Sick Trees and Global Warming Science

“We will act, not only to create new jobs, but to lay a new foundation for growth. … We'll restore science to its rightful place, and wield technology's wonders to raise health care's quality and lower its cost. We will harness the sun and the winds and the soil to fuel our cars and run our factories.”

(President Barack Obama’s Inaguration Day Speech, January 20, 2008)

President Obama’s inspiring words about science and green infrastructure have brought new hope to Sierra Club California – even amid bad news today that global warming is decimating western forests.

Our hope? That this Administration will apply science and technology to the problem of global warming – just as his predecessor’s administration disregarded science – in time to turn back the threat to our trees.

Last year, then-President Bush’s U.S. EPA denied California’s automobile greenhouse gas waiver request. The waiver would have allowed California and other states to implement a plan to fight greenhouse gases created by cars, trucks and vehicles – the top source of the pollution that causes global warming in our state, scientific studies have shown.

California Air Resources Board Chair Mary Nichols has written the Obama Administration a letter requesting that the waiver be granted. Quick action on this matter will allow other states to follow in California’s lead – and perhaps prompt the production of cleaner cars.

At the same time, we need to keep in mind that harm to our forests has already begun, and is unlikely to stop even if we begin to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. That’s why Sierra Club California started working with state officials to craft a plan to lessen the inevitable effects of global warming on habitats and wildlife.

Obama’s Administration can also follow California’s path in this – or work with our state’s leaders to ensure that science and protection prevails. As our new President said during his inauguration, “With old friends and former foes, we'll work tirelessly to .. roll back the specter of a warming planet.”

Let that work begin now.

Celebrating A Toll Road Victory

Sierra Club California and other environmental groups are celebrating a recent vote by the Commerce Department not to build a toll road through San Onofre State Park.

Many of you joined us in protesting this awful idea. Here's what Sierra Club Conservation Organizer Robin Everett had to say while celebrating this momentous event:

“The Sierra Club applauds today’s Commerce Department decision. The decision is a victory for our coast and our state parks.

“Today’s decision by the Commerce Department is a victory for the thousands of Californians, from Eureka to San Diego, who have spent years fighting this rogue toll road agency and its army of high-priced lobbyists.

“The Commerce Department decision lowers the boom on the TCA’s consistent misrepresentation of the toll road as essential to national security and the only viable transportation alternative. Even the Bush administration has rejected the toll road agency’s ridiculous arguments.

“The Sierra Club began fighting this toll road over 10 years ago, starting with a march of 40 people in downtown San Clemente and ending with thousands of people at the final hearings. The TCA has tried at every turn to block public involvement, but the Coastal Commission and now the Commerce Department heard Californians and protected our coast and our park.

“We call on the TCA, whose financial house is in deep disorder, to give up its scheme to replace a state park with a toll road and come to terms with the reality that outside of their agency bubble no one supports their plan.”

Feed In Tariffs – The Right Idea, Right Now

Sierra Club California just submitted a letter urging California’s energy officials to embrace “feed-in tariffs” in a big way.

Feed-in tariffs are incentive structures used to encourage generation of renewable energy by compensating for price differences between renewable power and fossil fuel electricity. As applied in Germany, this system sets a fair price for renewable power, encouraging widespread generation and use.

Not only would feed-in tariffs encourage cleaner power production, they also represent a good way for the state to take on climate change. Sierra Club California has urged the California Air Resources Board to consider this powerful economic tool as it considers the Climate Change Scoping Plan today and tomorrow.

But for now, the state has proposed a limited version of feed-in tariffs, limiting them to smaller plants (less than 20 megawatts in size). We are telling the air board and the energy commission to raise that limit, and to give feed in tariffs more power to increase the amount of renewable energy generated in the state.

We’re also working with lawmakers to generate measures that would encourage California to embrace this powerful new philosophy – and that encourage the state to raise its clean power production goal to 33% by 2020.

Read Sierra Club California’s Dec 10 comments to the California Energy Commission

Stronger Renewable Energy Goals For California

Yesterday, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed an executive order calling on the state to streamline its renewable energy process, ideally making it easier to produce and sell renewable power. He also is expected to sign a memorandum of understanding among resources-protection agencies, prompting more sustainable siting of clean-energy plants.

