Short version: >Additional 50 cents / gallon of gas >2 cent fee for every mile you drive in your car per year >$3500 fee on all minivans light trucks and SUVs >Speed limit reduced to 55 mph >State legislature gets in the business of "recommending" new car and engine designs. (we all know what master engineers our politicians are...)

E-Mail your local representative and tell them to vote no!

Assembly Bill 1058 spells trouble
for California consumers and taxpayers.
This legislation orders state bureaucrats to reduce greenhouse gases from California cars and trucks. It doesn’t say how. AB 1058 gives the California Air Resources Board a blank check to decide what you drive and how many miles you drive.

AB 1058 will limit your choice of vehicles. It really is an attempt to force Californians into smaller, less powerful cars. That’s not fair to low and middle income families and working Californians.



Tell them to STOP AB 1058 NOW!
AB 1058 Passes California State Senate; Heads for Assembly Thursday, May 16. Bill on “Fast Track” to Governor’s Desk. Call or Write Your Assembly Representative Today to Ask Them to Vote “No” on AB 1058.


Phil Isenberg, spokesman for the Coalition Against AB 1058 Coalition, issued the following statement in response to the Senate passage of AB 1058, authored by Assembly Member Fran Pavley of Agoura Hills.

“It is unfortunate that the thin majority of Senators who voted for this bill did not recognize the pitfalls in Assembly Bill 1058, which is on a fast track in the Legislature. If enacted, this measure sets the stage for huge increases in the cost of owning and driving vehicles in California, particularly minivans, pickup trucks and SUVs. If AB 1058 becomes law, California motorists could face billions of dollars in new costs for greenhouse gas regulations, even though such regulations would provide no net benefit to California.

“We strongly urge that the Assembly reject this bill when it comes to them for concurrence, which could be as early as Thursday, May 16. AB 1058 is a vague, extreme measure that would give broad new powers to the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to cut greenhouse gases from California cars and trucks, despite the fact that no practical, affordable technology exists that would eliminate these gases from vehicle exhaust. The only way to reduce these gases is to reduce gasoline consumption by mandating less driving and smaller cars.

“A recent (March 2002) joint report by CARB and the California Energy Commission offers some insights into several strategies to reduce gasoline consumption, and thereby reducing carbon dioxide:

• Another 50-cent-per-gallon increase in gasoline taxes.
• A two-cent tax on every mile driven for all passenger vehicles.
• Extra fees of $3,500 on minivans, light duty trucks, sport utility vehicles, and others to discourage consumers from buying them.
• Reduction of the speed limit to 55 miles per hour.
• Recommending new designs for vehicles and engines.

“If all these measures were implemented, the cost to consumers would be more than $15 billion a year. The Pavley Tax is a blank check that would hurt low-income Californians the worst, because it would dramatically increase the costs of driving for everyone regardless of income.

The following link directs you to your local representatives and allows you to send an e-mail explaining your opposition to all your local reps.

http://eletter.wedrive.org/contact_legislator.html

 

I don't think this one has a chance to pass. Count the number of suv's on the road compared with the number of economy cars. Then realize that many of the economy cars you see are second cars used for daily commute by families that own suvs. What legislater is going to vote to alienate every suv owner in the state! When they try messing with the performance parts industry, we have a problem, when they try messing with 60% or more of the population of the state, it won't fly.

 

Russ, you're thinking like a logical person. You can't do that when you're trying to figure out the motives of politicians. The vast majority of those politicians drive SUVs purchased for them by the state. These are the same morons that recently lost their bid to tax soda for the purpose of funding a program that teaches kids not to drink soda...

 

I have read that Mr. dumbass Davis is now "recommending" a 50 cent tax added to cigs (I don't smoke) and DOUBLING the DMV fees. Here we go again. this a-hole gets CA into trouble with his great ideas and plans and then puts CA into the red. So his quick way out is to add taxes.

Do the right thing......

VOTE THIS A-HOLE OUT OF OFFICE!!!!!!!!!!!!

Barry F

 

Barry, I'm trying ... but I am sorrounded by "blanket democratic voters" at work. You know the kind, "I don't know what the democratic politician stands for, but he gets my vote. Anyone other than a Republican".

 

Well....

I'm classed as a "rep" but I look at it like this, party, smarty...... the party thing is so old school, it's like the electoral college thing. They were put in place way back when they made a difference. Now they don't mean S**T but screw up the voting process.

Don't even get me started on this......

Vote in the best person with the best platform. Even if they're "green"

Barry F

 

I contacted Assemblywoman Pavley after reading this post yesterday. I wanted to get the full story. She sent me a copy of AB 1058 as well as a report from The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), a national non-profit orgaization.

Now, I'm not saying it won't happen, but from what I'm reading, I don't see anything that indicates an additional .50 a gallon for gas, a $3500 fee on SUVs or a .02 per mile annual fee.

The NRDC states this: "A wide variety of cost effective technologies are available today that would reduce carbon dioxide emissions from cars and light trucks of all sizes. Independent experts around the country agree that carbon dioxide pollution can be reduced dramatically without compromising safety, performance or the consumer’s choice of cars, minivans or SUVs. Studies by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, U.S. Department of Energy and the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy (ACEEE) show that cost-effective technologies exist to cut CO2 pollution.

In fact, Ford, GM and DaimlerChrysler each have announced plans to produce low carbon dioxide, fuel-efficient hybrid SUVs within the next few years. The clean cars act would simply accelerate the process, making cleaner solutions available across a broader range of vehicles.

AB 1058 directs the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to adopt cost-effective, technologically achievable standards for reducing carbon dioxide pollution. CARB must make appropriate considerations for vehicle type, ensuring there will be no restrictions on the types of vehicles Californians can buy. The rules would apply only to new vehicles once the new standards take effect; consumers would not face additional emissions testing."

Now again, I'm not saying the politicians can be trusted here, but I also want to make sure some fanatic organizations aren't trying to lead us along as well by making outrageous claims. I just want to get the straight and true facts if possible.

Next, I'm gonna research this CARB report indicating the tax hikes and additional fees. Stay tuned!

 

Okay, I contacted CARB to get more info.
Here's their reply:

"Dear Mr. Donaldson:
I've also heard the allegations about new taxes and fees. I recently sent a letter to Assemblymember Pavley explaining that ARB does not have such authority. Simply summarized, the allegations about fee increases are incorrect. There has also been some talk that ARB would require lower speed limits; again, we do not have such authority. ARB cannot institute new taxes or fees or lower speed limits without specific authority from the Legislature. Currently, we don't have such authority and AB 1058 doesn't provide it."

 

Why is it always a Democrat who comes up with this crap? Even worse, its a woman too. Here's more info on her: http://democrats.assembly.ca.gov/members/a41/