In last night’s debate Senator Barbara Boxer made clear what was at stake in November’s U.S. Senate election: California’s clean energy future. Without a doubt, re-electing Barbara Boxer will help keep the dream alive, but electing Carly Fiorina would be a nightmare. In fact, when asked about her stance on Prop 23, the Dirty Energy Initiative funded by Texas oil companies to suspend California’s landmark global warming law AB 32, Fiorina danced around the question. But her spin failed. After a long-winded meaningless answer, the moderators pushed her give a direct yes or no answer on supporting the Dirty Energy Initiative. You’ll be surprised to learn she still didn’t answer the question. This strongly contrasted with Senator Boxer who has long been openly campaigning against Prop 23 and a stalwart supporter of AB 32:

Shortly after, Fiorina was grilled on her views of AB 32, California’s major climate change bill, and whether she backs Prop. 23, a November ballot measure that would suspend the law.

After Fiorina dodged the question, Shandobil said, “Yes or no? Just answer, do you support it?”

“I have not taken a position on it yet,” Fiorina responded, adding that “there’s no question in my mind … that AB 32 is at the very least, in the short term, a job killer.”

Boxer retorted: “Well, if you can’t take a stand on Prop. 23, I don’t know what you will take a stand on.”

By the way, one of the worst things that can happen to you in a debate is to be caught trying to avoid a question by the moderator. Why? Because you’re just drawing negative attention to yourself and feeding the press their story the next day like in the SacBee, the San Jose Mercury News, and the LA Times. I could go on, but the list is so long that Carly might actually accept global warming before I’m done reading it off.

You can watch the exchange about AB 32, Prop 23, and green jobs below:

It’s a great clip, but you can’t get enough information about what separates two candidates from a short sound bite. So to help you, take a look at this chart comparing the difference between Boxer and Fiorina on a number of environmental issues. Without a doubt, the choice is black and white… or brown and green, depending on your point of view.

• Read & write comments (No comments so far)
• Link to this post

I hope this is the only time I’ll ever say this: Carly Fiorina wins! The people have spoken, and our favorite failed corporate executive/ Senate candidate has received the equivalent of a Razzie award. That’s right, Carly ‘global warming is just changes in weather’ Fiorina has been added as the LCV People’s Choice Dirty Dozen member of the year. And rightfully so. I think of it like that episode of Friends where Monica has to be the best at everything and ends up being the best at being the worst. Well, congrats Carly, you’re the best of the worst when it comes to protecting the environment. I knew you had it in you.

Our friends at LCV had this to say:

Today, the League of Conservation Voters (LCV), which works to turn environmental values into national priorities, announced that Republican Senate candidate Carly Fiorina has been named to the 2010 Dirty Dozen as the next “People’s Choice.” Fiorina was chosen for the Dirty Dozen list through an online vote where she received 36 percent of the votes.

“When it’s politically convenient Carly Fiorina supports climate action and when it’s politically profitable she’ll side with the corporate polluters funding her campaign,” said Tony Massaro, LCV Senior Vice President for Political Affairs. “Fiorina’s win as the ‘People’s Choice’ clearly shows voters want a Senator who will create new clean energy jobs in California, not a failed corporate executive with a preference for killing jobs.”

Fiorina has received about $63,000 in donations this year from out-of-state coal interests and $76,850 from oil and gas companies.* As CEO of Hewlett-Packard, Fiorina laid off approximately 18,000 workers during HP’s restructuring in 2003 and then later said she regretted not firing more people.** Speaking at the 2008 Republican National Convention in Minneapolis, Minn., she praised Sen. John McCain’s (R-Ariz.) cap-and-trade plan as something that would “both create jobs and lower the cost of energy.”*** Yet Fiorina has campaigned and run ads on her opposition to comprehensive clean energy and climate legislation, including a commercial against Senator Boxer’s stance on global warming claiming that Boxer is “worried about the weather.”

“Carly Fiorina is drastically out of step with the American businesses, veterans and workers that are all calling for a clean energy economy and greater energy independence,” said Massaro. “The people have spoken and we will work hard to fulfill their request for Carly Fiorina’s defeat this November.”

Amen.

Next step: let’s re-elect Barbara Boxer to the Senate this November!

• Read & write comments (1 comment so far)
• Link to this post

Frankly, I’m a little surprised it took them this long. Maybe they thought, with all their money and influence, that a bill that would ban single-use plastic bags would never get as far as it has in the California legislature. But now they’re running scared.

