Tag Archives: Prop 87

Framing The Fall: Bush On The Ballot in CA

The California Courage Campaign has launched a new campaign for the fall focusing on five initiatives that will be on the Nov 7 ballot here in California. Last year we had great success as part of the progressive coalition that defeated Arnold’s reform initiatives. This year, Arnold is, probably wisely, keeping his distance from them. Without a unifying force behind the initiatives, we knew we had to come up with a theme, a narrative, with which to frame the initiatives in a way that would educate and motivate the ballot measure-weary electorate. And this year, what better motivator for voters in our great blue state, and, truly, what better uniter of what ordinarily would be disparate progressive groups than the decider himself, George W. Bush.

Yes, this fall, George Bush’s agenda will be on the November ballot in California, and we’re calling on our supporters and all of you to join us in saying simply “George Bush, you’re not welcome here” by signing our open letter to President Bush. Go ahead, try it. The comments section is particularly therapeutic.

More over the flip.

Rick Jacobs, Chair of The California Courage Campaign, launched the campaign with an e-mail to supporters yesterday:

The issues vary, but the effects are  the same. Conservatives plan to make California a national leader in regressive  policies and unfair practices.

Courage Campaign, with your help, wants to stop Bush and Co. from:

  • Invading our privacy
  • Giving tax breaks to Big Tobacco and Big Oil
  • Corrupting fair elections
  • Handing over our state to rich real estate developers

We are mounting a concerted effort to keep Bush, Karl Rove and their conservative special interests out of California. We've stepped up to coordinate with dozens of other progressive organizations around the state, from the ACLU to the League of Conservation Voters to the California Nurses Association and together, we will send George Bush's dangerous policies packing.

We’ve launched a Bush in CA website where we describe the 5 initiatives we’re taking positions on including how the other side is framing the debate, who is funding the initiatives, an explanation of the positions we take and links to the actual “Yes On” or “No On” campaigns for those props.

A rundown:

No On 85: Waiting Period and Parental Notification Before Termination of Minor’s Pregnancy.

Yes on 85 calls this the “Parents’ Right To Know” Act

No on 85 says that voting no means “Real Teen Safety”

We call it “Protect Teen Safety.”

If approved, Proposition 85 would require notification given to parents of a pregnant girl under the age of 18 when she seeks an abortion. Then, a 48-hour waiting period is mandated.

Yes on 86: Tax on Cigarettes. Initiative Constitutional Amendment and Statute.

Yes on 86 Campaign calls it “Stop Big Tobacco”

No on 86 Campaign calls it “Stop the $2.1 Billion Tax Hike”

We call it “Hold Big Tobacco Accountable”

Will raise state cigarette tax $2.60 a pack and is projected to raise about $2.1 billion in 2007 to fund health insurance for uninsured kids, improved emergency care, tobacco prevention programs, and chronic disease research.

Yes on 87: Alternative Energy. Research, Production, Incentives. Tax on California Oil Producers. Initiative Constitutional Amendment and Statute.

Yes on 87 Campaign calls it “Make Big Oil Pay for Cleaner Energy”

No on 87 Campaign calls it “No on $4 Billion Oil Tax. It’s a Recipe For Waste, Not Progress”

We call it “Make Big Oil Pay Their Fair Share”

Right now, Big Oil pays California almost nothing to drill in our state, while they pay billions of dollars in drilling fees to every other oil producing state. Prop 87 will set California’s oil drilling fees to 1.5 to 6% (depending on the price of oil per barrel) which is at levels similar to those in Oklahoma, Alaska, and Texas. The revenue raised ($4 billion over 10 years) will go towards research and producing alternative fuels and energy.

Yes On 89: Political Campaigns. Public Financing. Corporate Tax Increase. Campaign Contribution and Expenditure Limits. Initiative Statute.

Yes on 89 calls this the “California Clean Money and Fair Elections Act”

Californians to Stop Prop 89, a coalition of taxpayer groups, insurance companies, and corporations, says that this is “Phony Reform.”

We call it the “Restore Democracy Act.”

If enacted, Proposition 89 would reduce the influence of lobbyists and special interests in California. This is why it’s often called the “clean money” act. Currently, lobbyists and corporations can donate “dirty” money to the campaign funds of their favorite candidates. Prop 89 would restrict the ability of special interests to donate to campaigns, and would provide public financing for qualified “clean money” candidates.

No on 90: Government Acquisition, Regulation of Private Property. Initiative Constitutional Amendment.

Yes on 90 campaign calls it “Protect Our Homes Act”

No on 90 campaign calls it “The Taxpayer Trap”

We call it “Leave No Real Estate Developer Behind”

This is fake “eminent domain” reform. Prop 90’s out of state backers are trying to capitalize on people’s fears about government confiscating private property (made infamous in the Supreme Court’s Kelo v. New London decision) to inject their own anti-government ideals into our constitution. Prop 90 will destroy future environmental protections, responsible land-use planning and basic laws intended to protect the welfare of California’s citizens.

