By Tom Tanton and Jean Pagnone

When California makes the news, it is typically an example of what not to do. It is a state with high unemployment, out of control spending, and high taxes. Therefore it should be no surprise that California is in the news again thanks to California Air Resources Board and AB32, the Global Warming Solutions Act.

Additional revelations about ‘scientists’ fudging underlying data have surfaced and advocates for the poor are awakening to the economic devastation wrought by CARB’s implementation. Now CARB has issued a legislatively required update to its ‘scoping plan.’ Discussions have reignited about the need, the mechanism and the overall benefits of this bureaucratic attempt to do something about the weather. Most significant perhaps is the application of cap and trade rules to transportation fuels which are scheduled to go into effect January 2015. This new, permanent hidden gas tax created by CARB and implemented without legislative approval will likely cost Californians 15 cents to over a dollar more per gallon of gas, with that amount continuing to increase. That adds up to $3 to $9 billion dollars taken out of… Read More

If you haven’t read my two lengthy columns earlier this week about the recent Senate committee hearing about how to spend the Air Resource Board’s cap and trade auction revenues, take the time to do so – Part l is HERE, and Part ll is HERE.

They exemplify what takes place inside the State Capitol every day, and show how policy is made.

I transcribed exactly what was said at the four-hour hearing on climate change policies, with Senators deciding how to spend the anticipated $3 to $5 billion a year taxed on California businesses who have been deemed polluters by the California Air Resources Board.

The billions of dollars expected from the CaliforniaAir Resources Board’scap and trade auctions areexpected to pay for the anticipated transition from a market economy to a centrally planned one. Yetnothing in… Read More

Part ll in a two part series. Part l can be found here.

Last week I wrote about a recent Senate Budget Committee cap and trade hearing and the billions of dollars expected to be generated by the Air Resource Board’s cap and trade auctions.

One of the issued I posed was the original purpose of passage of AB 32, the legislation under which the cap and trade hearings are conducted.AB 32, California’s Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, established the goal of reducing… Read More

With billions of dollars expected to be generated by the California Air Resource Board’s cap and trade auctions, many in the Legislature are excited with ideas of how to spend the money.

But rather than scheming on foolhardy, unsustainable spending plans, if the real goal is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, experts involved in the process say the Legislature should give the money back to the businesses it taxed, with the proviso the money is spent helping the companies lower their emissions.

What is AB 32 and Cap and Trade?

Last week, the Senate held a very… Read More

In my first two stories about Dr. James Enstrom, Ph. D., The firing of James Enstrom: the dangers of bucking fashionable science, and Hell hath no fury like a bureaucrat scorned,I explained about the attempt to muzzle scientific debate at UCLA, and the ultimate wrongful termination lawsuit of Enstrom, a scientist and professor at the university for more than 35 years.

Enstrom challenged the scientific research that the California Legislature and California Air Resources Board used to enact clean air policies including regulating diesel fuel emissions. And then he was fired.

Enstrom exposed the cover-up of “junk environmental science,” and exposed a phony… Read More

There is a disturbing trend of state and federal environmental agencies, which do end runs around state legislatures and Congress, and regulate carbon emissions themselves.

The Environmental Protection Agency has been doing this for years, as has California’s Air Resources Board. And they’ve gotten away with this thanks to activist scientists.

But when another scientist blows the whistle, look out. Hell hath no fury like a bureaucrat scorned.

UCLA lawsuit, Dr. James Enstrom

Dr. James E. Enstrom, Ph.D. a University of California at Los Angeles research professor who was terminated after he blew the whistle on junk environmental science and scientific misconduct at the University of California, filed… Read More

Part l of a series:

Bucking the highly fashionable notion that California’s air pollution is deadly, Dr. James Enstrom was one of only a few scientists willing to blow the whistle on the fraudulent science perpetrated at the California Air Resources Board.

It is often said the cover up is worse than the crime. Dr. Enstrom is living proof.

An attempt to muzzle scientific debate and academic freedomon a University of California college campus is at the root of the wrongful termination lawsuit of Dr. James Enstrom.

Enstrom challenged the scientific research that the California Air Resources Board and California Legislature used to enact policies regulating diesel fuel emissions. And then he was fired from his job of 35 years at University of California, Los Angeles.

Enstrom exposed the cover-up of “junk environmental science.” He also outed a phony… Read More