CABPRO Report

Black, white or pink with purple polka dots

By Dick Marshall

I hear a lot these days about racism, particularly as it is directed against Republicans and Conservatives. Seems that so many people are more than willing to buy into the typical liberal mantra of when you are losing an argument based on the facts, start calling names. The facts are that throughout our history as a nation, it has been the conservative Republican Party and not the Democrat Party that has brought about change in civil rights. While these are facts not in dispute, our liberal, progressive population continues to try to hang the racism bib around our necks. The most current example is the Tea Party movement protest recently held in D.C. The major liberal media are attempting to get all the mileage they can out of a non-issue. Does anyone out there with half a brain believe that if racial slurs had been vocalized, they would not have been caught on camera? That said, as a realist, do I believe that racism in our society is extinct? No, I don’t. There are, and always will be, those who hate just because they want to hate. But those people are a miniscule part of our population, and on both sides of the aisle. Most people today, if they have racial prejudices, choose to keep them to themselves and practice "live and let live."

We all have our biases, our likes and dislikes, even our prejudices. To say we don’t is to say that we thoroughly do not understand our human nature. Each and every one of us likes our self better than we like the other guy. If we don’t we need help. Most of us like our country better than any other. Most of us think our race or ethnic origin is better than others. After all isn’t racial superiority what started the whole slavery thing? And before you start blaming America for slavery, acquaint  yourselves with these few facts. Slavery as we know it began on the north coast of Africa, within the Muslim faith. It was the Portuguese who were the main slave runners. Of all the Africans captured and sold into slavery, only 6% came to the United States. The other 94% went elsewhere. Because of the Civil War we get the main blame. Finally, Lincoln did not free all the slaves, only those in the combative states and cities.

So it is not that we have our individual likes and dislikes, it is the manner in which we deal with them that is important. As for me personally, I would never stand in anyone’s way of advancement or obtaining his or her dreams. I will compete to the best of my ability and let the more qualified person win. On the other hand I don’t  believe that I should give anything to anyone who did not earn it. No one gave me what I earned and I have a better respect for what I earned because of my struggles. I make my choice as to whom I lend my hand and I reserve the right to withdraw it any time I choose. I don’t like whiners, snivelers and complainers. I have no use for those who think that they are entitled to what others worked hard to get. Those who have no respect for the law or those who enforce it irritate me. People who disrespect our service men, women and emergency responders disgust me. Bad neighbors, bad and abusive parents, people that abuse children, deadbeat husbands, people that don’t take personal  responsibility are not my favorites either.

Other than that, if you are responsible for yourself and position in life, if you work hard and take care of your family, respect those who protect you and our way of life, if you like your country and respect its Constitution, are informed and think for yourself, are a good neighbor and friend, etc., etc., then you are my kind of countryman and I applaud you.

I make note here that both sides of the above descriptors are represented by all races, genders, nationalities, political persuasions, sizes, shapes and religions. Other than that, I don’t care if you are black, white or pink with purple polka dots.

It is official, suspend AB32 initiative will be on the November ballot

A  Big tip of the hat to Russ Steele for: 

It is official, suspend AB32 initiative will be on the November ballot

Legislative Potpourri

By Fran Grattan Freedle


The California Budget
Governor Schwarzenegger finally faced reality as he presented the May Revise, the final budget in his second term of office. He is opposing tax  increases though his budget advisors are recommending them as part of the solution.  And, he has focused on the preservation of education, public safety and infrastructure priorities.

Each spending cut has met with fierce objection, but we all need to participate in the resolution of a budget that is $20.1 billion out of balance.

Getting spending under control while not raising taxes further, coupled with job creation, is the only way we will get our economy back on track and the budget back to health.

The Republican goal is an on-time, responsible budget that focuses on controlling spending, reducing the burdens on business and stimulating job growth to get people back to work.

The Governor’s legal woes
The question of whether the Governor legally exercised his authority when he furloughed 200,000 state workers will be reviewed by the California Supreme Court. The case has been given priority. Meanwhile some estimate that furlough costs may exceed the expected savings.

In another action the PTA, Association of School Superintendents, School Board members, 60 children and nine school districts have filed a lawsuit arguing that elected officials, led by the Governor, have failed in their constitutional  obligation to support public schools.

