California hot rodders, please read!

OK, I'll bite, how specifically does AB32 affect me and my hot rods? That link seems like nothing more than scare tactics.

 

http://blogs.streetrodderweb.com/66...why-we-need-proposition-23-to-pass/index.html

Assembly Transportation Committee- (ph) 916-319-2093 (fax) 916-319-2193 Address: Assembly Transportation Committee, State Capitol, Sacramento, CA 95814

STATE CAPITOL
Room 5128
Sacramento, CA 95814
(916) 319-2066
FAX (916) 319-2166

DISTRICT OFFICE
41391 Kalmia Street, Suite 220
Murrieta, CA 92562
951-894-1232
951-894-5053 fax

Assemblyman Mike Eng (D-El Monte) Chairman [email protected] (ph) 916-319-2049 (fax) 916-319-2149

Assemblyman Bill Berryhill (R-Stockton) [email protected] (ph) 916-319-2026 (fax) 916-319-2126

Assemblyman Bob Blumenfield (D-Van Nuys), [email protected] (ph) 916-319-2040 (fax) 916-319-2140

Assemblywoman Joan Buchanan (D-San Ramon), [email protected] (ph) 916-319-2015 (fax) 916-319-2115

Assemblyman Warren Furutani (D-Long Beach), [email protected] (ph) 916-319-2055 (fax) 916-319-2155

Assemblywoman Cathleen Galgiani (D-Merced/Stockton), [email protected] (ph) 916-319-2017 (fax) 916-319-2117

Assemblywoman Bonnie Lowenthal (D-Long Beach), [email protected] (ph) 916-319-2054 (fax) 916-319-2154

Assemblyman Jeff Miller (R-Corona/Mission Viejo), [email protected] (ph) 916-319-2071 (fax) 916-319-2171

Assemblyman Roger Niello (R-Sacramento), [email protected] (ph) 916-319-2005 (fax) 916-319-2105

Assemblyman Chris Norby (R-Fullerton), [email protected] (ph) 916-319-2072 (fax) 916-319-2172

Assemblyman Jose Solorio (D-Anaheim), [email protected] (ph)- 916-319-2069 (fax) 916-319-2169

Assemblyman Tom Torlakson (D-Martinez), [email protected] (ph)- 916-319-2011 (fax) 916-319-2111

And also flipped through the december issue of street rodder at vintage ford in sacramento today, and is ab 859 still going?? it mentioned about smogging cars 15 years of age and older

http://blogs.streetrodderweb.com/6687098/car-initiative/ballot-

initiative/index.htmlhttp://blogs.streetrodderweb.com/6718533/car-initiative/say-no-to-untested-e15/index.html

 

Check this out :

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/greenspace/2010/09/prop-23-oil-gas-prices-ab-32.html

"Proponents of Prop. 23, however, say the global-warming law, which promotes solar, wind and alternative fuels to replace oil, gas and coal, will increase the price of energy. They project up to a 60% rise in electricity rates, up to 57% higher natural-gas rates, and a $3.7-billion annual increase in the cost of gasoline and diesel fuel."

 

Has my vote. I sent my mail in ballot yesterday.

 

From the LAtimes article: "Scientists say that gases from industry and transportation are heating the planet and already have begun to affect California, with melting snow packs and rising sea levels."
Really? The sea is rising? Hadn't heard it's actually rising.

If anyone thinks killing the coal industry is only going to affect the price of energy, you all need to do a little research to see how aluminum is manufactured. If coal goes away, aluminum will become scarce, and the price will go through the roof. Over half this country's aluminum is made with coal-fired electricity... one aluminum plant in Indiana uses enough coal to power 350,000 homes.

Now look at everything in our modern world that uses aluminum... now imagine it with a component that will become as expensive as precious metal.

As everyone has said, California tends to lead the way on these things. Vote it down guys. It'll affect our hobby, but that's small potatoes.

-Brad

 

its really all about MONEY!!!!!!!!!! i see greed on both sides!!!!! yes i want a greener planet! i want clean water and clean air! but i feel like there are lies on both sides just to get their way! if they were up front and honest about everything, we would have less problems everywhere!

 

Yes Brad, right as usual!@

Myself, dad and brother(sentinelT) are all in trucking. To think that this only affects Cali is ignorant. EVERYTHING that comes into a West Coast Port will have its retail adjusted for the overhead bills like this produce.

