When The Bee has to resort to name calling (“AB 32 Foes are Slick – and Predictable,” Editorial, March 14), it’s a pretty good bet that they’re short on facts and logic.
The upshot of the piece is the same old song that we’ve heard for years: that man-made carbon dioxide is causing the planet to overheat, and only severe restrictions on energy production, cargo and passenger transportation, agriculture, brewing, distilling and baking, cement production, manufacturing and construction (to name a few affected industries) can save us – while creating lots of “green jobs.”
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed AB 32 into law in 2006, and although the most draconian of the provisions don’t go into effect until 2012, restrictions began taking effect in 2007 – the so-called “early action items.” Businesses have been making investment decisions for nearly four years now anticipating the full impact of the law.
So where is the cornucopia of new jobs? Until the enactment of AB 32, California’s unemployment rate tracked very closely to the national unemployment rate. Since then, the state’s jobless numbers have steadily outpaced the national figures.
California’s unemployment rate has now climbed a record 2.8 points ahead of the national rate.
In a candid moment, The Bee admits that, “a single-state effort would put California at a competitive disadvantage.”
How could that be, if AB 32’s restrictions are so economically beneficial? Despite the growing chorus of climate scientists who refute the dogma of man-made global warming, and despite the mounting scandals striking at the heart of global warming data, The Bee clings to the notion that radically restricting our economy would save the planet.
Perhaps. But a far more likely scenario is that California would continue to suffer from an exodus of jobs and investment as it has since AB 32 was enacted and the planet would continue to warm and cool as it has done for billions of years.