Ian Anderson 5 p.m., April 25
- Community Blog
- I've Got Issues
Prop 39 "clean energy" money wreaks of bait and switch by construction industry
I spent months warning people about all the major problems with the language of Prop 39 and now you can see why. This bill which was "billed" as a "clean energy bill" is now a "construction industry bill". Proposition 39 was a recipe for waste and corruption. It spends up to $22 million on a new bureaucracy and special interest commission. It gives Sacramento politicians a blank check to spend billions without real accountability or taxpayer protections against conflicts of interest.
Backer Tom Steyer is a Goldman Sachs alum and Robert Rubin protege (Robert Rubin deregulated the derivatives market creating the current financial mess) and a billionaire hedge-fund manager.
Tom Steyer is a billionaire who CNN called 'California’s Hedge Fund King', he spent $20 million to influence your vote and buy the election and he WON.
$2.5 billion that could have gone to schools, health and welfare, environmental protection or public safety instead has been diverted to a new government commission with fat salaries and little accountability.
KQED recently explained HOW this billion dollar windfall can and will be spent and it's not on solar panels....
“It started with cost,” says Stephenson, “and it’s now moved to what’s good for the environment and global warming.”
Yvonne Tom oversees energy efficiency programs for the Alameda County Office of Education.
She advocates spending some of the money to hire "experts" at a county level to help districts make the best use of funds.
Wow, no room for corruption or cronyism there, right?
Again we keep hearing about vinyl windows, which by the way are a poly-vinyl chloride product. In fact PVC is so toxic it has been outlawed in all public buildings in NYC, yet somehow California see's PVC as a "green" product that deserves tax dollars.
Adam Browning, with the non-profit group Vote Solar, calls Prop 39 out on the deception. Browning says the ballot measure explicitly included clean energy solutions in its language and that should guide implementation. Anything else, he says, “reeks of a bait and switch.”
“They didn’t just show pictures of compact fluorescents,” says Browning. “There were plenty of solar panels that were used to sell this and voters expressed their preference for something. They had it before them. That should be honored.”
The question is will California voters hold billionaire Steyer accountable for how he spends their money?
More like this:
- Faith, labor groups call for passage of Prop 39 — Oct. 25, 2012
- Prop 39 backer has millions invested in dirty coal, big oil, nuclear, and hydraulic fracking tech — Oct. 21, 2012
- Proposition 39 diverts billions to special interest slush funds — Oct. 11, 2012
- Proposition 39 opposition : "green energy" is not as green as it seems — Oct. 8, 2012
- Following the money behind Thomas F. Steyer "philanthropy" and Prop 39 — Sept. 18, 2012