Listen To California!

Two out of three California voters believe “we can have a strong economy and a clean environment at the same time.” Nearly two-thirds (63%) say environmental laws shouldn’t be used as bargaining chips in budget negotiations.

That’s according to a new poll commissioned by several environmental groups that are Sierra Club California’s allies in battling efforts to undo environmental protections.

California voters have spoken! So far, though, their voice hasn’t been heard by a minority of legislative Republicans from trying to erode these important existing laws that protect our air, our climate, our lungs and our land.

Among them: regulations that protect Californians from diesel pollution caused by dirty engines; allow affected residents to sue to stop global warming pollution; require environmental review of the sale of state lands; and prevent the use of smog-forming pesticides. Another minority-group effort would tie the hands of California air regulators in an endless loop of red tape.

Of course, governing by poll results isn’t always the best thing to do. But in a time of back-door budget blackmail, the recent poll results provide an important reminder of our democratic process.

Let’s hope they’re listening now.

Want Proof? The Sacramento Bee’s website has an actual copy of these scary budget proposals (PDF)!

See what the SF Chronicle’s “Thin Green Line” blog has to say about the poll

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.

Bad Budget News II: We Are Not Alone!

The governor’s continued efforts to hold out for environmental rollbacks – combined with his proposed cuts for transit – represent a giant step backward for our state’s economy and ecology alike.

But don’t take our word for it. Here’s what some major news organizations statewide had to say about the disappointing proposals sifting through the state Capitol:

• LA Times News Story (1.11.2009)

Schwarzenegger is proposing that the California Department of Transportation forge ahead with some construction projects that are tied up in court over environmental issues. One is a $165-million carpool-lane expansion on U.S. 50 in Sacramento that a judge has delayed because of the amount of greenhouse gas emissions it could generate, among other concerns.Protections would also be lifted on a freeway-widening project through an ecologically sensitive area of coastal San Diego County and on a controversial plan to drill a tunnel into the Berkeley Hills. And Schwarzenegger wants to empower a panel of his appointees to waive environmental rules on other projects.

See the LA Times’ map of the proposed projects

• LA Times Editorial (1.12.2009):

“[T]here's good reason to think a permanent end to public transit funding will be part of future budget proposals. It shouldn't be. California voters have repeatedly shown they want some of their gas tax money to fund transit, and they're even willing to tax themselves more to improve bus and rail systems. Transit agencies, like every other public service, can expect to take a big hit in the next budget, but that doesn't mean their permanent funding stream should be cut off.”

• Contra Costa Times Editorial (1.08.2009):

“[T]he governor was opposed to the Democratic budget, not because of the revenue increases, which he did not criticize, but because he wanted more spending cuts and relaxation of environmental and labor laws to stimulate public works projects.
“On Wednesday, Schwarzenegger said he wanted a bipartisan solution to the budget impasse. In other words, he belatedly has come out against the Democrats' fee-is-not-a-tax scheme, which clearly never would get any GOP support. If the governor opposed the revenue-raising element of the Democrats' budget, why didn't he say so nearly three weeks ago, when it was first proposed?”

• Sacramento Bee Editorial (1.11.2009):

“If you are a business owner, it is likely you belong to the Chamber of Commerce or some other business association. … Here are some questions you should ask yourself: Are the leaders of my association or union acting in the state's interest? Are they even acting in my interest? If I'm a supplier who contracts with the state, do I want a budget resolution delayed so my business coalition can press Democrats to waive environmental reviews of highway projects?”

• San Francisco Chronicle (1.08.2009):

"Now it's back to the bargaining table with the one faction that has been orbiting in outer space while disaster looms in Planet California. The Republican Senate and Assembly members will join Schwarzenegger and the Democratic leaders at a "Big 5" meeting today. The governor said it was time to 'turn the page.' We'll see.
"The GOP legislators continue to refuse to consider any new taxes to fill these deficits. They're seemingly so determined to adhere to their no-tax pledges that your tax refund might get held hostage as a result, and the economy they're claiming to protect will suffer the reverberations of a government breakdown. "

Budget Battles – A More Concrete Plan

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger continues to press for unnecessary big-road-project exemptions to the California Environmental Quality Act. In fact, that’s one of the reasons why he vetoed a proposed budget fix advanced by the democratic leaders in the Legislature.