The governor’s action comes at a critical time for the state of California. Most experts agree that clean energy will provide new “green jobs” to lift the Golden State’s economy, while reducing the pollution that causes global warming. Still, groups and individuals who want to protect our state’s wilderness resources worry that these same facilities could hurt animals, plants and wilderness areas in their path.

“Everyone agrees that generating more renewable power will energize our economy and reduce pollution, but we can’t ignore the impacts to wilderness in our quest to generate more clean energy in California,” said Jim Metropulos, Senior Advocate, Sierra Club California. “Sierra Club California hopes that involving agencies like the Department of Fish and Game and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service that protect these resources will lead to a better understanding of how we can build a clean-energy future that doesn’t hurt our precious ecosystem in the process.”

Sierra Club California has long called on lawmakers and the Schwarzenegger Administration to increase the standard to at least 33 percent by 2020. This summer, the California Air Resources Board joined that call, asserting that raising the standard would reduce the pollution that causes global warming.

Simply raising the required amount of renewable power generated by utilities won’t accomplish everything, Metropulos said. Sierra Club California urges additional reforms to ensure the continued success of a renewable energy program.

First, our state currently ties the price of clean energy to its future projected price of natural gas, known as the market price referent, which the state consistently underestimates. This forces would-be clean energy projects to compete against an artificially low fossil-fuel-based standard – an archaic, unsustainable practice that California must reverse.

In designing a new approach to renewable energy, the Schwarzenegger Administration and the California Legislature would do well to look to programs that already work. In Germany, a program known as “feed-in tariffs” sets up fixed prices for renewable energy, rewarding investors leery of our “boom or bust” system. Meanwhile, throughout California, communities are scrambling to get into “community choice aggregation,” pooling their buying power to get more bang for the buck.

As they move to expand renewable power generation in the state, state lawmakers and regulators always must keep in mind whether renewable sources of energy are equally sustainable in terms of environmental impacts or energy supply. For example, outdated methods of drawing on geothermal energy involve essentially poking holes in the ground and allowing the underground steam to escape into the atmosphere. This process releases both greenhouses gases as well as toxic materials.

“California has the power to retake the lead in developing new sources of clean, renewable power, as long as Gov. Schwarzenegger and the Legislature fix flaws in current renewable power standard law,” said Metropulos. “Adopting a truly sustainable standard that protects wild places while fully empowering clean-energy projects represents the best pathway to a clean-energy future.”

Remember to VOTE!

Are you as excited about the November 4 election as I am? For the first time, we have a chance to reject the destructive Bush Administration policies that have poisoned our air and delayed action on climate change.

Right here in California, we also have a chance to turn back poorly designed propositions that would stand in the way of clean energy and cleaner vehicles. We also can promote real progress in transit policy, reduce factory farm pollution and protect positive family planning services.

If you haven’t voted yet, please consider Sierra Club’s recommendations this November:

For President and Vice President:

Barack Obama and Joe Biden

For Congress: Please view Sierra Club's list of Clean Energy Candidates at http://www.sierraclub.org/politics

PROPOSITION 1A YES

• Would fund an 800-mile high-speed rail system that will transport Californians quickly and safely while reducing pollution and protecting wild places.

PROPOSITION 2 YES
• Would reduce the density of farm animals, and therefore the intensity of the air and water pollution.

PROPOSITION 4 NO
• Would create a major obstacle to family planning services, likely resulting in dangerous amateur abortions.

PROPOSITION 7 NO
• Contains serious, inherent flaws that could get in the way of achieving its goal of 50% renewable fuels by 2025.
• Actually works against Sierra Club-backed energy policies that would allow communities to choose the source of their energy.
• Decreases environmental review of proposed power plants.

PROPOSITION 10 NO
• Would put California on the wrong road to cleaner vehicles by setting up faulty programs that don’t reward low-emissions cars and trucks.

Learn more at www.sierraclubcalifornia.org.

- Colleen Flannery

Outreach Coordinator

Sierra Club California

No On Proposition 7

Sierra Club and its environmental allies have joined together to oppose Proposition 7, a costly renewable energy scheme that actually will make it harder to build clean power in our state.

Proposition 7:

1. Contains serious, inherent flaws that could get in the way of achieving its goal of 50% renewable fuels by 2025.
2. Actually works against Sierra Club-backed energy policies that would allow communities to choose the source of their energy.
3. Decreases environmental review of proposed power plants.

