the need for such drastic economic action. Due to the economic slow down across the nation the US is approaching the 1990 GHG emission level and global warming has stalled out, with no warming since 1998.  For 14 years there has been no warming, with a growing cooling trend in the last 10 years. The need for AB-32 has come and gone, the Schwarzenegger horror move is over!  It is time for a reassessment of the need for AB-32.

You can down load the Full Study Report HERE.

H/T to Climate Depot and IVN


About Russ Steele
Freelance writer and climate change blogger. Russ spent twenty years in the Air Force as a navigator specializing in electronics warfare and digital systems. After his service he was employed for sixteen years as concept developer for TRW, an aerospace and automotive company, and then was CEO of a non-profit Internet provider for 18 months. Russ's articles have appeared in Comstock's Business, Capitol Journal, Trailer Life, Monitoring Times, and Idaho Magazine.

27 Responses to Prop 23 Update: Schwarzenegger’s global warming is over, but the economic horror continues!

  1. Arthur M. Day. says:

    Will the last person to leave California please blow out the candles.

    • Michael Anderson says:

      What the heck. Let’s do some math:

      If ten thousand people per day, a whole city roughly the size of Grass Valley!, were to leave California, it would take ten and a half years for the entire state to be depopulated.

      That’s every day of the week, including Sundays and holidays. And Thanksgiving and Christmas days too! And we’re assuming no one would be coming in the other direction, which would be ridiculous since that many people leaving would crash real estate properties to the point that you could pick up a prime spot almost for free. Living in Tornado Alley or moving to sunny California and getting a free house…hmmm, hard to decide.

      Somehow I just can’t imagine that we need to worry about a completely depopulated state of California.

      Yours in reality,
      Michael A.

  2. Arthur M. Day. says:

    Mr. Anderson;
    Patience, my boy, patience. Since it is life threatening for Devout Democrats to admit that they are wrong about anything, the destruction can only continue, the Sane Drain having removed the voters needed to remove said Devout Democrats.

    • Michael Anderson says:

      Arthur says that the the state will be taken over by “Devout Democrats,” and the Sane Drain will continue to motivate people like himself to move out of California.

      Ummm, hasn’t this already happened? Aren’t we sort of already at the end game of all of this?

  3. Arthur M. Day. says:

    Mr. Anderson;
    The Devout Democrats took over the state years ago, they are the ones who have driven CA over the cliff. The end of the end game is bankruptcy of the state.
    I am a member of the Sane Drain. I bought a little house on two 25’x100′ lots in N. Redondo Beach for $18,750 in 1965. My payments were $187.50/mo., including my property taxes. I could have taken the $265K I received when I sold it in 1992 and bought anything anywhere in CA and stayed under the Prop 13 umbrella. It never even occurred to me to do that, even I could read the handwriting on the wall.
    Has it occurred to you that you are ignoring the damning study Russ posted and heckling me?

    • Michael Anderson says:

      Yeah, I’m not much for studies in general. There’s lots of them, and you can pretty much cherry pick the ones you want to prove your point. Sure, they can be useful but the person doing the citing with an ax to grind changes the total information picture by her observation.
      I like the empirical view, and as I noted it would take over 10 yrs. of a city the size of Grass Valley leaving the state daily in order to completely depopulate California.
      As for your charge of heckling, I am open to suggestions on how else to respond to your simplistic homilies. It is not my goal to heckle you, and I apologize if that is how my responses make you feel.
      Michael A.

  4. Arthur M. Day. says:

    Typical Devout Democrat, ignore the study that makes clear the Green Democrat Disaster, drop an insult, and return to wallowing around in your benighted fog shrouded swamp of self congratulation.

    • Michael Anderson says:

      Arthur, I’m a registered Republican so I don’t know who you’re talking about.

    • Too many RINO’s Arthur. Hard to say why someone calling themselves a Republican would preach socialism.

      • My guess would be it was only for convenience. Maybe to see what robocalls and mail registered Republicans in Nevada City get, as the Michael P. Anderson of Nevada City is also an Al Gore fan who thinks Bush v. Gore was a travesty of justice.