Leading up to the elections, we’re going to be spreading the word throughout the state and throughout the blogosphere about these initiatives with e-mail alerts, petitions and an ad we have in the works, which we’ll be running some time next month. Any contributions to the cause are of course always welcome. We actually have a generous donor who has pledged to match up to $30,000.

So please, join us by signing the open letter to Bush and spreading the word to all your friends and family in California.

Thanks!

Yes on 87: Call on Chevron to Support Clean Energy

(Edited for space and appearence. – promoted by SFBrianCL)

Right now, we have a great chance to take a huge step toward cleaner air and cheaper energy for California.  Proposition 87, on the ballot for November 7th, will:

  • Reduce gasoline and diesel usage by 25% over the next 10 years;
  • Create thousands of new clean energy jobs and grow our economy;
  • Reduce air pollution that causes asthma attacks, lung disease and cancer;
  • Make oil companies pay their fair share for oil drilling in California, just like they already pay in every other oil-producing state — even Texas;
  • Make it illegal for oil companies to raise gas prices to pass the cost along to consumers.

Proposition 87 is a great initiative, and we urge you to support it.  Sign the Yes on 87 campaign’s petition now, at:

  The Yes on 87 Website

There’s more in the extended.

Not surprisingly, the oil companies are trying to kill Prop. 87, with a massive TV and radio ad blitz designed to scare and mislead California’s voters.  The race has barely started and already ABC News has called the oil companies’ ads “misleading” and “not accurate”.[1]  The oil companies’ warchest is currently more than $30 million, and they could spend millions more.  Prop. 87 needs our help to overcome all this money.

The single biggest funder of the campaign to kill Prop. 87 is Chevron, at $12.8 million and counting.  Ironically, at the very same time, Chevron’s also running a PR campaign trying to paint itself green, asking everyone to join them in moving toward alternative energy sources:

  “At Chevron, we believe that innovation, collaboration and conservation are the cornerstones on which to build this new world.  We cannot do this alone.  Corporations, governments, and every citizen of this planet must be part of the solution as surely as they are part of the problem.”  [1]

We couldn’t agree more. 

Join us and our friends at Yes on 87 in calling on Chevron to walk their talk and support Prop. 87, instead of bankrolling the campaign to kill it:

  The Yes on 87 Website

Chevron and the other oil companies can easily afford the cost of Prop. 87.  They posted record-setting profits in the past year: $78 billion in 2005, and $20 billion in the first quarter of 2006 alone.  And they just discovered a giant new oil field in the Gulf of Mexico.

California is a major oil-producing state (America’s 3rd biggest), but we’re the only one where the oil companies don’t pay their fair share to drill for oil, like they do in Alaska, Louisiana, and Texas.  Meanwhile, the oil companies are charging Californians the highest pump prices in the nation for gas.

It’s time for a change, and Chevron knows it.  Here’s more of what their own PR ads are saying:

  “Technological improvements are needed so that wind, solar and hydrogen can be more viable parts of the energy equation.  Governments need to create energy policies that promote economically and environmentally sound development.”  [2]  And…

  “How do we accelerate our conservation efforts?  Whatever actions we take, we must look not just to next year, but to the next 50 years.” [3]

It’s time for Prop. 87. 

We’re calling Chevron out, and calling on them to join us in supporting Prop 87, instead of trying to kill it. 

The Yes on 87 campaign will deliver this petition, including your signature and comments, in person, to Chevron later this week.

Sign on now, at:

  The Yes on 87 Website

  “Now more than ever we need to work together.”  – Chevron [4]

Please sign on today.  Your help will really make a difference in this fight.

Thank you.

– Peter

Citations:

The sources quoted above and details on how much Chevron and other oil companies are spending on their campaign to kill Prop. 87 are available at the Yes on 87 website, linked above.

The Deep Pockets Hollywood type that I like: Stephen Bing

Whoa! Stephen Bing just dropped $10 million on Prop 87.  This from John Myers:

On Wednesday, Bing wrote a $10 million dollar check to the Yes on 87 campaign, supporting a proposal to fund alternative energy research through a new tax on oil drilling.

That makes his total contributions to date for Prop 87 a whopping $26.5 million. Bing has the reputation of being a reclusive millionaire, but it’s hard to miss him in this race… considering his contributions account for some 82% of all the money raised in support of Prop 87 (campaign total: about $32 million). (CapNotes 9/15/06)

There a couple of propositions where we are going to need to lay down some serious coin.  I actually think defeating Prop 90 should be our top priority, but winning on 87 can’t be far behind. 87 would provide an excellent model for the rest of the oil-producing states to invest in alternative energy technology.

Prop 87: Would you choose to fight Big Oil?

It turns out Prop 87 has an interesting back story.  Namely, it has a story about one man’s quest to see the oil companies help fund alternative energy.  And the man? A journeyman screenwriter.