Watch the ad above to learn more, or click here to read our position on Proposition 7.

Water For ALL!

Protesting Governor Schwarzenegger and Senator Feinstein’s push for a November water bond, community groups throughout California rallied yesterday to expose the proposal’s failure to provide long-term and equitable solutions to California’s water problems. Community groups oppose the bond and are calling for immediate action from the Legislature to distribute existing bond funds that have sat unspent since 2006.

“Our communities are struggling as budget cuts dry up state support for our health, education and infrastructure programs. Now the governor is asking Californians to repay another $9.2 billion dollar water bond? We simply cannot afford to do that,” stated Debbie Davis, legislative analyst for the Environmental Justice Coalition for Water. “Ironically, this bond is called the ‘Safe Drinking Water Act,’ but it does nothing to address the drinking water crisis in thousands of communities in California.

"Our communities need funding for programs that help provide safe, clean drinking water. Despite a $9.2 billion dollar price tag, this bond doesn’t deliver.”

California’s recent drought has exacerbated water problems throughout the state, ranging from a lack of clean drinking water for rural communities to the collapse of the Delta ecosystem. Instead of creating new management solutions to old problems, the bond provides funding for the same types of projects that have already pushed California’s water system to the brink. Proposed dams and surface water storage would take decades to put in place, and most profit special interests.

“We have a water crisis today. This proposed bond wastes $3 billion on projects that will take decades to produce a drop of water,” said Jim Metropulos, Sierra Club California's Senior Advocate. "We don't need 19th-century solutions to today's problems."

Metropulos, Sierra Club Angeles Chapter staff and others called on the Legislature and the Governor to pass SB 1XX (Perata, Machado and Steinberg), releasing unspent funds from Proposition 84, passed in 2006. Over $800 million is being held hostage as leverage for a wasteful water bond.

The Legislature reportedly has until the end of this week to vote the water bond onto the ballot.

Information and images courtesy Environmental Justice Coalition for Water and Planning and Conservation League.

And The Winner Is...

Grassroots lobbying is more important than ever.

That's what Senate President Pro Tempore Don Perata, D-Oakland, told a group of volunteer lobbyists who donated their Sunday and Monday to assist Sierra Club California's senior staff in advocating key legislation.

Perata, who won Sierra Club California's first-ever Byron Sher Award for Outstanding Environmental Achievement by a Public Official in recognition of his tireless efforts on behalf of the environment, encouraged these volunteers to continue to maintain their presence in the State Capitol. Because of term limits, he said, California's legislative leaders won't have the experience to push forward major pieces of legislation like the Global Warming Solutions Act - unless the people in their district hold them to it.

"If you can talk to someone where they live, where they shop, that's going to be how we get these bills passed," he said. "[You must] maintain your vigilance, and maintain the priority you place on the environment in your daily lives."

He also warned that some Republican representatives of the Legislature want to build more dams and roll back environmental protections.

But it wasn't all seriousness. After warning the Club members to stay aware of legislation, he brought warm laughter with an aside:

"Of course, asking Sierra Club members to be more vigilant is crazy," he joked.

Hunters, Activists, Scouts: Kids, Get Active

Sometimes, kids actually teach grown-ups about what’s important.

Sierra Club California, California Waterfowl and the Girl Scout Council of California learned that yesterday during a joint press conference and educational event.

Alarmed by statistics that show kids spend as much as a quarter of the day hooked to TV screens and computer monitors, the three groups have united with dozens of allies to back Assemblymember Felipe Fuentes’ “No Child Left Inside” Act, AB 2989. From health groups to hunters, law enforcement to local government, just about everyone interested in the well-being of California's kids has signed on to this key legislation.

The bill would fund a grant program that would pay for California’s kids – especially at-risk, underserved young people – to learn and play at outdoor educational and recreational spots. Outdoor education and recreation boosts youths’ self-esteem and improves science test scores, according to a study by state education officials. Right now, the “No Child Left Inside” Act is stuck in the Senate Appropriations Committee.

Spending time outdoors provided a passageway into a world of wonders, young Girl Scouts told the gathered adults, including Assemblymember Fuentes, several reporters and representatives of California Waterfowl and Sierra Club California. Hiking, caving and adventuring gave them a passageway into a new world, the teens told their audience.