He’s trying to make something out of nothing. Nonpartisan analysts at the Legislative Analyst's Office have identified problems with Schwarzenegger’s approach. For example, the efforts to roll back California’s environmental protections only would advance many projects by a few months. Other projects may be held back by Prop. 1B limits on spending bond money on project design.

The state’s best hope for economic stimulus may instead lie with investment in rehabilitation and safety improvement projects, such as bridge maintenance, drainage improvements and pothole repair, according to the analysts. Even better, these small-scale projects can be done at less cost, since there’s traditionally more competition for smaller projects.

Such spending could cause true economic stimulus, and offer statewide safety and environmental benefits.

Wouldn’t that be something?

Image courtesy State of California

Sierra Club California, Others Fight For Tough Diesel Rule

Shouldn’t California’s trucks carry a fair share of California’s efforts to reduce pollution?

Sierra Club California Director Bill Magavern and other key figures in California’s environmental movement have banded together to ask the California Air Resources Board to do just that. The letter asks the regulators to improve enforcement and enaction of their proposed diesel truck rule, set for a Dec. 12 vote.

The rule would require trucks to lower the amount of harmful diesel emission particles they exhaust into California’s air. With diesel emissions expected to go up as much as 40 percent by 2020, it’s a good time to address these harmful pollutants. What’s more, with the fuel efficiency improvements brought on by changes to the truck rule, truckers will recoup their costs in about 2-3 years.

Cutting truck emissions will lessen the environmental health burden on California families. A November 2008 study found that air pollution in just the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley regions costs the California economy $28 billion annually.

A tight, responsive rule also will help the state reduce the pollution that causes global warming, the environmental experts say. Reducing heavy-duty vehicle emissions must be part of California’s efforts to take on those pollutants.

If you want to get involved, consider joining Breathe California’s Bus for Breath. This group will help send people to the air board meeting to advocate adoption of a protective, productive rule.

Click here to read the entire letter from California environmentalists and health advocates.

The Cost Of Bad Air

Two California State University professors, Jane V. Hall and Victor Brajer, just released a study that proves what we have all known for a long time: Dirty air has a high cost.

Nearly every resident of the Central Valley and South Coast region suffers from exposure to dirty air, and too many pay a tragic price: as many as 3,860 adults die prematurely each year due to air pollution in those two areas of the state, according to the study. (The South Coast region includes Los Angeles, Riverside, San Bernardino and Orange counties; the Central Valley region stretches across Fresno, Kern, Kings, Madera, Merced, San Joaquin, Stanislaus, and Tulare counties).

Because the pollution concentrations are highest in African American and Latino neighborhoods, those families suffer the most exposure to harmful air pollution particles, the findings show.

Meeting federal air quality standards would prevent those deaths, the study finds, and would result in:

• 1,950 fewer new cases of adult onset chronic bronchitis
• 3,517,720 fewer days of reduced activity in adults
• 2,760 fewer hospital admissions
• 141,370 fewer asthma attacks
• 1,259,840 fewer days of school absence
• 16,110 fewer cases of acute bronchitis in children
• 466,880 fewer lost days of work
• 2,078,300 fewer days of respiratory symptoms in children
• 2,800 fewer emergency room visits


Between the cost of medical care and the dollars spent on lost productivity, California spends nearly $28 billion in those two regions, the CSU Fullerton professors reported.

The study was released just as California air regulators begin discussing key air quality rules, including rules that would help clean up diesel exhaust from trucks and a plan to deal with climate change.

Recent Coverage:

Study: Calif. Dirty Air Kills More Than Car Crashes (AP)

Human cost of valley's dirty air: $6.3 billion (The Sacramento Bee)

Bad air costing state's economy billions (SF Chronicle)

More than 400 related stories (Google News)

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

Achieving Open Government in China’s Hunan Province

Sierra Club California got a rare opportunity to take part in a landmark international effort today.
Representatives of China’s Hunan Province came to Sacramento with The Asia Foundation to learn about how California makes information available to the public. They wanted to know how California public interest groups – including Sierra Club California and the Public Policy Institute of California – interact with the government to obtain information, particularly environmental information.

