Assembly Bill 32, "The Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006," was intended to protect California from human caused global warming.  Whether global warming is in fact caused by humans or by natural processes, AB 32 is ineffective and counterproductive, massively costly to businesses and families, and will increase our state deficit and/or cut services including those related to public health and environmental protection.

Ineffective and Counterproductive

California produces only 1.4% of the world's greenhouse gas emissions, so our efforts to address climate change cannot be successful alone.  AB 32's go-it-alone approach will impose massive costs on businesses that can be easily avoided by relocation across state or national boundaries. 

Common destinations for businesses relocating out of the country include Mexico, China and India all of which have environmental laws that are much more lax than even pre-AB 32 regulations.  The end result will be both a loss of California jobs and an increase in worldwide pollution.  California climate change policy can only be successfully implemented in coordination with other states and countries.

Massively Costly to Businesses and Families

AB 32 would cost the average family $3,857 a year in greatly increased expenses for housing, transportation, food and energy.  A study by Sacramento State University economics professors estimated these costs at $2,048 in higher housing costs due to regulations requiring home builders to use more expensive building methods and mandatory retrofitting of families existing homes.  Additionally, families will pay $756 more for transportation (gas and maintenance only), $35 more for natural gas, $124 more for electricity and $895 more for food. 

The costs to small businesses would total $49,691 for the average small business with a costly cap and trade system and many new industrial regulations.  California is rapidly losing well-paying manufacturing jobs due to a regulatory climate ranked by George Mason University as one of the nation's least free as well as aggressive efforts by lower taxed and less heavily regulated neighboring states to attract California companies.  AB 32's stifling effect on entrepreneurs could result in the loss of up to 1.1 million jobs.

Increases our State Deficit and/or Cuts Services

The drastic drop in California's economic output that will result from AB 32 will also result in a drastic drop in revenues for state agencies, including those responsible for providing social services and protecting the environment.  Agencies which face cuts of up to 80% under AB 32 include the Department of Public Health, Department of Developmental Services, Children's Medical Services and Rural Health and Department of Housing and Urban Development. 

Even though AB 32 was intended to protect the environment, agencies which stand to see 80% budget cuts under AB 32 also include the Coastal Commission, Environmental Protection Agency, California Conservation Corps and Department of Parks & Recreation.  Politicians may attempt to avoid these cuts with massive tax increases that would only exacerbate our economic woes.

Increases Government Control of Individual Decisions

In attempting to protect the environment, the government has given itself an increased role in personal decisions such as where individuals choose to live and what they choose to drive.  AB 32 regulations will attempt to force Californians from their trucks, minivans, SUV's, muscle cars and classic cars in favor of vehicles that are smaller, more expensive to purchase and less safe. 

AB 32 furthermore dictates housing decisions.  New regulations will make new homes more expensive and will require costly retrofits of existing homes.  New houses will be required to be built closer together with smaller yards and fewer families will be able to live near open space and outdoor recreation.  The increase in housing costs that will result from AB 32 is estimated at a whopping $2,048.