Who’s really lying on climate change? Hint: Their first names are Jerry and Arnold

Who’s really lying on climate change? Hint: Their first names are Jerry and Arnold https://t.co/kW0bkXg9AU pic.twitter.com/TnvKOaVO0X

— Watts Up With That (@wattsupwiththat) August 4, 2017

Arnold Schwarzenegger really should be careful about calling people liars. Especially when he’s trying to pass off faith as scientific fact.

Maybe you saw the former governor and erstwhile action star berating conservatives the other day for refusing to accept his view that the answer to climate change is the heavy hand of government....

Republicans didn’t have to vote for cap and trade

Cap and trade support gives California Republicans the losing argument that they voted for fuel cost hikes to save us from even worse taxes. What ordinary voting taxpayer is going to buy that?

#Capandtrade support gives #CAGOP losing argument that it supported fuel cost hikes to save us from even worse taxes https://t.co/8RlNHWBAVv

— HJTA.org (@HJTA) July 31, 2017

Republican refusal to give in to the type of extortion reflected in the cap-and-trade bill may very well have forced the Democrats into approving a CARB-style bureaucracy with a simple majority vote — which, by the way, might still happen. The far-left of the Democratic Party may have cheered but, for Republicans, it would open up vast new demographics — working Hispanics, other ethnic groups and recent immigrants — for whom just a few more cents in a gallon of gas is a big deal.

Unfailing opposition to the deal by Republicans would have provided something else almost always absent from California politics — clarity and accountability. When gas prices go through the roof — which they surely will — there would be no doubt which party to blame.

But we’ll never know as it will be difficult, if not impossible, to repair the damage and restore the Republican brand. Thus the odds of Republicans gaining seats in any of the next four election cycles (thanks to redistricting in 2022) are now in doubt. And for what? So Republicans can now adopt the losing argument that they voted for increased fuel costs to save taxpayers from even higher prices? What ordinary voting taxpayer is going to buy that argument?

California: Overall household fuel costs will likely eventually increase by over $1,000 a year per household. And all this is occurring so that liberal Democrats can reach an arbitrary threshold of a 40 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emission levels by 2030.

Fuel costs to rise $1K/household by 2030 just so liberal Dems can meet arbitrary climate emissions goal https://t.co/ROsYCBrfFU #CAPolitics

— HJTA.org (@HJTA) July 25, 2017

Brown signs cap and trade extension, Schwarzenegger blasts Trump https://t.co/TL5IpTilm3 pic.twitter.com/sCjAFgGmX1

— SFGate (@SFGate) July 25, 2017

California produces less than one percent of the world's climate change emissions so why is extending the state's cap and trade tax so urgent? According to columnist Susan Shelley, the real motivation is actually to provide money for the Governor's pet bullet train and a revenue stream for future borrowing.

.@Susan_Shelley: Real reason #CAGov wants #capandtrade now is not the planet, but money for bullet train & borrowing https://t.co/ZXSexIfJkS

— HJTA.org (@HJTA) July 16, 2017

CA ranked 43rd - one of 10 worst run states. Or if for you the glass is half full, we're better than 7 https://t.co/gK7R65mMDw #CAPolitics

— HJTA.org (@HJTA) July 13, 2017

If anyone is looking for evidence that government unions use their immense influence to support the growth of an authoritarian state, look no further than their unequivocal support for global warming “mitigation,” and all attendant agencies and laws to support that goal.

How Gov’t Unions and Crony Capitalists Exploit Global Warming Concerns - California Political Review https://t.co/TECDtxsS8E

— CA Political Review (@CAPoliticalRev) June 23, 2016

If anyone is looking for evidence that government unions and crony capitalists work together – contrary to the conventional wisdom that presents the appearance that they are in conflict – again look no further than their shared support for global warming mitigation, expressed in the legislative mandate to reduce CO2 emissions. AB32 implements this by forcing industrial entities to purchase permits to emit progressively smaller quantities of CO2, via an auction process that is expected to raise $20 billion per year to finance renewable energy investments.
Think about how government unions will benefit from all this money:

• Transit workers will claim a share because they will be getting cars off the road.
• Firefighters will claim more fires are because of global warming and demand more funds – when in reality most severe wildfires are the result of decades of forest mismanagement and unwarranted wildfire suppression.
• Cities will qualify for proceeds when they zone extremely high density housing.
• Code enforcement officers will declare that the percentage of their jobs oriented towards conservation and energy/water efficiency qualifies them for a share of the proceeds.
• Teachers will declare that the percentage of their curricula oriented towards climate education qualifies them for a share of the proceeds.
• More generally, municipalities will collect more property tax as restrictive zoning elevates the cost of housing.

Think about how crony corporations and corrupt financial special interests benefit from this money:

• Wall Street traders will set up new subsidiaries to traffic in carbon emission auctions and take a cut.
• “Green” entrepreneurs will manufacture devices calculated to save energy and water – despite the fact that the shortages are contrived.
• Producers of energy and water will sell at higher prices since competitive development of these resources is restricted.
• Utilities whose profits are “decoupled” from the quantity of energy and water they deliver will increase revenue and hence their profit margins which are pegged to revenue, without having to increase services.
• Manufacturers of noncompetitive products with no natural demand – high speed rail is a perfect example – are enriched via hundreds of billions of investment for their supposedly greener and cleaner solutions.
• More generally, artificial scarcity causes asset bubbles which benefits wealthy investors and pension funds, but impoverishes ordinary workers.

Even if CO2 is a threat to life on earth, there is an alternative that merits discussion:

California's cap and trade program may be in collapse.

CA #capandtrade program may be in collapse https://t.co/QCEGYtUZxd #CAPolitics

— HJTA.org (@HJTA) June 15, 2016

The linchpin of California’s climate change agenda, a program known as cap and trade, has become mired in legal, financial and political troubles...

The program has been a symbol of the state’s leadership in the fight against global warming and a key source of funding, most notably for the high-speed rail project connecting San Francisco and Los Angeles.

But the legality of cap and trade is being challenged in court by a business group, and questions are growing about whether state law allows it to operate past 2020. With the end of the legislative session in August, Gov. Jerry Brown, lawmakers and interest groups of all stripes are laying the groundwork for what could become a battle royal over the future of California’s climate change programs.

Unless the state acts, “the whole system could fail,” said Senate leader Kevin de León (D-Los Angeles). “If that happens, we could lose an entire stream of revenue to make our communities more sustainable.”....

Unless the California Air Resources Board takes action soon, motorists could be hit with a 76 cent per gallon gas tax increase in January.

◼ ENVIRONMENT: Gas prices fueling debate - The Press Enterprise via Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association
◼ LIKE Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association on FACEBOOK

Come Jan. 1, fuel producers will have to buy credits to cover auto emissions. Industry representatives said the consumers will bear the cost of those credits.

California drivers can expect to pay 16 to 76 cents per gallon more once the cap-and-trade changes are in effect, according to Fed Up at The Pump, a coalition of fuel producers and business groups that calls the upcoming cap-and-trade change a hidden tax.

“Now is not the time for California’s environmental bureaucrats to play social engineers and price out consumers who need to fill up their gas tanks to make a living,” read an issue summary on the Fed Up coalition’s website.