Through a translator, Deputy Director Paul Mason talked about a case in the North Coast, where environmentalists had to sue the Bush Administration for access to data used in developing a logging plan. He also explained discrepancies within the various agencies, noting that the Resources Agency, for example, still does not webcast its meetings even though most other key state agencies do.

Outreach Coordinator Colleen Flannery talked about how groups like Sierra Club use a variety of existing government databases. The representatives appeared impressed by the variety of information made available by the state – ranging from the state water boards’ environmental enforcement reports to political contributions made by companies and individuals to webcasts of government meetings.

The Hunan Province is struggling to address a number of environmental threats, among them environmental health impacts from illegal smelters in nearby Hubei Province, intense air pollution resulting in acid rain, and water contamination in the Xiangjiang River Basin. Getting out environmental information represents one of the province’s – and China’s – best potential weapons against pollution, Paul Mason said.

“Public access to information is one of the best ways to work toward a clean environment,” he told the representatives.

Image Courtesy Wikipedia Commons

Message To The Governor: Sign These Bills!

Just as the lengthening budget crisis threatened to push California’s lawmaking process aside, our state’s leaders finally agreed upon a financial plan for the state.

Now that Gov. Schwarzenegger’s attention seems to have shifted from the state’s tangled budget, Sierra Club California has a list of important bills we respectfully ask him to sign – and one that we want him to veto.

Here are some highlights, or you can read the whole letter here:

Sierra Club California urges Gov. Schwarzenegger to sign the following bills:

SB 974 (Lowenthal) – would mitigate air pollution from the ports and increase port efficiency by assessing a fee for each container moving through the ports or Los Angeles, Long Beach and Oakland.

SB 1313 (Corbett) – would ban potentially carcinogenic substances from food packaging, beginning in 2010.

AB 1879 (Feuer/Huffman) – would give the Department of Toxic Substances Control the authority to establish safeguards to protect people and the environment from consumer products containing known toxins like lead, mercury and arsenic.

AB 2347 (Ruskin) – would establish a producer responsibility program for recycling of mercury thermostats.

AB 2447 (Jones) – would ensure that new homes have adequate structural fire protection, without leaving that responsibility to CalFire and the state’s general fund.

Sierra Club California also urges Gov. Schwarzenegger to veto one bill:

SB 1473 (Calderon) - would give inappropriately broad authority to the Building Standards Commission (BSC) to develop and adopt the California Green Building Standards Code (CGBSC). This authority would allow the BSC to exclude expert state agencies such as the California Energy Commission, Cal-EPA, State Water Board, Air Resources Board, and Integrated Waste Management Board, which are already working on various aspects of green building.

Read the full letter to Gov. Schwarzenegger here.

Hot Air From Sarah Palin On Ports

As today’s LA Times reported, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin recently wrote a letter to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger opposing a landmark port air quality bill that we support.

John McCain’s running mate said she doesn’t like Senate Bill 974 (Lowenthal) because she thinks it will have “negative impacts” on the price of Alaskan goods. For her, the estimated few pennies extra that consumers might have to pay for a DVD player or new pair of shoes matter more than the health of Americans who suffer from the damaging effects of air pollution.

SB 974 is designed to address a different kind of negative impact: the negative impact of air pollution at ports. SB 974 imposes a small fee per container in order to fund clean-air technologies and relieve congestion at California’s major ports.

Investing in California’s port infrastructure could alleviate the increased asthma rates near goods movement corridors, decreasing the number of lost workdays and school days caused by this debilitating illness. It would put our major ports on a greener, cleaner path to growth – instead of a “Bridge To Nowhere.”

Sierra Club California urges Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to consider California’s health ahead of political pressure and sign SB 974.

-- Bill Magavern, Director, Sierra Club California

Another View: Read what the Indiana chapter of the Sierra Club had to say about Governor Palin's disdain for wildlife here.

Clear The Air In The Central Valley!

