LA Times - "Proposition 23 backers (Big Oil Companies) sue over ballot language"

[TomCADem]

Proposition 23 proposes to suspend environmental laws until unemployment reaches and remains at 5.5 percent, which would mean that environmental laws that promote energy efficiency and discourage the use of fossil fuels would generally be suspended. The proposition is supported by oil giant Valero. Of course, Meg Whitman opposes AB 32, which the oil company proposition is designed to repeal. So, god forbid that the AG provide an honest description of the impact of the proposed law.

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/jul/29/local/la-me-climate-ballot-20100729

Backers of Proposition 23, a November ballot initiative to suspend California's 2006 Global Warming Solutions Act, filed suit in Sacramento County Superior Court on Tuesday against Atty. Gen. Jerry Brown for what they called "false, misleading and unfair" language that would describe the measure on voters' ballots.

The ballots, which must be printed by mid-August, would say that the measure "Suspends Air Pollution Control Laws Requiring Major Polluters to Report and Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions That Cause Global Warming Until Unemployment Drops Below Specified Level for Full Year."

The Yes on Prop 23 campaign said in its court petition that the initiative's title and summary, drafted by Brown's office, should not refer to "air pollution control laws" because it does not apply to multiple laws, only the Global Warming Solutions Act, known as AB 32. Nor should it refer to "major polluters," the petition contended, because power plants and refineries are not the only institutions affected by the law, which covers emissions from universities, agricultural facilities, municipal buildings, and other private companies and citizens.

Brown, who is running for governor as the Democratic nominee, supports the law. His GOP opponent, Meg Whitman, says she would suspend the law for a year.