CCTA Opposes AB 398 Extension of Cap and Trade

AB 398  ( Approved by Governor  July 25, 2017. Filed with Secretary of State  July 25, 2017. )

AB398 Extension of Cap and Trade is a very complicated bill that was recently passed by the state Legislature and signed into law by Governor Jerry Brown. CCTA opposed the passing of the new legislation for multiple reasons; however, below are three specific concerns:

Concern 1 • Dollars to High Speed Rail…

Proponents of the 10 year extension of cap and trade state there is no funding for the High Speed Rail (HSR); however wording in AB 398...
Read More

Concern 2 • Increase in Gas Taxes…

Proponents of the cap and trade extension state there is no increase in gas taxes. Here is the catch, do not use the phrase "gas taxes,"...
Read More

Concern 3 • Repeal of the Fire Tax…

Proponents of cap and trade extension state the fire tax is repealed. It is not, AB 398 merely suspends it until 2031. and it can be...
Read More

 

OVERALL…

CCTA believes the motivations behind the cap and trade program have less to do with protecting California’s environment, and more to do with the revenue streams the program brings with it. CCTA is greatly disappointed Assemblyman Jordan Cunningham voted to support AB 398. While there were concessions for a few industries, this was a very bad deal for California’s forgotten taxpayer who will, as usual, pay the bill!

CONTROVERSIAL • Editorials/Opinions/Facts Discussing the Passing of SB 398

Fighting Cap-and-Trade with Senator Ted Gaines​

Fighting Cap-and-Trade with Senator Ted Gaines​ from CA Senate Republican Caucus on...
Read More

What’s Wrong with Cap & Trade?

Cap & trade will drive up gas prices, burden small businesses With the recent vote by the legislature to extend the Governor’s...
Read More

Direct rebuttal of cap-and-trade talking points • HJTA

The arguments legislators will make are: 1. The current Cap & Trade law was set to expire, if it had expired ALL authority to meet...
Read More

Republican Jordan Cunningham voted for cap-and-trade. That is not a sin

By The Tribune Editorial Board http://www.sanluisobispo.com/news/local/article163045763.html July 26, 2017 10:51 PM Allow us to introduce...
Read More

Cap & Trade Promises vs. Facts • Senator Andy Vidak

Monday, July 24, 2017 http://vidak.cssrc.us/content/cap-trade-promises-vs-facts?platform=hootsuite Promise #1 “The Cap and Trade extension...
Read More

Republicans are playing politics with the gas tax again. No wonder they have no power in California

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-gas-tax-strategy-20170717-story.html LA Times • July 17, 2017 A Chevron gas station in...
Read More

BACKGROUND • History of Cap and Trade

In 2009 Cap and Trade was being voted on in Washington DC to be nationwide. This effort failed. Then California implemented this statewide to the detriment of its taxpayers. The plan was and is for California to pave the way of spreading it nationwide. SB32 started all this in 2006.

SB-32 California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006: emissions limit. Click here to read the entire bill. (provided here are just two critical paragraphs)

(a) The California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (Division 25.5 (commencing with Section 38500) of the Health and Safety Code) authorizes the State Air Resources Board to adopt regulations to achieve the maximum technologically feasible and cost-effective greenhouse gas emissions reductions.

(b) The California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (Division 25.5 (commencing with Section 38500) of the Health and Safety Code) requires the State Air Resources Board to reduce statewide emissions of greenhouse gases to at least the 1990 emissions level by 2020 and to maintain and continue reductions thereafter.