California Air Resources Board Spends $800,000 to Bolster Latest Pet Initiative

by Capitol Confidential

California’s Air Resources Board (CARB)—long considered a foe of conservatives nationwide— has shelled out close to $800,000 to bolster its latest pet “green” initiative, Capitol Confidential has learned.

green pig

A study released last month, which draws positive conclusions regarding CARB’s favored “feebates” program, cost a whopping $796,641 according to a document found at CARB’s own site.  That has some observers scrutinizing CARB’s activities thinking it could come under renewed and sustained criticism.

California is currently mired in a fiscal morass that seems almost intractable, with many in the Golden State blaming overspending by government for the state’s fiscal woes.  Assembly Democrats have proposed plugging the state’s budget hole via $9 billion in loans, whereas Senate Democrats want to suspend $2 billion in corporate tax reductions, among other measures; the state budget deficit, meanwhile, is reportedly as big as $19 billion.

The “feebates” program is a CARB priority, however.  The agency sees slapping a tax on new, higher-emissions cars purchased by Californians, while offering a rebate on new, lower-emissions cars, as a key to combating climate change.

But California’s steps to curb climate change, including AB 32, have recently been taking a lot of incoming fire with the state’s finances, and economy, in the hole.  “There is a sense, even among some Californians who generally do consider themselves ‘green,’ that they’ve gone too far,” a California political source told Capitol Confidential.  “CARB in particular has come in for a lot of criticism, and their dropping this sort of money on a study that seems designed to validate their pre-existing conclusions is probably not going to help, especially when voters are angry about 12 percent-plus unemployment and the budget situation.”

Moreover, the substance of the “feebates” program is likely to anger fiscal conservatives, as well as automakers.

Anti-tax advocates say it will raise taxes both directly—i.e., for purchasers of less efficient cars—and indirectly.  In France, where “feebates” have also been used, critics say rebates wound up exceeding taxes paid, and the result, says one individual tracking the proposal with whom we spoke, has been generalized taxpayer subsidization of the program.  In Canada, meanwhile, the “fees” arising under their “feebates” program have reportedly been kept in place, but expensive rebates were ended.

Automakers, for their part, seem to see the proposal as unnecessary and redundant.  According to Dave McCurdy, President and CEO of the Auto Alliance, “automakers are [already] investing heavily in more fuel-efficient autos” which should mean that what some describe as government coercion is not in fact necessary to get consumers to purchase more fuel-efficient vehicles that emit less.

Still, CARB is expected to pursue the “feebates” program, relying on its costly survey to justify its actions.


Email this to a friend | Print | Share on Facebook | | Bookmark and Share

Tags: , , , , , ,
Posted Jun 9th 2010 at 12:17 pm in Environment, Regulation, State Politics | 76 Comments