The gifts had been opened, the roast duck consumed and Dan Kammen was watching a football game when the telephone interrupted his Christmas Day ritual.

Anthony Rubenstein, a former screenwriter unknown to Kammen and most Californians, was on the line describing his dream — a statewide initiative to pay for alternative energy research and development. … The Christmas Day phone call is a classic “cold calling” technique for telephone solicitors — and one of many Rubenstein admits using as he turned his dream into Proposition 87, the oil tax initiative on the November ballot.

At 42, Rubenstein has never before been involved in a political campaign. He’s never been active in environmental causes and claimed little energy expertise before speaking to Kammen.

Yet this self-described “low-rent screenwriter” is the instigator of one of the biggest environmental initiatives in years and one of the most expensive ballot measure campaigns this year.(SacBee 8/27/06)

More on the flip…

Prop 87 creates an oil severance tax.  The state would take a cut from each barrel pulled from the ground, varying froom 1.5% to 6% depending on the price of oil.

He said the breakthrough came when the group realized California was the only major oil-producing state without a severance tax on oil extraction. California imposes 6.2-cent-per-barrel regulatory fee that produces about $14 million in revenues.

Proposition 87 proposes a new tax on producers of 1.5 percent to 6 percent of the value of the oil they extract in California. The size of the tax would increase as the per-barrel price of oil rises.

“That made this more than just a good idea,” Rubenstein said. “It made it viable.”

Opponents claimed California, with its corporate income and property taxes, already has the fifth-highest taxes on oil producers of any of the top 10 oil-producing states.

Personally, I love this last line. “fifth highes taxes of the top 10 states.  Uh…so, pretty much it’s smack dab in the middle.  One could also say it has the sixth lowest taxes.  What kind of ridiculousness is that?

In the end, I have some qualms with Prop 87, namely that it creates this set aside.  I would prefer that the money go into the general fund.  That being said, I would encourage most of that money to go to energy effeciency as well. 

Also, couldn’t they have thrown zero emissions vehicles in Prop 87 too? I’d love to see the electric cars back in Califoria’s fleet.

Non-bond Props Field Poll: Still early, but plenty of work to be done

(A repost to fix some formatting. – promoted by SFBrianCL)

I’ll start with the good news.  Prop 87, the alternative energy and oil tax initiative, is way ahead right now.  It leads 52-31 right now, including 58% support from decline to state voters.  If that number remains in that ballpark, 87 has a great shot at passing. 

Prop 87 is an interesting initiative.  I’ll be doing a longer post on it in the near future, but as a former Texan, it boggles my mind that the state keeps so little of its mineral revenues.  The entire University system in Texas was built off those revenues, but somehow California didn’t jump on that train.  Personally, I would prefer that those revenues be given to the general fund rather than a specific purpose.  Alternative energy is great (and I just posted on that last week), but the state needs all the revenue it can get.  It would be the best to let that money into the general fund and then hash out details in the normal budget process (if it really can ever be called normal).

The cigarette tax initiave, Prop 86, is up 63-32.  I’m not sure how I feel about this one.  I like the purposes it goes to, but I’m just concerned over whether this law would violate the terms of the tobacco settlement. I would prefer that the state avoid another bout of massive litigation if possible.  The no voters on this ballot seem to be smokers, as they are the only demographic rejecting it right now (72-31).

Unsuprisingly, Jessica’s law, Prop 83, is passing overwhelmingly, 76-11.  I’m not sure that we really need a ballot initiative on this, mainly because most of the issues in the law were already addressed by Jackie Speier’s law on sex offenders.  But, you can see why Angelides was almost forced by popular will to support this bill.

The Anti-choice initiative, Prop 85, is currently trailing, but just barely.  It looks like there will be another battle.  These people will never give up, no matter how many times the people of this state say that we don’t want these anti-choice laws here. Phil Angelides has denounced the initiative. I haven’t seen anything official from Schwarzenegger, but he supported last year’s nearly identical Prop 73.

And finally, Prop 90 has a plurality of support as well. It currently leads 46-31, but right now it has a 42-32 lead amongst Democrats.  Once the message goes out about how bad Prop 90 is, the No tally will increase quickly.

Incidentally, it’s important to note that the no tally generally increases as the election draws near.  Voters are usually drawn towards the status quo (typically No), so expect to see some drift there.  Last June’s Prop 82 was a good example of this, it started off quite strong, but inertia (and a blitz of advertising) overcame its initial approval. 

These numbers will soon appear on the flip and in the Poll HQ.

Poll/Prop 83: Sex Offenders 85: Anti-choice 86: Cigarette Tax 87: Oil & Alt. Energy 90: Em. Dom.
  Yes No U/DK Yes No U/DK Yes No U/DK Yes No U/DK Yes No U/DK
Field 8/2/06 76 11 13 44 45 11 63 32 5 52 31 17 46 31 23
PPIC 7/06 N/a N/a N/a N/a N/a N/a N/a N/a N/a 61 23 16 N/a N/a N/a