Obamacare Challenges
The Pacific Justice Institute joins many other states in attempting to overturn the recently passed “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act” commonly called Obamacare. The lawsuit attacks several unconstitutional aspects of the Act’s adoption; the starkest is compelling citizens to purchase health care. Other grounds include the imposition of a direct tax and its expansion of   federal police powers, the unprecedented invasion of privacy and the physician-patient privilege, and
disregard for equal protection and preference for some religious objectors over others.

With the federal government empowered to collect, archive and track health care information for all Americans without our consent and against our will, this is a serious loss of our freedom.

Another government takeover
The energy sector seems to be next on the agenda of takeovers. The Global Warming Bill authored by Senators Kerry (D-MA) and Lieberman (I-CT) amounts to a new gasoline tax in the form of higher prices at the pump. This new cap and trade tax system will be comprehensive and complex, and subject to endless tax increases by future Congresses, using our income tax system as a model. This is not a one-time tax, but a new  system of taxation and will allow the Congress to expand endlessly into taxing every aspect of America’s energy economy with estimated costs of $350 billion by 2020. If it passes this year, there is nothing to prevent a future Congress from increasing it next year, just as Congress is  currently discussing increasing a whole array of new taxes – and considering adding yet another one to every purchase called the Value Added Tax (VAT).

Using the Greece cap and energy tax system that began in 2005 as an example, their gas currently costs $7 per gallon, and the promised “green jobs” have destroyed more than they have created.  And their economy is in the tank – pardon the pun.

Fran Freedle is the Nevada County Republican Women's Federated Legislative Chairman

Wiki Fascism

By Ken Croker, Business Manager

The black and white tiles are gone from the floor of my business, save for a small corner of the establishment invisible to the eye of the customer. It has been replaced by a rough looking, dingy, diamond-plate sort of gray tile. And though this has changed the view in my store, it hasn't changed my view of the world in general. Far right, no excuses, no apologies. In spite of all this, I   recently felt a disturbance in the force. It was a minor one, but it was a disturbance nonetheless.

Anyone who knows me through my business knows that I wear two sleeves on my shirt...politics and religion. I have a certificate on my wall over my desk that states that I am a charter member of the vast right wing conspiracy. On the back of my register screen I have a scripture from Isaiah 53. No bones. There it is. There I stand. I don't believe I shall be moving any time soon.

Anyone else who has frequented my establishment since the beginning of the "Great Experiment II," (you know, the one where we elect someone who has no experience, no track record, no past, and absolutely no clue and hope he causes the lame to walk, blind to see, deaf to hear, and   mortgage to be paid) knows of the Wall Of Shame, a.k.a. political humor central. There it is (or was) for all to see and comment on freely, be they for or against my opinion. It sparked laughter. It sparked conversation. It sparked debate. It sparked a desire for some to come in to the store in anticipation of what might be on the wall next.

The previously mentioned disturbance in the force recently came in the form of a left wing extremist with an axe to grind. Said person walked into my establishment and claimed that she heard that we had a bunch of 'fascist propaganda' on the wall, and that now that she was here to see it, she knows her friend wasn't lying and wanted the   corporate phone number. She was informed that she could talk to the manager (me) and that I was "...right over there." The odd thing that the leftist said next is a puzzlement to me. She said "I've  already talked to him about this and he's very rude."  ???

Now I am not whining about not getting my way. I am whining, however, about the fact that they said my having this opinion was offensive to them. Yet if I were to go into a few of the establishments in the area and complain about the Obama stickers or the FREE TIBET (when you purchase one Tibet of equal or greater value) signs, I would probably be chased out of the establishment by a small mob, being hogtied with hemp ropes and beaten with wicker brooms in a cloud of dust and patchouli and a flurry of tie-dye until I submitted to the moon  goddess with an offering of eye of newt and rum.

It's about freedom of speech.

With that said, I revert back to the statement made about my "fascist propaganda." I decided I really needed to look up the word 'fascist' and see if it was defined in the way it was being        propagated by so many. Here is what I came up with. Merriam-Webster defines 'fascist' as follows…

Main Entry: fas·cism
Pronunciation: \ˈfa-ˌshi-zəm also ˈfa-ˌsi-\
Function: noun
Etymology: Italian fascismo, from fascio bundle, fasces, group, from Latin fascis bundle & fasces fasces

Date: 1921
1 often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
2 : a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control <early instances of army fascism and brutality — J. W. Aldridge>

When I read this, I did not see myself or the American version of the right wing at all in the  picture. This is the way I have always seen fascism. I am in agreement with this definition and always hope to stand against such a regime that promotes such ideals.