Over the weekend, The Bakersfield Californian ran an editorial about Governor Schwarzenegger’s delay in appointing members for the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, which makes policies to reduce the pollutants that plague the valley.

The situation has gone from bad to terrible, as an area once considered a severe non-attainment area was recently reclassified as an extreme non-attainment area. This makes the San Joaquin Valley’s very air an immediate health risk to asthmatic children, agricultural production, and seniors.

So why are the people of San Joaquin still waiting for representation on their air board?

With the air pollution of other regions affecting the San Joaquin Valley, citizen health needs to have a higher priority. The governor must keep his commitments, stop dragging his feet and appoint the necessary people.

- By Noah Hochman, Intern, Sierra Club California

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.”

Environmental Justice and Carbon Trading

Several of California's leading environmental justice advocates on February 19 released a Declaration Against Carbon Trading. The Los Angeles Times mistakenly reported that Sierra Club declined to comment on the announcement. Here is the letter we sent the LA Times correcting the mistake and making clear our position.

To the editor:

Re: “Groups to fight plan for trading carbon emissions,” Feb 20. Sierra Club California did provide a comment on the declaration by environmental justice groups against trading greenhouse gas emissions, but technological problems may have prevented it from reaching your reporter.

We share many of the concerns of the environmental justice groups regarding pollution trading, like possible hot spots, loopholes and windfall profits. For these reasons we worked with those groups to successfully keep mandatory trading out of California’s Global Warming Solutions Act, AB 32. We have advocated that AB 32's implementation focus primarily on direct emission reductions, not trading, and we have repeatedly pushed California’s Air Resources Board to implement the community-protection provisions of the law. We are also open to using well-designed market compliance mechanisms to achieve some of the emission reductions necessary, as long as big polluters have to pay for their emissions and local air quality is protected.

Bill Magavern
Director, Sierra Club California

Assembly Runs out of Gas on Clean Car Bill

The Assembly left town yesterday after deciding on the fate of its remaining bills that had not cleared the house last year. The Assembly went out with a whimper, failing to pass AB 493, Ira Ruskin's innovative proposal to give consumers discounts on cleaner vehicles, paid for by surcharges on the more polluting cars and trucks. With no Republican support at all, and with too many Democratic lawmakers unwilling to cast a vote against the powerful auto dealer lobby, the bill lacked the necessary votes, and was never even brought up on the floor.
http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20080130/news_1n30gas.html

Governor Appoints Outstanding Doctor to Air Board

Sierra Club California applauds the governor’s appointment of John Balmes, M.D. to fill the seat of the medical/health representative on the California Air Resources Board. Dr. Balmes is committed to reducing global warming pollution and achieving cleaner, healthier air for all Californians, and especially for children, the elderly, and the millions of Californians suffering from asthma and other lung diseases.

Dr. Balmes is a Professor of Medicine at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) where he is the Chief of the Division of Occupational and Environmental Medicine at San Francisco General Hospital (SFGH), and an Attending Physician in Pulmonary/Critical Care Medicine at SFGH. Dr. Balmes leads an active research program involving controlled human exposure studies of the respiratory effects of ambient air pollutants, and he has advised both CARB and the Department of Toxic Substances Control, among other governmental bodies.

As it grapples with the two vitally important tasks of protecting public health and stabilizing the climate, CARB will benefit enormously from the expertise and commitment of John Balmes.

In related news, a groundbreaking new study from Stanford University being released today identifies and quantifies that carbon dioxide is not just heating up the planet, it is making it harder to breathe.

California Wins Global Warming Case Brought by Auto Industry

In a significant victory in the fight to reduce global warming pollution, today the Federal District Court in Fresno dismissed the auto industry's claims that federal law barred California from enforcing it own motor vehicle greenhouse gas regulations. In a 57-page decision, Judge Anthony Ishii held that these regulations did not in any way conflict with either federal fuel economy laws or with the President's power to conduct foreign policy. Emphasizing that the Clean Air Act expressly authorizes California to regulate emissions that affect human health and the environment, Judge Ishii found that Congress did not intend that this authority be curtailed by federal fuel economy laws. Sierra Club intervened in the case, on the side of the California Air Resources Board, which had set the clean-car standards ordered by Assembly Bill 1493 of 2002, authored by Fran Pavley.