The swift and sudden force of their campaign has led the bill’s author, environmental champion and Assemblywoman Julia Brownley, to remark “I’ve never witnessed this kind of opposition to a bill.”

I’m talking, of course, about some of the usual foes of environmental regulations — the American Chemistry Council, a group that represents the interests of chemical companies. According to California Watch, these companies include the vast majority (80 percent) of companies around the United States that produce plastic bags. Because of course, that’s what plastic bags are made of: chemicals. Hence, the danger to marine life when tons of this familiar litter makes its way into the ocean and starts the slow but dangerous process of breaking down.

The Chemistry Council has released a TV advertising campaign airing only in Sacramento, and thus targeting legislators. With a mocking tone, it criticizes lawmakers for considering AB 1998, the ban on plastic bags in grocery stores.

“California is in trouble … 2.3 million unemployed … $19 million deficit … What are some Sacramento politicians focused on?” a cynical voice asks.

“Grocery bags.”

They’ve also launched a Web site complaining about what they call the “bag police.” It’s the corporate polluters’ usual message: “How dare anyone suggest to consumers practical and cost-effective ways to protect our planet? It’s the American way to pollute as much and as often as we want… right?!

Finally, the Virginia-based Chemistry Council has made donations to specific state senators whose votes could provide important to the outcome of the bill, as reported by the Sacramento Bee.

The intention of this coordinated campaign is, of course, is to increase pressure on legislators to vote no. But their scary ads (with their unsubstantiated “threat to jobs” numbers) are nowhere near as frightening (and yet entertaining) as the ones put out by our friends at Heal the Bay, which we featured in a recent blog.

To answer the main question asked by the chemical industry, why is this ban a priority, given all of California’s other big challenges?

Because single-use plastic bags are rarely recycled (it’s estimated that about 5-6% of plastic material is recycled). They blow into gutters and collect in our storm drain system, ultimately making their way to the ocean. It is estimated that 60–80% of all marine debris is plastic, which doesn’t biodegrade, but rather, breaks down into smaller and smaller pieces. In some areas there is six times as much plastic as there is plankton. Put simply, plastic bags are devastating oceanic environments. The Pacific Garbage Patch, a famous semi-solid plastic island of trash in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, increases in size and density daily. It is a trash soup that is now twice the size of Texas.

Californians are currently using 19 billion plastic bags each year. That’s a lot of trash, and a lot of devastation to marine life. The bill will require grocery stores to offer reusable bags for purchase at checkout, thus encouraging consumers to get into the habit of bringing their own reusable bags to grocery stores.

AB 1998 has passed the Assembly and is in the Senate Rules Committee for amendments. It has until the legislative deadline on Tuesday to get from the committee to the Senate floor and pass; from there it travels to the governor’s desk.

If you haven’t yet taken action, please see CLCV’s action alert for more information, and contact your Senator before Tuesday, August 31.

• Read & write comments (No comments so far)
• Link to this post

Why, you ask, would the California League of Conservation Voters, the political arm of the environment movement in California, want me to vote for Carly Fiorina? After all, Fiorina has been in the headlines recently doubting the human causes of climate change, advocating offshore oil drilling, taking money from out-of-state coal companies to finance her Senate bid, and flip-flopping on federal cap-and-trade legislation. She would be an outright disaster for California’s environment.

Don’t worry, we at CLCV haven’t lost our minds, or radically altered our mission of electing champions for California’s environment. We’re NOT, we repeat, NOT asking you to vote for Fiorina for Senate. As you probably already know, we, along with several other environmental groups, have endorsed environmental champion, Senator Barbara Boxer, for reelection.

Instead, we’d like you to cast your vote for Fiorina to join the list of some of the worst enemies of the environment running for national office: “The Dirty Dozen.”

The national League of Conservation Voters (LCV) compiles this list each year. Their trademark Dirty Dozen program targets candidates for Congress — regardless of party affiliation — who consistently vote against clean energy and conservation and are running in races in which LCV has a serious chance to affect the outcome. Since 1996, more than 60 percent of the Dirty Dozen have been defeated.

There are already some pretty far-right foes of environmental protection on the 2010 list: Senator Blanche Lincoln (D-AR), Representatives Roy Blunt (R-MO) and Michelle Bachmann (R- MN) and former Congressman Steve Pearce (R-NM) are currently on the 2010 Dirty Dozen list. Former Congressman Richard Pombo (R-CA) was the first candidate to be defeated of the 2010 Dirty Dozen. Now we’re ready to add another California member to the list: Carly Fiorina.