Searching a little further, I found a rather  extended definition of the word on Wikipedia. I will only print excerpts, and encourage anyone  to look up this definition yourself at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism. If you, dear reader, are not familiar with the phenomenon that is Wikipedia, I will sum it up for you. It is an ever-changing online encyclopedia whose definitions are constantly added to and changed by the readers. Every definition is to be fact checked as such and flagged if the writings are in question. But recently, there has been some controversy regarding the slant of definitions allowed on the site as well as questionable writings going unchecked. So,   with that in mind, some of the definitions          regarding fascism on Wikipedia are as follows...


"Fascism was originally founded by Italian national syndicalists in World War I who combined left-wing and right-wing political views, but gravitated to  the political right in the early 1920s. Scholars   generally consider fascism to be on the far right of the conventional left-right political spectrum."



“They oppose liberalism — as a bourgeois movement — and Marxism — as a proletarian movement — for being exclusive economic class-based movements. Fascists present their  ideology as that of an economically trans-class movement that promotes ending economic class conflict to secure national solidarity. They believe that economic classes are not capable of properly governing a nation, and that a merit-based aristocracy of experienced military persons must rule through regimenting a nation's forces of production and securing the nation's independence. Fascism perceives conservatism as partly valuable for its support of order in society but opposes its typical opposition to change and modernization. Fascism presents itself as a solution to the perceived benefits and disadvantages of conservatism by advocating state-controlled modernization that promotes orderly change while resisting the dangers of pluralism and independent initiative to order in  society.”

Something that has bothered me since I became politically and ideologically aware is the fact that anytime I hear talk of the likes of Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, etc... I hear them put into the right wing dog pile. The phrase used in earnest regarding these historical figures is 'right wing extremists'. Now I hear my person and those I try to surround myself with called the very same thing. So, as   you can imagine, I take great issue with this terminology.

I will now address those who think I am a fascist or think I should be lumped in with some of the greatest enemies of humanity. The Baathist party (who Saddam Hussein claimed as his party) was conceived in Paris by two French/Syrian scholars in the 1930s. The long-winded name was the Baath Arab Socialist Party. This tyrannical and genocidal movement was frocked with fascist ideologies to the point of Nazism. Hitler persecuted Jews, gypsies, gays, Poles, Russians, Czechs, and the mentally or physically handicapped as well as the elderly. Mussolini, in his ascent to power,   took over factories, the press, railroads, and communications in Italy. He later banned free  elections and routed out anyone who took issue with his power.

This reminds me of another fascist leader who took his plays right out of the Mussolini handbook, "Fascism for Dummies." Hugo Chavez has been taking over all broadcast outlets, the newspapers, the power stations, and just made a grab at his nation’s steel manufacturers and producers. He just started a Twitter site for people to snitch out other citizens who disagree with him. Sounds like the rat email address our fearless leader opened up to turn in those who dissented against the    Socialized Health Care Bill for purposes of 're-educating'.


I am a right-winger. I am also a Christian. My political views and faith allow me to believe that you have the right to express your opinion regardless of whether or not I am offended. This is in diametric opposition to the ideals of Fascism.

On the flip side of that, I also have the right in this great country, under the watchful eye of the   Creator, to express my opinion as well. I also have the right to share my beliefs. I have a right to vote my conscience and opinion. I have a right to be happy or unhappy with the leaders of my city, county, state, and federal governments. But it seems that in this country of rights and freedoms, these rights and freedoms are only observed and reserved for those who disagree with me or the folks who share my ideals. And in the end, WE are the ones who are told we are offending people.

That is Fascism. I am offended.

For the record, upon reading the above definitions, I tend to see these very qualities that I am being accused of foisting upon the masses embodied in our current administration. We are having our   societal classes stripped off like breakaways on the sidelines at an NBA game. Our thoughts are held borderline suspect according to the terrorist lexicon put out by the Department of Homeland Security. Our ability to achieve is being deemed unfair to those who would rather not work as hard, and therefore, we are being taxed extra heavy for achieving our life goals. As has been said, a government cannot give something that it has not first taken away. In the eyes of our government, as in all fascist regimes before and  elsewhere, the playing field for the commoners is being leveled, except that the head of the table is being reserved for the governing body, with the choicest foods being served to themselves. The only thing left is to have vocal dissenters persecuted, prosecuted, or executed. Then the seed of Fascism will have been watered, fertilized, and brought to fruition.


