Aside from the question of which party will control the House and Senate for the next two years, next month's mid-term elections also feature a number of important state contests, including California's closely-watched Prop 23, a ballot initiative that would suspend enforcement of the state's major greenhouse gas legislation, Assembly Bill 32. Prop 23 has national implications, since California has taken a leadership position on emissions regulations at a time when national climate policy has become deadlocked. Yet as I've watched the coverage of Prop 23 in the blogosphere and mainstream media, I've been amazed by the consistent mischaracterization of precisely what is at stake in this initiative, most recently in Tom Friedman's Column in yesterday's New York Times. Californians surely deserve a better assessment of the issues involved.
Personally I'm going to vote no on Prop 23. Based on all the advertisements on t.v. about the proposition imploring the people to vote no, there were interesting points brought up. Also, i am in favor of stopping Texas oil companies' schemes to repeal clean energy and air pollution standards. In my opinion, a cleaner California is a better one. However, making such a transition will be arduous and expensive!
No comments:
Post a Comment