The Palisadian-Post has partnered with locally founded environmental organization Resilient Palisades to deliver a weekly “green tip” to our readers. This week’s tip was written by Éva Milan Engel.
One of the propositions on the November ballot is Proposition 30.
Proposition 30 would raise state taxes on Californians who make $2 million or more in a year. The money collected, estimated at $3.5 billion to $5 billion in annual revenue, would be used to subsidize electric cars and charging stations (80% of the funds). The rest would go toward wildfire safety (20% of the funds).
Because cars and trucks account for approximately 40% of California’s emissions, we’ve emphasized transportation in climate policy. Transportation fuels hotter heat waves, more extreme droughts, larger wildfires and deadly air pollution. Right now, we have roughly one million electric cars on the road but, to meet climate goals, we’ll need eight million by 2030.
Who Doesn’t Support It?
- Some people who make more than $2 million per year (including billionaire Reed Hastings, co-founder of Netflix, who gave $1 million to fight Prop 30)
- Chamber of Commerce
- Teachers Unions (they want money for schools instead)
- Three timber companies (they’ve spent more than $1 million trying to defeat it)
- Governor Gavin Newsom (called the measure “corporate warfare” for Lyft because the money would help the company comply with a state mandate to switch to electric cars)
Who Supports It?
- Lyft (the company spent $45 million supporting the measure)
- California Democratic Party
- Unions whose members would build EV charging stations
- Environmental and public health groups (including American Lung Association and Union of Concerned Scientists)
- Many registered voters (LA Times poll found 49% support Prop 30; 37% oppose it; and 14% are undecided)
The California Air Resources Board reported the state has already spent $6.5 billion on emissions reduction programs for cars, trucks and other forms of transportation. The state’s new budget adds $10 billion over the next five years. There are also separate federal subsidies for EVs.
Opponents of Prop 30 say the $16.5 billion in past and future spending should be enough. Supporters of the ballot measure disagree.
A pro-clean energy think tank called RMI released a report last week suggesting Prop 30 would accelerate California’s progress toward its climate goals. Low- and middle-income Californians (more than a million who are least able to afford electric cars) would have additional financial incentives to switch to EVs.
Either way you look at it, EJ Klock-McCook, co-author of the RMI study, pointed out, one reason so many climate advocates support Proposition 30 is the certainty that comes with a ballot measure.
“We have to get going now,” Klock-McCook said, “or else we’re going to end up behind and really struggle to catch up.”
This page is available to subscribers. Click here to sign in or get access.