I have a right to my opinion, as do you. So far, we have neither given up that right, nor had it taken from us by force. I have my right to express my opinion in the form I choose, and I choose humor and satire mounted on my wall for all to chuckle at. If some don't find it funny, don't laugh. If some do, laugh. If some are offended, well, grow some skin. Lord knows I have to in order to withstand the slant of opinion in this world. This land is still free, and until it is no longer, those of us on the right should exercise the same liberties that the left abuses so frequently. And we should do so without having to hide our beliefs in a world that flaunts its opposition so boldly.

 
"The tree of liberty...."

Ken Croker lives and works in Nevada County.

Response to President Calderon

By Congressman Tom McClintock

May 20, 2010 6:26 PM
House Chamber, Washington,  D.C.            
M. Speaker:

I rise to take strong exception to the speech of the President of Mexico while in this chamber today.

The Mexican government has made it very clear for many years that it holds American sovereignty in contempt and President Calderon’s behavior as a guest of the Congress confirms and underscores this attitude.

It is highly inappropriate for the President of Mexico to lecture Americans on American immigration policy, just as it would be for  Americans to lecture Mexico on its laws. 

It is obvious that President Calderon does not understand the nature of America or the purpose of our immigration law.

Unlike Mexico’s immigration law -- which is brutally exclusionary -- the purpose of America’s law is not to keep people out. It is to assure that as people come to the United States, they do so with the  intention of becoming Americans and of raising their children as Americans.

Unlike Mexico, our nation embraces immigration and what makes that possible is assimilation.  A century ago President Teddy Roosevelt put it this way. He said:

"In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language ... and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people."

That is how we have built one great nation from the people of all the nations of the world.

The largest group of immigrants now comes from Mexico. A recent RAND study discovered that during most of the 20th century, while our immigration laws were actually enforced,assimilation worked and made possible the swift attainment of the American dream for millions of immigrants seeking to escape conditions in Mexico.

That is the broader meaning of our nation’s motto, “E Pluribus Unum” – from many people, one people, the American people.

But there is now an element in our political  structure that seeks to undermine that concept of “E Pluribus Unum.” It seeks to hyphenate Americans, to develop linguistic divisions, to assign rights and preferences based on race and ethnicity, and to elevate devotion to foreign ideologies and traditions, while at the same time denigrating American culture, American values and American founding principles. In order to do so, they know that they have to stop the process of assimilation. In order to do that, they must undermine our immigration laws.

It is an outrage that a foreign head of state would appear in this chamber and actively seek to do so. And it is a disgrace that he would be cheered on from the left wing of the White House and by many Democrats in this Congress.

Arizona has not adopted a new immigration law. All it has done is to enforce existing law that President Obama refuses to enforce. It is hardly a radical policy to suggest that if an officer on a routine  traffic stop encounters a driver with no driver’s  license, no passport, and who doesn’t speak    English, that maybe that individual might be here illegally.

And to those who say we must reform our immigration laws – I reply that we don’t need to reform them – we need to enforce them. Just as every other government does. Just as Mexico does.

Above all, this is a debate of, by and for the  American people. If President Calderon wishes to participate in that debate, I invite him to obey our immigration laws, apply for citizenship, do what 600,000 LEGAL immigrants to our nation are doing right now, learn our history and our customs, and become an American.  And then he will have every right to participate in that debate.

Until then, I would politely invite him to have the courtesy while a guest of this Congress to abide by the fundamental rules of diplomacy between civilized nations not to meddle in each other’s    domestic debates.

      Congressman Tom McClintock represents California's 4th Congressional District.

US Census

By CABPRO Staff

April 14, 2010 marked the last day for Americans to mail back their 2010 Census questionnaires.  For those who missed the deadline or declined to fill out the census all together, a census worker will most likely be knocking at your door sometime after May 1^st.  

The 2010 Census is a count of everyone living in the United States and is mandated by the U.S. Constitution.  The purpose of collecting Census data is so that the information can be used to apportion congressional seats to states, distribute over $400 billion in federal funds to tribal, state and local governments every year, as well as determine what local community services are needed.

To say that there is much controversy over the 2110 Census would be putting it mildly.