Once again a judge has found the auto industry’s desperate attempts to stay mired in outdated, dirty technology completely without merit. Today’s decision is just one more reason why EPA should stop dragging its feet and grant the waiver California needs to move forward with this vital tool to combat global warming.

Just as we said earlier this year when we celebrated a similar victory in a Vermont court, instead of the automakers thinking of excuses, it’s time for them to put their immense know-how toward solving some of our most pressing problems. This ruling should compel the U.S. automakers to make the kind of clean, efficient cars Americans want--the kind that foreign automakers have used to surge to record profits as the U.S. auto industry buckled under the weight of its gas guzzlers. This ruling is good for the environment, good for America, and, ultimately, good for the automakers.

It’s now time for the Bush Administration’s EPA to get out of the way and grant California the waiver it and other states need in order to move forward with these landmark protections.

Transportation Commission Turns Toward Clean Air

Yesterday I joined other clean-air advocates from around the state in asking the CA Transportation Commission to reinstate air quality as one of the key factors to consider when bond money to improve trade corridors is doled out. The CTC had previously removed air quality from the list of criteria compiled by its own staff, but after public testimony yesterday the commissioners restored it to the list. Breathers who live near busy ports and rail and truck routes now can have some hope that the public's money will be spent on transportation projects that make the air cleaner, not dirtier.

This decision may signal the beginning of a new and much-needed integration of transportation and air-quality policies at the state level. Dale Bonner, Secretary of Business, Transportation & Housing, kept an open mind and met with all the interested parties, including state and local air quality advocates. The Air Resources Board also deserves credit for speaking up at yesterday’s meeting.

Bill Magavern, Senior Representative, Sierra Club California

2007 Legislative Session Wraps Up With Some Progress, But on Many Key Issues It’s “Wait ‘til Next Year”

After a highly productive session in the 2006 election year established key new safeguards for the global climate and human health, this year has seen far fewer major new laws enacted to protect California’s environment. Although some key measures found success, on many vital issues our elected officials seem to be echoing the eternal refrain of Chicago Cubs fans: “Wait ‘til next year.”

Bright spots included flood protection, clean air, and endangered species protection. A package of bills negotiated by the Legislature and Governor finally starts to bring some sense to development in flood-prone areas. SB 5 (Machado) requires the state to prepare a Central Valley Flood Protection Plan by 2012. AB 5 (Wolk) reforms, restructures and renames the state Reclamation Board, which is the agency in charge of flood protection in the Central Valley. AB 70 (Jones) would provide for limited shared contribution between the state and local governments when local governments approve new developments in previously undeveloped areas that can increase property damages resulting from a flood for which the state is liable.

The Healthy Heart and Lung Act, AB 233 (Jones), sponsored by Sierra Club California and American Lung Association of California, will improve enforcement of rules that limit toxic diesel emissions, and SB 719 (Machado) will, at long last, reform the San Joaquin Valley’s lackluster Air Pollution Control District by adding expertise and urban representation. AB 118 (Núñez) will raise about $150 million annually for clean fuel and clean air programs.

Governor Schwarzenegger surprised many observers by signing AB 821 (Nava) to require the use of non-lead bullets when hunting big game within the range of the endangered California condor. This state icon is suffering from lead poisoning, because the birds eat bullet fragments when scavenging carcasses.

Speaking of poisons, the Governor has opened a Green Chemistry Initiative to reduce human exposure to toxic chemicals, most of which currently come into our homes and workplaces without being required to demonstrate safety. Legislation to reduce toxic threats fared poorly this year on the whole, but Schwarzenegger’s signing of the Toxic Toys bill, AB 1108 (Ma), will invigorate the Green Chemistry process by keeping hazardous substances away from the youngest Californians. The bill bans pthalates, a plastic softener, from products meant for infants and toddlers.