Just as the kids learned how to “play together,” the three organizations and their dozens of allies have joined forces to focus on what matters: getting kids outside.

Supreme Court Protects Our Forests

After decades of legal wrangling, environmentalists emerged victorious in a California Supreme Court case that promises improved protection for California’s endangered species and industrial forestlands.

Today’s ruling in Environmental Protection Information Center & Sierra Club v. Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, is the culmination of a challenge to the permits issued as part of the Headwaters Deal in 1999 and centered on endangered species protection and sustainable forestry mandates. It holds state agencies responsible for upholding these protections.
“This is a stunning victory for the environment and for holding government agencies accountable. When agencies won't do their job and follow the law, the courts will not defer to them,” said Scott Greacen of EPIC. “The California Supreme Court clearly saw that CDF and the Department of Fish and Game weren’t following the law.”

California Supreme Court Justice Carlos Moreno, who wrote the court’s unanimous opinion, ruled that Pacific Lumber failed to turn in a “sustained yield plan” for its Humboldt-area holdings, as required by the Headwaters Agreement. The court also chastised the agency for approving a document that did not actually exist.

The court also ruled that the Department of Fish and Game broke the law by assuring Pacific Lumber that it would not need to do additional conservation if new species become endangered in the future.

The California Department of Fish & Game shouldn’t have agreed to the “No Surprises” provisions, which limited the timber company’s obligation to mitigate certain impacts on endangered species, including the effects of natural disasters, the ruling says. Instead, the court ruled, those who hold endangered species permits must work to “fully” protect these animals and plants, especially if their behavior enhances the effects of natural disasters on animal or plant life.

The state must approve adequate sustained yield plans to ensure companies have enough timber resources to protect wildlife and maintain the local economy, the court ruled.

EPIC and Sierra Club California first filed this challenge to Pacific Lumber Company’s unsustainable plans to endanger Humboldt’s economy and wildlife in March of 1999. In the meantime, Pacific Lumber has gone bankrupt, and its woodland holdings are being taken over by Mendocino Redwood Company, which promised to practice more sustainable harvest practices.

“The impact of this decision will outlast Pacific Lumber itself to create a significant legacy for California’s forests and endangered species,” predicted Paul Mason, Sierra Club California’s Deputy Director. “It requires timber companies and state agencies to protect both the working families and the endangered animals that depend on these woods for their survival.”

READ THE RULING FOR YOURSELF: PDF or DOC.

Priority Port Bill Sails off Assembly Floor

Senate Bill 974 (Lowenthal), a Sierra Club California-supported bill, just passed the California Assembly by a more than 2-to-1 margin!

For a relatively small per-container fee of $30, just 0.13 percent of the average port container’s worth, port users will help fund programs that reduce pollution and congestion at the ports.

If it’s signed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, SB 974 will become a powerful tool to turn back the increased incidences of asthma and other respiratory diseases that accompany portside pollution. As a side benefit, it will help fund measures that will help unravel traffic congestion near ports.

Here’s what Assemblymembers had to say about this vital bill:

Assemblyman Mike Feuer (D-Los Angeles): “We have a chance to take a major step to transform the ports in our cities.”

Assemblyman Bob Huff (R-Diamond Bar): “We have to find a way to keep these negative impacts from affecting our region…. When you support this bill, you support more money for transportation.”

Assemblyman Kevin DeLeon (D-Los Angeles): “The health care costs [caused by port pollution] are irreparable. Once particulate matter is lodged in your lungs, it can't be dislodged.”

Assemblywoman Betty Karnette (D-Long Beach): “The people in my area really want something done about the way we're suffering.”

Another Bush Administration Global Warming Delay?

As California takes on global warming by setting real targets for pollution reduction, the Bush administration continues to drag its feet.

Remember how the U.S. Supreme Court told the federal government it must act to stop the pollution that causes climate change? Well, as predicted earlier this week by the San Francisco Chronicle, the Bush administration will continue to defy the Court today by issuing a request for additional comments — an "Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking"— on global warming regulations, rather than the so-called "endangerment determination" that the Court's ruling in Massachusetts v. EPA compelled and that senior Environmental Protection Agency officials had argued for.

Today's Washington Post details the tireless efforts of senior political appointees in the administration to prevent global warming regulations from being in put in place under President Bush... the same President Bush who this week called global warming a "serious problem."

