Shielding law on global warming top priority for environmental activists

California has become the primary battleground for environmental activists this election cycle thanks to a ballot initiative that would stymie a first-in-the-nation cap on greenhouse-gas emissions.

The Proposition 23 measure would suspend California’s global warming law — which calls for a reduction in emissions back to 1990 levels by 2020 — unless the state’s unemployment rate drops below 5.5 percent. Currently, the state’s unemployment rate is 12.4 percent, the third highest in the nation.

Protecting California’s global warming law has become a top priority for environmental activists who are still smarting over the defeat of comprehensive energy legislation in Congress this year. If the law survives the ballot challenge, it could become a model for other states to emulate.

“We are watching this on a national level,” said Chris Youngmark, deputy director of a local California United Steelworkers, which opposes Prop 23. “It seems like everything starts in California and moves eastward.”

Here’s a quick primer on the debate.

THE POLITICS

The debate over the climate law, as with most issues this election year, centers on jobs and consumer pocketbooks. Prop 23’s opponents and supporters both say their efforts will help ease California’s unemployment by preserving existing jobs and allowing for further economic growth.

Opponents of Prop 23 say it would kill “green jobs” and stymie investment and modernization in California’s economy. Supporters of Prop 23 say it is needed to kill a global warming plan that would eliminate jobs and raise energy costs for consumers.

THE SPENDERS

Prop 23’s backers and opponents have both received significant help from billionaire donors. They are using the money to flood the California airwaves with 30-second television ads and to organize grassroots outreach.

Opponents of the ballot measure have outraised supporters about 2-1 and raised more than $16 million, including $5 million from billionaire asset manager Tom Steyer, co-chair of the “No on Prop 23” campaign.

The League of Conservation Voters and its sister organization, LCV Education Fund, have committed $1.2 million so far to defeat Prop 23, the group announced Thursday — more than they are spending on any candidate races this year.

Major oil industry companies are bankrolling the effort to pass Prop 23. Valero Energy leads the pack with a $4 million donation — about half of the total that has been raised by supporters.

Tesoro Corp. has chipped in about $2 million, while a refinery subsidiary of Koch Industries — owned by the billionaire brothers and conservative political donors David and Charles Koch — has donated $1 million. Marathon Oil has contributed $500,000.

THE PUSHBACK

Critics of Prop 23 — including California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger — have attacked the corporate spending on the campaign, noting that almost 90 percent of it has come from outside the state.

Energy companies such as Valero say the criticism is unfair.

“We feel that [criticism] has been unfairly heaped upon Valero,” spokesman Bill Day said.

Valero — which has donated $4 million or about half of the money raised by supporters of the ballot initiative — has 1,600 employees in California, Day said. “We pay a lot of taxes do business there and are very concerned about the economy,” he said.

When asked whether Valero will contribute more funds, Day said no such plans are in the works. He added that the company “remains an enthusiastic supporter” and “feels it is vital for California’s economy.”

THE POLLS

Surveys on Prop 23 point to a nail-biter on Election Day.

A Sept. 26 Field Poll showed opponents of Prop 23 leading supporters 45 to 34 percent, similar to a 12 point difference in July. But a Sept. 24 L.A. Times/University of Southern California poll showed a dead heat, with supporters besting opponents by 2 points — 40 to 38 percent. A full quarter of those polled were undecided.

Another poll on Sept. 29 from the Public Policy Institute of California showed supporters up by 1 point among likely voters — 43 to 42 percent. Fifteen percent were undecided.  

But the problem for backers of the ballot initiative is that in all three polls, support was below 50 percent, which at that stage of a campaign creates significant hurdles since many undecided voters typically vote no.

“That is a political reality in California and there have been notable exceptions in the past,” said Angela Mangels, a spokeswoman for the "Yes on 23" campaign.

THE CLOSING ARGUMENT

Steve Maviglio, spokesman for the No on Prop 23 Campaign, said industry backers of the ballot initiative could cut big checks in the last weeks before the election and make inroads with undecided voters.

He said last-minute efforts by the oil industry helped kill Prop 87 in California in 2006. That initiative would have set up a $4 billion program to cut petroleum consumption by 25 percent and funded a tax of up to 6 percent on the state’s oil producers.

“Awareness is still very low, and you can make a major dent in the last couple of weeks,” Maviglio said of Prop 23. “We’ve got a foot on the gas pedal until the end here because we know what could happen.”

“Part of it is raising money and getting the message out,” said Solar Energy Industries Association President and CEO Rhone Resch. “But it’s really about getting the vote out. … There is a very strong grassroots campaign to defeat this proposition.”

Opponents of Prop 23 have lined up a fundraiser next week with Elvis Costello at a home in Atherton, a suburb of San Francisco that is one of the wealthiest towns in the nation. Sponsors expect the minimum of $500-per-head fundraiser to raise some $200,000.

Supporters of the initiative declined to tip their hand about any late infusion of cash.

“Unlike our opposition, we do not publicly speculate on our fundraising,” Mangels said.

She said Prop 23 supporters are focused on voter contact through grassroots events, including a Tea Party-sponsored protest Thursday outside the Sacramento headquarters of the California Air Resources Board.

---