Downside of costly energy dawning on Europe. CA next?

May 24, 2013

By Chris Reed

ab32-banner-lmoreOne of the most befuddling things about being a public-policy watcher in California in recent years has been the durability of the argument that the higher energy costs forced by 2006’s passage of AB 32 won’t be a drag on the state economy. Instead, the claim goes, the innovation triggered by the mandate that California use cleaner-but-costlier types of energy will at the least make up for jobs lost because energy is much cheaper in rival states and nations.

Now I understand why religious greens would believe this. But allegedly rational, neutral journalists? Incredibly, it wasn’t until this March that The Los Angeles Times had a news story that operated from the straightforward premise that AB 32 carried huge risks for the state economy.

‘Rising energy prices a threat to competitiveness’: Duh

In Europe, however, the learning curve is a little farther along. This is from a Financial Times article headlined “High energy prices for industry occupy officials at EU summit”:

“[There is] a growing fear in Europe that rising energy prices now pose a threat to the industrial competitiveness of a region mired in recession. It has been driven home by a steady stream of announcements from European manufacturers about plans to build new production facilities in the US.”

And where are those European manufacturers planning to build new factories? Not in California. In states with access to cheap natural gas made available by fracking, such as Louisiana, Texas and Pennsylvania.

But then the California media have a little problem with reporting on fracking, too. They can never even bring themselves to admit the Obama administration supports it. Even when Obama’s secretary of the interior says it loudly and clearly.

A dead heat in the Reverse Pulitzers competition

SEJThis creates a dilemma for those on the Reverse Pulitzer jury. Who deserves the 2013 award?

1) The legions of California journos who idiotically argued that high energy prices will be good for or won’t hurt the economy, or …

2) The legions of California journos who dishonestly depict fracking as new and evil while never mentioning that the Obama administration backs fracking as just another heavy industry.

On the other hand, it’s no dilemma at all when you think about it. Everyone in Group 1 is in Group 2, and vice versa.

Reverse Pulitzers for the lot! My congratulations! Y’all are doing a hell of a job!

4 comments

Write a comment
  1. us citizen
    us citizen 24 May, 2013, 08:08

    You could hit CA right square in the head and they (the govt) wouldnt learn a thing from anyone.

    Reply this comment
  2. CalWatchdog
    CalWatchdog Author 24 May, 2013, 08:22

    As a Democratic California legislator said a decade ago, “Those fat-cat corporations can just go rip off people in other states.”

    — John Seiler

    Reply this comment
  3. tax target
    tax target 24 May, 2013, 08:51

    Yeah just like the democraps want to rip off the taxpayers… so this taxpayer is leaving for other states. Thank you Kalifornsky democraps for the wake-up call. I’m looking forward to not filing a Form 540 each year!

    Reply this comment
  4. Queeg
    Queeg 26 May, 2013, 22:19

    Bye bye bye Target….next whiner?

    Reply this comment

Write a Comment

Leave a Reply



Related Articles

In San Diego, how low will foes of gay GOP candidate go?

The 2008 election of gay libertarian firebrand Carl DeMaio to the San Diego City Council absolutely drove the city’s Democratic

Spending Actually $121 Bill Higher

John Seiler: The wrangling over the $12 billion in taxes in Gov. Jerry Brown’s proposed 2011-12 budget of $86 billion

Attorney General’s Office: Bullet-train law not binding on Legislature

The bullet-train project doesn’t have a legal financing plan or adequate environmental rules, according to an Aug. 16 decision by