Skip to content
Sign up free
News

Cap-and-Trade: Good for California?

By Susannah Kopecky

2-minute read

Governor Schwarzenegger applauded the passage of a statewide cap and trade tax Tuesday, lauding the state’s Air Resources Board for drafting  “the nation’s first cap and trade program,” according to a statement  from the Governor’s Office. This is nothing that the governor should  be proud of.

Assembly Bill 32, the Global Warming  Solutions Act of 2006, introduced by Fabian Nunez, blames individuals  and businesses for climate change, and seeks to punish all for the alleged  crimes against the earth. Like the 20x2020 challenge, AB 32 seeks to  impose artificial restrictions on California citizens. While the 20x2020  program, as signed into law earlier this month, will mandate that all  citizens must cut their water consumption by 20 percent by 2020, AB 32 mandates  that also by 2020, the California will have to reduce carbon emissions by 25 percent. How does AB 32 propose we drastically  cut down on emissions without harming businesses? With “green” solutions,  of course, to be determined at a later time. Coupled with this bill,  the governor also recently signed legislation to open the playing field  more for alternative fuel providers, despite the fact that gasoline  remains the most plentiful and readily available and affordable source  of fuel for the masses.

In a statement, the governor applauded  the drafting of the cap and trade program:  “California has led  the nation and the world in developing green policies and programs,  and we are continuing to take action with a first-in-the-nation cap-and-trade  program… I have no doubt the nation’s first cap-and-trade program  will also drive innovation and generate green jobs.” Schwarzenegger  also applauded the California Air Resources Control Board for “laying  the groundwork in developing a program with flexibility to achieve emission  reductions at lower costs.” At lower costs to whom? Certainly  not to business, which Schwarzenegger has claimed he wants to bring  back to the state. What business would come back to California, where  it would be taxed at a higher rate than surrounding states for being productive?

By taxing innovation and the much-maligned  big business, lawmakers are looking to put the squeeze on older industries  and instead favor up-and-coming green designations. Unfortunately green enthusiasts, the entire basis of the cap-and-trade  argument is now being undermined: more individuals are questioning whether  global warming is indeed man-made, or if global warming is indeed a  firm phenomenon itself. The recent news of leaked emails showing skepticism  on man-made global warming has been a damning indictment.

Cap-and-trade is just one more way  to tax and discourage innovation. Why a self-proclaimed Republican governor,  who made his own vast wealth working in business, would support such  a plan, defies reason.

Tags: News

Adhere to the IVN etiquette

By posting a comment, you agree to adhere to our etiquette rules: No partisan attacks, no personal attacks, substantiate your sources, no self-promotion.

Get IVN’s Free Weekly Newsletter:Get IVN’s Free Newsletter

Get IVN’s Free Weekly Newsletter:Get IVN’s Free Newsletter

Nonpartisan Issues. Diverse Perspectives.

Check your inbox and click the link to confirm.

Republish this article

Republishing guidelines

Republish IVN articles for free. Independent Voter News articles may be republished online or in print under a Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 4.0 license, on these terms:

  1. Credit the author and IVN. Keep the byline ("By Author Name, Independent Voter News") and the attribution note at the end, which links to the original.
  2. Keep the meaning. You may update time and place references and apply your house style. You may trim for length, as long as the cuts don't change the meaning or misrepresent the author. Keep the headline. Mark any additions as your own (for example "Additional reporting by ...").
  3. Translations are welcome. Translate faithfully, add "Translated from English by [your outlet]", and tell us at editor@ivn.us.
  4. Keep the links, including the link to the original article.
  5. Keep the tracking image. The HTML includes a 1-pixel image that counts readers on your page. It collects no personal information.
  6. Photos and illustrations. Images credited to IVN may be used with this article only. Images credited to others (AP, Getty, Unsplash, Wikimedia and so on) stay under their owners' terms. Secure the rights or switch "Include images" off.
  7. Don't sell it. You can't sell our articles or sell ads specifically against them. Your normal site advertising is fine.
  8. No implied endorsement. Don't suggest that IVN or the author endorses you, your candidates or your causes, or that donations to you support IVN.
  9. Keep labels. Opinion or analysis pieces keep that label.
  10. Point search engines to the original. Where your CMS allows, set the canonical URL to the original IVN article.
  11. No bulk or automated republishing, and don't submit our articles to aggregators (Apple News, Google News, MSN) as your own.
  12. Corrections and removals. Update your copy when we correct it, and remove it promptly if we ask. We'll contact you at the email you give us.
  13. Questions or print republication: editor@ivn.us.

IVN staff: fill in who you're inviting above, then create the invite.

Preparing the article

Cap-and-Trade: Good for California?

Choose a format
  • HTML
  • Email HTML
  • Markdown
  • Formatted (.docx)
  • Plain text
  • WordPress blocks
  • PDF
Choose a platform

Photos credited to others need their owners' permission.

To for

Republishing somewhere else? Questions? editor@ivn.us