You folks do know that the new diesel technology basically filters emission through piss? Yeah Ureah. Soon us Beer drinkers will be like cash cows! DOH!@#$@#

 

http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/ab32/ab32.htm\

read it for yourself

 

From same article: "California’s 2006 global-warming law would save the state’s consumers as much as $670 per household in 2020, in the event of a global surge in the price of crude oil, according to a report released Monday by economists for alternative-energy advocacy groups."

 

They also said our health care costs would go down.
Has ANY prediction from ANY government agency or advocacy group EVER been accurate?
Show me any government policy or program that came in on time, on budget, and performed as promised.
Hell, I'm not picky... I'll settle for ONE of those three.

-Brad

 

Hey, I thought that was you filling up urea bottles behind the T/A.
I'd buy some from you but I been makin' my own

Seriously, I think it all boils down to this: A few years ago when the economy was rolling and CA was rolling right along, over ambitious legislation was passed. This was because money was plentiful, grants were available and lots of jobs would come from green legislation. If you are into government, not a bad idea.
Now we have a 180 in the economy and CA cannot implement all their big ideas. This new initiative slows it down to something more reasonable for today.
I'm done.

 

Amen


Im voting YES on 23!!!!

please let your fellow hambers, car guys, friends and family know about this

In the end it will affect all of us, not only in fuel prices but electricity too!!

 

YES on 23 For Sure!

 

Certainly. Lots to choose from. I'll even keep it car-related. On-time and under-budget. Sometimes we just need to turn off the talk radio and keep an open mind....

http://news.transportation.org/press_release.aspx?Action=ViewNews&NewsID=254

 

looked it up maybe im not reading it right

Prop. 23 suspends California’s global warming law, AB 32, until unemployment declines to 5.5% for four consecutive quarters. Analysts including studies by Sacramento State University, Cal. Lutheran and the Legislative Analysts Office conclude that AB 32 will hurt California’s economy and could result in job losses of over 1 million jobs. By suspending AB 32, Prop. 23 aims to save California jobs and avoid the costly implementation of a global warming regulatory regime that other states and countries have decided is too burdensome in today’s troubled economy.

Supporters believe Prop. 23 saves 1 million California jobs, and protects citizens from major increases in the costs of energy, transportation, housing and food. With California’s unemployment at record highs, Prop. 23 supporters believe now is not the time for California to impose the most draconian regulatory regime in state history. The focus instead should be on jobs and getting the state back to work.

Opponents disagree that AB 32 kills jobs and cite job growth in government-subsidized green companies. Opponents also believe AB 32 shows leadership in the fight against global warming and establishes California as an international environmental trendsetter.

 

everything needs to be read before anyone votes. California, unfortunately, has many propositions on every ballot. That leaves to end-result up to the voters, many of which don't read all the fine print.
You Cali guys, I'm sure will agree with me, that the television commercials for all the candidates and all the propositions, both "Yes" and "No" are very convincing. Which makes everything more confusing.
These decisions should be made by the legislators, but they are all so nuts, that these decisions end up on the ballots and "we" have to determine the truth.
The people that market all this stuff are real cagey with stretching the facts.
They all do it. It's another illustration of the poor ethics and morals that we have been living with since the 1970's.
It's shameful the way these are presented...all as "facts"...............

So, I'm not going to advocate on this proposition, but everyone needs to read both sides with as many real facts as possible and see who is behind the proposition and who is financing these issues.
There-in lies the key to who's interest is at stake.

I hate these threads, I really do.........they ruin all the fun of rodding

 

If you think that these threads ruin the fun of rodding just wait and see how much fun it is when the "nanny state" takes control of our hobby/passion. This is not just a "Johnny come lately" issue in the form of a proposition, AB32 has been around for awhile and is being fought vigorously by every car enthusiast group in California. And has others have said, other states should be concerned as well for if this goes through here in CA then standby... As for who is financing, take a look at the TV these days...ever see a pro-Prop 23 ad??? I see ads against Prop 23 at least once an hour and they all say that "big oil" is the one pushing 23. Who funds these ads? How much money has Al Gore raked in since starting the global warming hysteria?
If the global warming folks have their way then we will all be driving electric cars and sitting around lamenting the day that we didn't act to save hot rodding.

 

I'm not understanding you, You are saying "if this goes through", as if that's a bad thing.
"Going through" (a "yes" vote) as you say, will roll back the emission standards to the way they were a few years ago.
Isn't that what you want?

the term "going through" usually means a measure passing...aka a "yes" majority...

 

OK, I still don't get how this is Hot Rod related?

BTW, I am voting Yes on Prop 23, but not for reasons related to Hot Rodding.