      • Michael Anderson says:

        To be more accurate Greg, I am not a “fan” of Al Gore. I just believe he would have made a better president than George Bush.

        But that’s not a very revealing statement, since I believe Kim Kardashian would have made a better president than George Bush. The bar’s pretty low on that comparison designator.

        Regarding Bush v. Gore, I’m 100% positive that this SCOTUS ruling, ironically using the 14th Amendment to make the case, will be right up there with Dred Scott.

        And what’s up with the “Michael P. Anderson of Nevada City,” why the personal citation of what town I live in? More of your famous bad behavior? Hey Russ, please remind Greg of the decorum required in these forums. Thanks.

      • For the record, mandersonation signed up for Al Gore’s twitter feed.

      • For the record, “More of your famous bad behavior?” is also defamatory.

      • Michael Anderson says:

        Greg wrote: “For the record, mandersonation signed up for Al Gore’s twitter feed.”

        Here’s some facts for you:

        1. I don’t use Twitter.
        2. I haven’t used “mandersonation” since 2009, when you tar-babied that term into the ground. It’s a dead fish, Greg. Give it up.
        3. I think Al Gore is an idiot, and his silly movie is hocus pocus.
        4. Describing “bad behavior” isn’t defamatory if it’s proven to be true.

      • You may not use twitter now, but mandersonation did. What a twit.

        “famous bad behavior” would be hard for you to prove, Mike, and it wouldn’t help that I’ve never been arrested and have never been sued. Looks like my kid also turned out OK.

        But here, you’ve failed to identify just what horrible phrase I’ve used that it is that is defamatory, and you’re obviously hoping I will “go wobbly” over your threat to talk to your lawyer, saying multiple times I should be afraid. Unfortunately, that is not the first time you tried to cause me fear. It worked the first time, and I really did consult with a lawyer. My wife really was shaking, afraid a climate activist really was threatening us, but in the end I convinced her it was probably just some empty words from a geek wannabe engaged in schoolyard threats.

        What a shame your mandersonation alter ego bit the big one.

      • Michael Anderson says:

        Greg, thanks for providing more documentation for my Goodknight file. I do appreciate it very much.

      • Since there’s been no followup or a demand for a retraction of whatever the mystery defamation might be, I’ll assume Mike’s lawyer told him some variation of “there’s nothing defamatory there”.

      • Michael Anderson says:

        You can make any assumption you want.

        Perhaps you’ve had no formal theatre training.

        Suspense is everything.

      • Greg Goodknight says:

        What suspense?

  5. Arthur M. Day. says:

    If it walks like a duck, etc.

  6. Mike Anderson (I’m assuming this is the same MA of Nevada City who also goes by the handle “mandersonation”) may be the only registered Republican who is on the record stating opposing Obamacare is unpatriotic. He has also been absolutely rabid on the subject of catastrophic anthropogenic climate change and the evils of “carbon dumping”.

    Look at the bright side of AB32… it is accelerating the state towards bankruptcy and the adult supervision it will take to balance the books.

    • Michael Anderson says:

      Cool, looks like I’ll be visiting my lawyer again this afternoon. Keep it up Greg, time for you to start getting nervous.

      • Bush had an MBA in business from the Ivy League School. But, if a RINO thinks that is of no value I guess we get it.

      • Your threats are again noted, Mike, as is your continued malice.

      • Michael Anderson says:

        I guess lawyers don’t make you nervous, Greg. That’s all I was referring to; but you knew that didn’t you?

      • What Mike might want to review with his lawyer (shouldn’t take more than one billable hour) is this FAQ regarding online defamations from the Electronic Frontier Foundation:

        In fact, anyone hosting or posting in a blog should probably be aware of it. That FAQ used to be expressly linked by WordPress in their Terms Of Service but perhaps no more.

        What Mike thinks I’ve written that was false and defamatory, I’ve not a clue. If he can afford to have his lawyer dig for something that is more than just an inconvenient truth, good for his lawyer.

      • He is one of those rich Republicans. Price is no object nor is the tax rate.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: