[GPCA-SGA-Votes] Discuss ID 141: GPCA position on Proposition 70 - Greenhouse Gas Reduction Reserve Fund.

Sat Mar 24 21:56:07 PDT 2018

All,

The Green Party of Alameda County recommends a "No" vote on Prop. 70.
Below is our current draft Voter Guide article for Prop. 70.

Greg

Proposition 70 -- NO
Vote Requirement to Use Cap-and-Trade Revenue

California Proposition 70 is on the June ballot as a legislatively referred
constitutional amendment. If approved, this amendment will require a
one-time two-thirds vote in each chamber of the state legislature in 2024
or thereafter to pass a spending plan for revenue from the state's
cap-and-trade program for greenhouse gases.

We completely oppose this Proposition and urge a NO vote on it, because
this was a bill designed to give the Republicans in the California
Legislature more power on how to spend the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund
proceeds that pour into the state coffers from the polluters.  This measure
was only agreed to be put onto the ballot by the Governor in order to gain
a couple of Republican votes on the cap-and-trade bill last year, and it is
a terrible idea, essentially putting the fox in charge of the henhouse.  We
see enough of that at the Federal level these days, and do not need any
more at the State Level.

Further, at a moment where we need nimble investments in climate change
solutions, the 2/3 requirement this bill would impose would most definitely
lead to more gridlock and bad deals, vs. cleaning up the state's energy,
transport, food production, and other greenhouse gas related sectors.

To quote in this case the California Democratic party: "A two-thirds vote
gives polluters more leverage in how cap-and-trade funding is spent after
2024. The fact is, ACA 1 itself was a part of a deal to get a two-thirds
vote for the cap-and-trade extension. When a two-thirds vote was required
to approve California's budget, legislative hostage-taking, gimmicks and
pork barrel spending were part and parcel of the process."

A DEFINITE NO.

-- Sources:
     https://ballotpedia.org/ California_Proposition_70,_
Vote_Requirement_to_Use_Cap- and-Trade_Revenue_Amendment_% 28June_2018%29

<https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_70,_Vote_Requirement_to_Use_Cap-and-Trade_Revenue_Amendment_%28June_2018%29%C2%A0%C2%A0%C2%A0%C2%A0>
     https://lwvc.org/news/our- positions-june-5-2018-
election-ballot-measures
<https://lwvc.org/news/our-positions-june-5-2018-election-ballot-measures>

On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 1:33 PM, GPCA Votes <gpca.votes at gmail.com> wrote:

> Ranked Choice Vote ID #141
> Ranked Choice Vote: *GPCA position on Proposition 70: ACA 1 (Resolution
> Chapter 105, statutes of 2017), Mayes. Greenhouse Gas Reduction Reserve
> Fund.*
> Ranked Choice Vote Administrators: Victoria Ashley, Brian Good, Laura
> Wells, Eric Brooks, Mike Goldbeck
> Discussion  02/12/2018 - 03/25/2018
> Voting  03/26/2018 - 04/01/2018
> Voting ends at Midnight Pacific Time
>
> *Background*
>
> This is the ranked choice vote for the GPCA to take a position on
> Proposition 70: ACA 1 (Resolution Chapter 105, statutes of 2017), Mayes.
> Greenhouse Gas Reduction Reserve Fund.
>
> The choices are to rank 'endorse', 'oppose', 'no position' and/or
> 'abstain.' Delegates can rank as many or few of these options in their
> order of preference.
>
> An 'endorse' vote would mean the GPCA would endorse Proposition 70.
> An 'oppose' vote means the GPCA would oppose Proposition 70.
> A 'no position' vote means the GPCA would not take a position on
> Proposition 70.
> An 'abstain' vote means the voter is not expressing a preference, but is
> voting to help achieve quorum.
> Any of these position that receives 2/3 after all preferences are
> transferred is the position of the party. If neither 'endorse' nor
> 'opposes' receive 2/3, the GPCA's position will be 'no position'.
>
> The proposition is listed below, along with the Legislative Counsel’s
> digest and a link to the full text.
>
> *Proposition 70*
>
> ACA 1 (Resolution Chapter 105, statutes of 2017), Mayes. Greenhouse Gas
> Reduction Reserve Fund.
>
> The California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 designates the State
> Air Resources Board as the state agency charged with monitoring and
> regulating sources of emissions of greenhouse gases. The act authorizes the
> state board to include the use of market-based compliance mechanisms.
> Existing law requires all moneys, except for fines and penalties, collected
> by the state board as part of a market-based compliance mechanism to be
> deposited in the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund and to be available upon
> appropriation.
>
> The California Constitution requires appropriations from the General Fund
> of the state to be passed by a 2/3 vote of the membership of each house of
> the Legislature and requires a majority vote to pass appropriations for the
> public schools and appropriations in the Budget Bill and in other bills
> providing for appropriations related to the Budget Bill.
>
> This measure would create the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Reserve Fund, in
> which all moneys collected by the state board as part of a market-based
> compliance mechanism beginning January 1, 2024, and until the effective
> date of specified legislation would be deposited. The measure would require
> all moneys in the fund to be available upon appropriation for specified
> purposes and would require a bill making those appropriations to be passed
> by a 2/3 vote of the membership of each house of the Legislature. The
> measure would require all new moneys collected as part of a market-based
> compliance mechanism after the effective date of that specified legislation
> to be deposited in the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund. The measure would
> prohibit a specified sales tax exemption from being applied until the
> effective date of that specified legislation.
>
> Link to full text: http://elections.cdn.sos.ca.
> gov/ballot-measures/pdf/aca-1.pdf
>
> *Candidates*
> Endorse
> Oppose
> No Position
> Abstain
>
> Full details are available at: http://www.sjcgreens.org/
> 141_gpcapositionprop70
>
> *Please send your discussion comments to gpca-votes at sfgreens.org
> <gpca-votes at sfgreens.org>*
>
>
> --
> gpca-votes mailing list
> gpca-votes at sfgreens.org
> https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpca-votes
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.sfgreens.org/pipermail/gpca-votes/attachments/20180324/bc51d98a/attachment.html>