Nearly everyone you talk to has a “Census Story” to tell.  Or, at the very least, complaints about many of the personal questions asked in the Census.

In early March a tax-payer funded form letter announcing the impending arrival of the 2010 Census form was sent to every household in America. It thanked you in advance for filling out the form completely and returning it promptly.  The second paragraph of the letter read as follows:

 “Your response is important.  Results from the 2010 Census will be used to help each community get its fair share of government funds for highways, schools, health facilities, and many other programs you and your neighbors need. Without a complete, accurate census, your community may not receive its fair share.”

So, the U.S. Census Bureau spent millions of dollars sending this letter out to every household  in American, alerting them to be on the lookout for their census form. Why couldn’t this letter have just been included WITH the census form?

The term “fair share” is used in this letter TWICE. Has being an American now been reduced to “fair share”.  What ever happened to working hard to make something of yourself?  Now, being an American means standing in line for your ‘fair share”?

When the 2010 Census actually did arrive, more than one-quarter of the questions dealt with race and ethnicity.  This is none of the governments business.  If this is indeed the 2010 U.S. Census, then why is their a need to know race and ethnicity?  Shouldn’t their just be a box with AMERICAN next to it for you to check?

And how about the questions about do you rent or own your own home and do you have a mortgage or do you own it free and clear? How is this information any of the governments business?  Could it be that this information is being collected for purely political reasons?  Are they checking to see how many whites own homes as compared to Hispanics, Blacks and other races?  You betcha!

Bitterness towards our government is growing every day.  This 2010 U.S. Census is filled with intrusive questions and to top it all off, we have a President who refuses to release any of his personal information.  We are Americans and that should be all we need to disclose.

Become an AB32 California Jobs Initiative activist!

By Russ Steele

The good news is the California Jobs Initiative has received overwhelming support from the citizens of California. The Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, the California Hispanic Chambers of Commerce, the National Federation of Independent Business, and the California Jobs Initiative coalition submitted more than 800,000 signatures - nearly twice what was required by law - to place this measure on the November ballot.

The bad news is that the Attorney General of California, Jerry Brown, who opposes the suspension of AB32, tinkered with the title of the initiative. He removed the easy to remember California Jobs Initiative and replaced it with this long complex and misleading title. This is the title that will show up on the November Ballot Measure: SUSPENDS AIR POLLUTION CONTROL LAWS REQUIRING MAJOR POLLUTERS TO REPORT  AND REDUCE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS THAT CAUSE GLOBAL WARMING UNTIL       UNEMPLOYMENT DROPS BELOW SPECIFIED LEVEL FOR A FULL YEAR.

The Attorney General and his environmentalist friends hope that voters will find this wording confusing, and will stop reading after the first few words, then vote no on the measure. In addition, the pollution phrasing allows the opposition to cast the initiative as allowing oil companies to destroy California’s air quality.

Actions the environmental groups have already launched: demonizing the oil companies that funded the signature collection with a web site, Facebook page and Twitter ad campaigns.  In my opinion, this was a coordinated effort by the AG and leading environmental groups to re-brand the suspension of AB32 as a clean air issue -- not a jobs issue.  It is important that everyone reading this column help combat this reframing. This is NOT an air quality issue.

AB32 was NOT designed to stop air pollution. AB32 was designed to stop global warming. California has some of the nation’s strictest environmental laws with or without AB32, and even CARB admits in its scoping plan: “California acting alone cannot reduce emissions sufficiently to change the course of climate change worldwide.”

The Initiative does NOT stop the creation of green jobs. Green energy venture capitalists can still go to the bank, apply for loans and start businesses with or without AB32. However, our opponents know these businesses can only succeed by picking taxpayer pockets to funnel massive subsidies to Silicon Valley millionaires and their buddy Al Gore.

The reframing and misinformation campaigns are being well funded by environmental groups like the Sierra Club, Green Tech Action Funds, Natural Resources Defense Council and Environmental   Defense Fund.


While Californians everywhere are for clean air, we must not let this issue be hijacked by a misinformation campaign, such as this one launched by Al Gore’s Repower America, which calls AB32  Suspension Measure a “dirty energy proposition.”

The dirty energy proposition would kill various  California clean energy and clean air efforts --  including a goal of reaching 33% of our electricity from renewable sources within a decade. The proposition would hurt our environment and our health, while blocking many of the tens of thousands of jobs that come along with a clean  energy industry.