David Bookbinder, Sierra Club's Chief Climate Counsel and the attorney who's defending California's Clean Car Law, had this to say about the Bush administration's latest delay in addressing global warming:

"Today's action caps off eight years of catastrophic negligence on the part
of an increasingly irrelevant administration, and removes whatever shadow of a
doubt that may have existed about whether it was going to fail to live up to its
obligations to the American public, the law, and the Supreme Court to do
something real on global warming.

"The American public, Congress, world leaders, and even career government
officials are counting down the days until this administration leaves town and a
new president undoes the damage done by President Bush and makes up for nearly a decade of lost time — time we didn't have to waste in the first place. And the
first thing the next administration will do is toss the Advanced Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking into the circular file.

"Stephen Johnson should have left his post long ago, but today's action underscores his complete and utter lack of credibility. Johnson will be remembered not for his decades of public service, but rather for his unswerving fealty to the misguided policies of a failed administration.

"This global warming melodrama has all the set pieces of classic Bush administration political theater: politics coming before science, outright deception of the American public and Congressional investigators, willful disregard for the law and courts, and political meddling at the highest levels to protect favored special interests--with the dark hand of the Vice President visible throughout. Thankfully this drama is near the end of its final act."

Fire Protection For The Future

As California’s brave firefighters battle nearly 1,300 blazes statewide, Sierra Club California continues to push for new laws that we hope will create a legal “fire break” for our state.

While they won’t change the state’s current fire danger, they do help shape our future safety – both by changing the way communities plan their growth in fire-prone, state-controlled areas and by holding homeowners to simple defensible-space mandates.

photo by Robert A. Eplett, OES

Join us in supporting these simple steps toward a safer future:

Assembly Bill 2447 (Jones): Requires counties to prove adequate fire protection before approving development in high-fire-risk areas, and ensure that developments are designed safely. Pending in Senate Appropriations Committee.

Senate Bill 1500 (Kehoe): Requires cities and counties to notify state fire officials when they plan to build in state-protected, fire-prone areas (some 31 million acres, statewide), and determine who will provide fire protection for the new home before it's built. Pending in Assembly Appropriations Committee.

Senate Bill 1617 (Kehoe): Assesses a modest $50 fee on homeowners in fire-prone, state-protected areas (State Responsibility Areas) in order to fund fire prevention activities. Pending in Assembly Appropriations Committee.

Senate Bill 1595 (Kehoe): Updates the existing requirement for homeowners to maintain 100 feet of defensible space around their home. Pending in Assembly Appropriations Committee.

Assembly Bill 2859 (Gaines): Makes it easier to clear areas around homes and communities. Pending in Senate Appropriations Committee.


The Flash Report had good things to say about SB 1500 -- proving that planning for safer homes and ensuring that state taxpayers don't subsidize the cost or rural sprawl isn't a partisan issue.

Your donation helps us promote legislation that protects wilderness and human health.

Ending The Oil Addiction

Sierra Club California Director Bill Magavern just debated Republican Congressman Dan Lungren over offshore oil drilling.

One of Bill's best points:

"We can't address our smoking problem by looking for new sources of tobacco, and we can't address our oil addiction by drilling off our beautiful coasts. Instead, we need to use less oil, and to find alternatives to oil. That will bring the price down, and, more importantly, wean us off our addiction to oil."

More reasons NOT to drill for oil off California's coasts:

• Drilling our coasts would do nothing to reduce gas prices for the average American family. Opening offshore areas to drilling would only lower gas prices by less than 3-4 cents a gallon, according to the Natural Resources Defense Council.

• Drilling isn't a good, quick fix. It would take at least a decade to bring new leases issued under this plan into production.

• Oil companies are not even using 5,500 offshore leases they already own.

• The honest answer to our oil problem is to use less of it, and that means better, faster fuel economy standards and a shift toward renewable energy. Renewable sources of energy remain a promising path away from our oil dependency, both Bill Magavern and Dan Lungren agreed during their ABC News debate.

Find out more about the "Outer Continental Shelf," the area that would be affected by drilling.

Your secure donation helps us protect our pristine coasts from threats like drilling.

Aerial Spraying over Urban Areas Stopped -- Sterile Moths to be Used Instead

Good news!

The Dept of Food and Agriculture has announced that it will not proceed with its plans for aerial spraying over urban areas to eradicate the light brown apple moth.