Unfortunately, the Governor vetoed important bills to make our buildings and fuels greener. AB 888 (Lieu) would have set green building standards for commercial buildings, starting in 2013. AB 1058 (Laird) would have set green building standards for new residential construction, and AB 35 (Ruskin) would have required CAL-EPA to set sustainable building standards for the construction and renovation of state buildings. SB 210 (Kehoe) would have required the adoption of a low-carbon fuel standard by 2010 that achieved at least a 10 percent reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and maintained or improved upon air quality benefits gained by current gasoline and diesel fuel standards.

The Legislature deferred until next year the vital tasks of spurring smart growth, requiring utilities to generate more power from renewables, and cleaning up the filthy air at the mega-ports of Los Angeles, Long Beach and Oakland. Sierra Club California and our allies had pushed the Legislature to act in these vital areas, but many key bills stalled toward the end of session due to opposition from powerful special interests. SB 974 (Lowenthal), the Clean Ports bill, was deferred until January at the request of Governor Schwarzenegger. Both SB 375 (Steinberg), which seeks to reduce vehicular emissions through smarter land use patterns, and SB 411 (Simitian), which would require utilities to generate 33% of their power from renewable sources, failed to clear the Assembly Appropriations Committee, and AB 558 (Feuer), which would have generated information on the use of toxic chemicals, died by a close vote of the Senate Appropriations panel.

The Legislature’s failure to pass these important bills, along with the Governor’s vetoes of some of the bills passed by lawmakers, leave substantial unfinished business to be taken up next year. Since 2008 is an election year, and our elected officials know that protecting our health and ecology is very popular with voters, we have reason to expect more progress next year.

By Bill Magavern

The Healthy Heart and Lung Act, AB 233 (Jones) awaits the Governor's Signature

Sierra Club California and the American Lung Association of California have sponsored AB 233, the Healthy Heart and Lung Act, because of the need to reduce emissions of hazardous diesel exhaust. Assemblymember Dave Jones, Democrat of Sacramento, continues his impressive record of clean-air advocacy by authoring the bill.

Soot from diesel-fueled engines is an extremely dangerous air pollutant that has been linked to lung cancer, chronic bronchitis, asthma episodes, heart attacks and strokes, hampered lung growth in children, and premature deaths. The California State Air Resources Board (CARB) has linked diesel particulates to approximately 3,000 premature deaths each year as well as thousands of hospitalizations for respiratory illnesses. Recent research in Southern California found pronounced deficits in attained lung function for children living within 500 meters of a freeway. A recent study of women’s health found that particulate pollution substantially increases the risk of heart disease in older women.

AB 233 would reduce public exposure to dangerous diesel emissions by improving enforcement of diesel control regulations, increasing penalties for violators, and increasing education and outreach to vehicle owners regarding state idling requirements. The bill would require CARB to develop a plan for consistent, comprehensive and fair enforcement of diesel control regulations, including education and outreach efforts. AB 233 would also raise the penalty for violation of CARB diesel idling limits to $300 per violation, in line with penalties for other diesel violations. In addition, operators of commercial motor vehicles would be required to clear their citations for violating emissions rules before having their registrations renewed.

CARB has recently adopted major new diesel control regulations affecting off-road diesel engines and idling limits on all diesel vehicles and sleeper cabs, and soon will adopt additional regulations for on-road diesel engines. Expanded enforcement staff is needed to ensure consistent enforcement and public health protection.

Governor Schwarzenegger’s signature on the Healthy Heart and Lung Act would add some necessary enforcement muscle to the state’s aggressive program of reducing Californians’ exposure to toxic diesel exhaust.

Bill Magavern
Sierra Club California

Bush Administration Secretly Lobbied to Block California's Clean Car Law

Today, Rep. Henry Waxman, Chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, uncovered that the White House worked directly with Secretary of Transportation Mary Peters to engineer a secret campaign--using taxpayer resources--to lobby Congress and governors to help block the waiver California and more than a dozen other states need to proceed with landmark standards that would reduce global warming emissions from automobiles 30 percent by 2016. This comes as the administration bypasses serious international discussions on global warming in favor of a summit of the world’s major emitters whose sole purpose appears to be obfuscation and delay in forging a binding international agreement on global carbon emissions.

----
Documents relating to the Congressional investigation can be found at:
http://oversight.house.gov/story.asp?ID=1495