Mike

 

And now the American Cancer Society is running commercials to defeat this prop. That will be very convincing for many people, after all no one wants more cancer or asthma related deaths!
We need to work that much harder to pass this prop.

The other confusing aspect is we need to vote yes to defeat something, which is counter intuitive.

 

thank you for the info . just another reason to move ! .............. steve

 

You hit it the nail on the head, Don.
"Yes" means "No" and "No" means "Yes"....what a mess...

I think the technical term for this is...

Definitions of clusterfuck on the Web:
A chaotic mess that might be compared to group sex, in which participants are so intertwined and intermingled that they might penetrate each other rather than their intended target. ...

<table><tbody><tr><td width="100%">cluster fuck</td><td align="right" nowrap="nowrap">
</td></tr></tbody></table><small>noun</small>

1. (context, US, military, slang) A confusing or chaotic situation or event, often caused by a failure of communication or a complex environment.

 

ca. has been doing the "trick fuck" for yrs now . on 23 which is correct ?? yes or no ?
i would like to know ................... steve

 

Sorry for the confusion but if you go back and read my post you will see that the bill that I am referring to is AB32,
"AB32 has been around for awhile and is being fought vigorously by every car enthusiast group in California. And has others have said, other states should be concerned as well for if this goes through here in CA then standby... "
AB32 is the Assembly Bill that will severely limit the number of vehicles that can be registered in CA with "other than original" engines. If you like the idea of buying a $$$$ "green" LS engine from GM for your hot rod then AB32 is your kinda bill. Proposition 23 pulls the reigns in on the "global warming" fanatics who are pushing AB32...Prop 23 says that until there is better data on the effects of CO2 on the environment and until the economy recovers then the CA lawmakers should standdown on passing any legislation of this sort.
I don't know if it was by design but if you take the "32" in AB 32 and reverse it, it now becomes "23". I would encourage everyone to vote YES on Prop 23.
I hope that clears it up...

 

Algore just purchased a multi-million $ home in Southern Calif., at sea level!
(around the corner from his present girlfriend's digs)

Is the sea rising, Al? Or is the sky just falling?

 

They just want our old cars off the road, so everyone can boost the economy and purchase new cars & trucks! Oh and then loose jobs!!!!
YES ON 23! or we will be like these guys!

 

PLEASE VOTE YES ON 23 to stop us paying through the nose for our FUEL,FOOD,ELECTRICITY and for all of our goods and our cost of living

IM VOTING YES ON 23 to save our jobs, and our HOT RODS=)

notrod13
Grenade Inspector



Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: long beach
Posts: 351
Re: California hot rodders, please read!
looked it up maybe im not reading it right

Prop. 23 suspends California’s global warming law, AB 32, until unemployment declines to 5.5% for four consecutive quarters. Analysts including studies by Sacramento State University, Cal. Lutheran and the Legislative Analysts Office conclude that AB 32 will hurt California’s economy and could result in job losses of over 1 million jobs. By suspending AB 32, Prop. 23 aims to save California jobs and avoid the costly implementation of a global warming regulatory regime that other states and countries have decided is too burdensome in today’s troubled economy.

Supporters believe Prop. 23 saves 1 million California jobs, and protects citizens from major increases in the costs of energy, transportation, housing and food. With California’s unemployment at record highs, Prop. 23 supporters believe now is not the time for California to impose the most draconian regulatory regime in state history. The focus instead should be on jobs and getting the state back to work.

Proponents of Prop. 23, however, say the global-warming law, which promotes solar, wind and alternative fuels to replace oil, gas and coal, will increase the price of energy. They project up to a 60% rise in electricity rates, up to 57% higher natural-gas rates, and a $3.7-billion annual increase in the cost of gasoline and diesel fuel."

I am VOTING YES on 23

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE pass this along to all of your friends, family and FELLOW HOT RODDERS in california!!!!!!

Let your local car club know to VOTE YES ON 23

 

i don't even know why I'm posting, but here goes...

I've lived in California nearly forty years. When I first got here I could see the Sierra Nevada mountains ('bout 80 miles away) almost every day. By the mid eighties the air had gotten so bad I saw them a couple of times a YEAR. When I used to fly into LA in the late eighties the air was so shitty it was the color of a paper sack- I'm not fucking kidding.

I'm not big on shutting down car stuff (shit, I spent Saturday at the track crewing for a top fuel dragster) but I also appreciate the fact that I can now see the mountains again many times a year and when I fly into LA the air is more-or-less clear. Having watched smog rules actually work over a 37 year period in California I can say that these PITA smog laws have actually started making the place livable again.

ok, let the hating begin...

 

I'm voting yes on 19.