Instead, the CDFA will use sterile moths to prevent the spread of the LBAM. I have been briefed on this development today by CDFA Secretary A.G. Kawamura and Assemblymember Jared Huffman (separately). More information will be forthcoming about the state’s plans, which will involve some aerial spraying in rural areas and some ground applications of registered pesticides. But this is a big victory for the community activists who opposed the spraying. We also thank the governor and Secretary Kawamura for ordering the alternative treatment, and Assemblymembers Huffman, Laird, Leno, Hancock and Swanson, and Senator Migden, for leading legislative opposition to the aerial spraying.

Sierra Club California will continue to support legislation that would require comprehensive planning and assessment of alternatives in the future to better deal with invasive pests without aerial spraying.

Bill Magavern, Director, Sierra Club California

The Humanity! The Humanity!

Recently, Sierra Club California elected to support The Prevention of Farm Animal Cruelty Act, a measure for the November ballot. This Humane Society-backed initiative would set minimum standards for the way California treats its farm-raised animals.

Essentially, farm animals would be able to stand up, turn around and fully extend their limbs. This will most benefit California’s approximately 19 million egg-laying chickens (statistics from CDFA).

As you can read in more detail in the Humane Society’s blog, the way some factory farms keep their animals has definite quality-of-life implications. I don’t think anyone would confuse putting chickens in cramped “battery cages” that don’t let them spread their wings, with sustainable farming.

Factory farms also directly impact California’s watersheds. When housed in the tight quarters of “animal feeding operations,” or factory farms, chickens produce more waste than they would if raised more sustainably. Lower-impact farming practices, on the other hand, produce lower concentrations of nitrates, ammonias and other compounds that pollute our groundwater and soil.

It might cost a little more “chicken feed” to provide California’s farm animals with basic improvements, but Sierra Club California is certain it will lead to less pollution and more sustainable farming.

See for yourself: This graphic Youtube video shows what life is like for chickens at a California egg farm (CAUTION: images of cruelty best viewed by mature audiences).

Read what Sierra Club has to say about humane husbandry

Your donation helps us fight for the ballot measures that protect California’s wildlife and wild places.

Light Brown Apple Moth Bills Flutter Forward

As part of Sierra Club California’s support of a moratorium on the aerial spraying of the Light Brown Apple Moth until the chemical’s health effects are known, we are proud to report the successes of several bills within the California Legislature.
If all goes well, pesticide spraying WILL NOT occur until we know just how harmful the pesticide is to people – and to our air, water and livelihoods.

Assembly Bills 2760, 2763, and 2765 all passed the California Assembly within the past weeks.

AB 2760 (Leno) triumphed in the Assembly and will head to the Senate.

This measure responds directly to the planned central coast spraying of a manmade pheromone containing synthetic chemicals and nanoparticles.

Although it doesn’t take effect until 2009, AB 2760 would require the completion of an environmental impact report before the aerial spraying of pesticides could commence. This report would assess the pesticide’s impact on our people and environment. The state never completed a report it initially began in 2007.

AB 2763 (Laird) and AB 2765 (Huffman) also recently swept through the California Assembly.

Assemblymember Laird’s bill would require the state to plan, well in advance, a method of control for invasive pest species that threaten our environment and economy.
Huffman’s bill goes further, requiring full disclosure of all pesticide ingredients, examination of alternatives to aerial spraying and a public hearing to consider all alternatives before eradication projects in urban areas could begin.

Even Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has acquiesced to the public outrage regarding the urban pesticide spraying.

On April 24, he announced the state will postpone aerial pesticide application until acute testing of the pesticide’s potential to harm eyes, inhalation, respiratory systems and other human systems, known as the “six-pack” toxicology test, is completed.


-- Compiled by Collin Fisher, Sierra Club California Researcher

Sierra Club California's Previous Comments On Light Brown Apple Moth

Banding Together To Protect The Budget

Remember last year’s budget debacle?

California’s legislative Republicans held up the budget for more than a month as they tried to roll back environmental protections – and as everyday Californians rolled their eyes at the lack of leadership they exhibited.

Now, they’re at it again. They’ve already said they plan to postpone implementation of California’s Global Warming Solutions Act, roll back diesel pollution reductions and undermine the 8-hour work day. These proposals probably will become a big part of the negotiations surrounding California’s 2008-2009 budget.