This week's media coverage around the ballot measure will be the first time that most Californians hear about the "dirty energy proposition." Let's make sure that they hear the truth -- by filling our local papers with letters to the editor opposing this dangerous proposal.

It is time for every citizen to become an activist and restore California’s economy. We must go  toe-to-toe with this misinformation letter-writing campaign. I am asking that everyone reading  this column commit to writing a letter to The Union, Auburn Journal, Sierra Sun, or Appeal-Democrat. If you see an online article in these newspapers, post the facts about jobs in the comments section. If you have Facebook or Twitter accounts, link to positive stories about the AB32 Suspension and the resulting job creation.  

When writing, remember our opponents clearly don't have the facts on their side, so they have  resorted to demonizing the oil companies, some of California’s largest employers. They are doing  everything possible to mislead voters on what the initiative will and will not do. The truth is on your side.  Share that truth with your family, friends, and neighbors. Save your job and the jobs of your neighbors!

Russ Steele is a freelance writer who blogs at NC Media Watch where he expands on issues presented here.  

LAO Findings: Jobs Will Leave the State

By Assemblyman Dan Logue

At my request, last week the Legislative Analyst’s Office released a report on the true costs of  Assembly Bill 32 and the impact it will have on California’s economy. For those of you that are not yet familiar with AB 32, the “Global Warming Solutions Act,” as it is otherwise known, was passed in 2006 in response to growing fears of global warming and rising sea levels. The bill essentially gave the California Air Resources Board the authority to implement a series of extreme regulations in order to force our carbon emissions back down to 1990 levels by 2020. This is truly a go-at-it-alone effort if there ever was one, far surpassing any greenhouse gas regulations that are currently in place worldwide. As I have said time and time again, these draconian measures will only push our already fragile economy over the edge and do little to combat actual climate change. It seems almost as if CARB has failed to take into account the 2.26 million people out of work and the growing exodus of businesses from California.

The LAO analyzed the full scale of damage our state will incur when trying to address the climate change issue alone. Their findings are alarming and give significant cause for reconsideration of whether or not AB 32 should continue to be implemented in this economy. During these trying times, I feel that it is crucial for all the facts to be available to the public so that they can make an informed decision for their future and that of our great state. 

In their analysis, the LAO concludes that California’s economy will be negatively impacted if we continue to implement climate change related policies that are not adopted anywhere else. By trying to stop global warming single-handedly, our relative prices for energy, such as electricity, will be going through the roof. This, in turn, will cause the price of goods and services in the state to rise; lowering business profits, reducing production,  income, and most importantly, jobs. Just take a moment to imagine what that would mean for       a state that already has well over 12% of its   population unemployed. 

The impact of AB 32 will be felt statewide, and while the effects may only be “modest” in certain industries, for many others it will be devastating. As businesses that cannot provide “green jobs” flee to states with lower regulatory costs, they will be taking our jobs and state revenues with them. Because California’s economy depends so heavily on interstate and international trade, we are especially vulnerable to outsourcing and competition when prices start to rise. The LAO found that CARB’s scoping plan has done a poor job of analyzing such leakages and costs associated with implementation. It then begs the question, how is it that CARB (a board of non-elected officials) can be given the power to enact the most severe environmental regulations known to date, without an accurate analysis of what it could mean for our economy?

California is not in a position to gamble with its  future and the report’s findings only serve to confirm what I have been saying all along. With our state’s deficit at an all time high, these senseless regulations threaten our hopes of economic recovery. AB32 will drive costs up statewide and cause further havoc for our already struggling businesses. It is time for us to seek out the truth and make the choices necessary to get our state working again. The bottom line is that people’s lives will be changed and they deserve a voice of reason.

Numerous studies rank California last in places to start a business in the U.S. It has the worst  regulations and one of the highest tax rates of all the states. With a 12.6 percent unemployment rate and 2.3 million people without jobs, an economic recovery is getting more difficult by the second.  AB32 will be the tipping point to ensure that  California, by going it alone, will never recover from its recession.

Assemblyman Dan Logue, R-Linda, represents the 3rd Assembly District in the California Legislature.  He is vice-chair of the Assembly Committee on Jobs, Economic Development and the Economy, and Chairman of the Assembly Republican Task Force on Jobs and the Economy.