Freedom of the press protects the right to obtain and publish information or opinions without government censorship or fear of punishment, whether or not government finds the material offensive, or disagrees with it.

Free speech enables people to obtain information from a diversity of sources, make decisions, and communicate those decisions to the government.

Recently I wrote about having my press credential renewal denied by the Capitol Correspondents Association of California, appointed as an arm of the California Legislature’s Joint Rules Committee, which has the final say in press… 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

Ding dong! Could CARB be dead?

The Pacific Legal Foundation filed a lawsuit yesterday against the California Air Resources Board challenging California’s cap and trade regulation.

The cap and trade program was created by CARB ostensibly as part of AB 32, California’s Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006.

“The regulation creates a quarterly auction program requiring many California employers to bid significant amounts of money for the privilege of continuing to emit carbon dioxide — or be faced with closing their doors in California, laying off their employees, and moving their businesses to other states,” the PLF explained in a press statement.

The PLF said the lawsuit challenges the auction process “as an unconstitutional state tax because it was not enacted by two-thirds majorities in both chambers of the Legislature, as required for new taxes by the California Constitution (Proposition 13 and Proposition 26).”

“The California Constitution is crystal clear that new state taxes require at least two-thirds approval… Read More