So this year, Sierra Club California and its environmental, health and labor allies have taken an early, unified stand against the efforts to undermine our environmental and worker protections.
California needs solid proposals to close a budgetary gap that’s yawned to more than $15 billion.

That’s why the Republican proposals are so shaky: they actually pile on more potential costs. For example, the Republicans want the Legislature to extend deadlines for cleaning up dangerous emissions from the diesel trucks responsible for nearly 40 percent of California’s most toxic diesel pollution.

At what cost? Diesel pollution annually leads to 1,500 early deaths annually, and causes about $12 billion in costs associated with premature death, health care, lost productivity and lost school attendance each year.

There’s even more potential expense associated with a delay in the state’s Global Warming Solutions Act. If we don’t immediately address the pollution that causes global warming, we won’t benefit from the measures taken to reduce that pollution: cleaner air and energy, more efficient cars and appliances and protected coastal areas.

And we might not take in as big a share of the $1.79 billion that venture capitalists poured into California’s green economy last year.

Despite the clear benefits provided by the environmental rules, Sierra Club California advocates fully expect this year’s budget negotiations to once again include a battle to protect our air and atmosphere.

As the minority party, Republicans have the most power during the budget process, since they can withhold the few Republican votes needed to reach the 2/3 super-majority required to adopt the budget. Last year, they tried (and mostly failed) to block the use of the California Environmental Quality Act to address global warming.

Even as the Republicans gear up to attack these critical protections, the state’s most important Republican, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger indicated this month that he wants to keep the Global Warming Solutions Act safe from attack. He’s also made it easier to implement the diesel truck rule, by providing nearly $50 million to assist low-income truckers in complying with the new rules. Legislative Democrats, most notably Senator Alan Lowenthal and Assemblymember Mark DeSaulnier also stand with us. Like us, they’re taking a stand against the potential hijacking of the state’s budget.

Hopefully, when the budget negotiations begin in earnest, California’s working families won’t be rolling their eyes at another Republican tantrum. They’ll be looking forward to cleaner air, cleaner energy and a new, greener future.

See What Sierra Club California Advocates Have To Say About The Budget

Your Donation Helps Us Safeguard The Budget

Make The May Revise More Sustainable

Every May, California's governors release a "May Revise," a revamped version of the budget that reflects the latest budget projections.

This May, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s proposed budget reminds us of the importance of all types of sustainability.

In his May Revise, the governor proposed several one-time fixes, including borrowing money from the Public Transit Fund.

That brand of unsustainable borrowing could keep Californians from enjoying safe, clean public transportation. Increasing public transit ridership improves air quality – and lowers commuters’ gas costs.

The May Revise offers no sustainable source of funding for AB 32, California’s Global Warming Solutions Act. True solutions to our state’s global warming emissions will emerge when polluters pay for the cost of cleaning up the emissions they create.We’d also like to see the Resources Agency gain a more permanent source of funding, since it’s one of the first agencies to suffer the pinch of budget cuts.

Many bright ideas shine through the smog of today’s tight fiscal times. For example, the governor’s revised budget provides $50 million to help low-income truckers meet state diesel standards early. And our state parks will stay open, following tremendous pressure from outdoors-loving Californians.

Sierra Club California will sustain its efforts to negotiate a budget that protects our air, water, natural resources and communities.

Our advocates comment on the specifics of the May Revise

See what the governor had to say about the May Revise

Sierra Club California Welcomes Karen Bass

Sierra Club California honors newly sworn-in Assembly Speaker Karen Bass. Her historic day also represents a great day for clean air, clean water and a healthy California.

We're pleased to see such a strong ally ascend to one of the state's most powerful positions. Assembly Speaker Bass voted with the environment on 12 out of 12 key bills last year, supporting water conservation, alternative fuels and green buildings. In 2006, she stood with environmentalists to support AB 32, the Global Warming Solutions Act, and 10 other key measures to again score 100 percent on our environmental report card.

Assembly Speaker Bass has made addressing the state's troubled budget her top priority. We look forward to working with her to ensure Californians have access to the natural places we love and to protect our air, water and atmosphere.”

- Statement, Sierra Club California Director Bill Magavern

Check out our 2006 and 2007 report cards.

Read more about Sierra Club California's budget worries