The polls close on August 26, so please cast your vote for Fiorina to become the next “People’s Choice” for the Dirty Dozen, and tell your friends to vote for her, too… Just this once. Visit LCV’s Web site: http://www.lcv.org/feedback/choice/

Then on November 2nd, in an even more important election, vote to reelect Barbara Boxer to the U.S. Senate. LCV gave Boxer a score of 100% on their most recent (2009) Environmental Scorecard.

Here’s LCV’s description of anti-environment candidate Fiorina on their Web site:

California Senate candidate Carly Fiorina (R-CA) – Failed former Hewlett-Packard CEO, Carly Fiorina, is challenging environmental champion and chairman of the Committee on Environment and Public Works Barbara Boxer. As Senator McCain’s surrogate during the 2008 Presidential election, Fiorina repeatedly endorsed expanding domestic offshore drilling even though her state of California experienced one of the most destructive U.S. oil spills to date when over 100,000 barrels of oil spilled into the Santa Barbara Channel in 1969. Fiorina even ran a commercial against Senator Boxer’s stance on global warming claiming that Boxer is “worried about the weather.”

• Read & write comments (1 comment so far)
• Link to this post

California is just a couple of steps away from banning single-use plastic bags. China has done it. Parts of Mexico, Europe, Africa, and Australia have done it, too. Even some individual cities like San Francisco, Malibu, and Palo Alto have already banned these major pieces of pollution.

But now AB 1998 (Brownley) could be trashed if it does not get enough votes to pass out of the Senate Rules Committee.  If it does pass this crucial vote, the bill is expected to be rushed to the Senate Floor where the full State Senate  will vote.

Please contact your State Senator today and ask that he/she support AB 1998 – California’s solution to our number 1 source of ocean pollution.

• Read & write comments (2 comments so far)
• Link to this post

John Laird is hands-down one of the best legislators California has had this decade. He is a rational thinker committed to dealing with the critical issues facing California. During his time in the California Assembly, John co-authored California’s landmark climate bill, AB 32, amassed a perfect environmental voting record and was a leader in the Assembly for six years. He is supported by CLCV in his candidacy for Senate District 15 on California’s central coast, and should be supported by anyone who cares about good government and problem solving.

His opponent in the Aug. 17th special election, Sam Blakeslee, is a different sort. Though he acknowledges the fact of man-made climate change, Blakeslee just can’t seem to figure out what to do about it. Blakeslee opposes California’s AB 32, calling it a  “rates and dates approach” (whatever that means) as reported today’s San Luis Obispo Tribune editorial labeling Blakeslee a “waffler”.

Waffler indeed. Though he opposes AB 32, he can’t bring himself to either support or oppose the polluter-funded Proposition 23, which aims to repeal AB 32. He just waffles. His lifetime environmental voting record of 25%, recorded in CLCV’s Environmental Scorecard, is one quarter as good as John Laird’s 100% score.

The past decade was the warmest ever recorded, exceeding the record set in the 1990’s. Warming is good for waffles. It is not good for the climate. We need a decisive leader at this critical time. John Laird is that leader. If you want waffles, make your own.

• Read & write comments (1 comment so far)
• Link to this post

We’ve seen this before: Someone takes a step into big time politics and upon crossing that imaginary threshold, throws out their previously held values and beliefs. In particular, Republican candidates running for statewide office in California have been notorious for their contradictions, especially when it comes to positions on environmental issues.

Gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman was called out earlier this year for her flip-flopping on the environment.  Now we are seeing the same from Senate candidate Carly Fiorina.

Flash back to 2008, when Fiorina stood up loud and clear for John McCain’s cap-and-trade program at the 2008 Republican National Convention, noting that such a program would “create jobs,” “lower the cost of energy,” and “encourage the development of alternative energy sources.”

Fast forward to 2010 and here we have a Fiorina who:

1. criticizes Barbara Boxer for supporting cap-and-trade; and
2. aligns herself with global warming denier, Senator Jim Inhofe, after he endorsed her.

In addition, Fiorina recently accepted $63,000 in donations from Appalachian coal-mining interests. A big chunk of the money came from an outspoken Ohio mine owner, Robert Murray, who dismisses global warming as “hysterical global goofiness.”

Looks like another politician has fallen victim to party politics.  For more details on Whitman and Fiorina’s environmental positions, see the Los Angeles Times story “California Republicans shunning one traditional path to victory: the environment.”

• Read & write comments (1 comment so far)
• Link to this post