States are climate battlegrounds

The nation’s premier state-led climate programs are under attack by a growing coalition of industry, tea party and conservative activists.

Opponents to limits on greenhouse gas emissions see the fights in California and New Jersey as the next step in the fight over global warming policy after the demise of federal cap-and-trade legislation on Capitol Hill.

“This is definitely a new battlefield worth reconsidering in light of threat No. 1 being shelved,” said Clint Woods, energy, environment and agricultural director at the American Legislative Exchange Council, a free market advocacy group.

In California, Texas oil giants Valero and Tesoro are spearheading a November ballot initiative to derail the Golden State’s landmark 2006 law capping its greenhouse gas emissions.

In New Jersey, conservatives are leaning on Republican Gov. Chris Christie to drop out of a 10-state regional cap-and-trade compact and show his true political stripes as he raises his national profile with an endorsement tour this fall.

Similar efforts could follow in other states, depending on how November gubernatorial races shake out.

California’s global warming law, which forces emissions across much of the economy to fall to 1990 levels by 2020, is the nation’s strongest and most sweeping policy to tackle global warming, absent federal policy. That, and the symbolism of reversing climate policy in a major liberal state, is why both sides of the Proposition 23 debate acknowledge the upcoming vote has larger implications.

“They fully intend to make California strike three after Copenhagen and Capitol Hill,” said Steven Maviglio, a spokesman for the No on 23 campaign.

Proposition 23 would block the state’s carbon dioxide limits until the unemployment rate drops to 5.5 percent or lower for four consecutive quarters. Unemployment currently is hovering at 12 percent and sponsors envision effectively killing the law, considering the rate has dropped below 5.5 percent for only three quarters since 1980.

Critics of California’s climate law spent about $4 million to get their measure on the ballot, and while public polls earlier this summer show Proposition 23 losing by about a dozen points, both sides say their internal polling has the race much closer. Turnout is expected to be high, as the climate question is one of 10 initiatives before voters this fall alongside the legalization of marijuana and competitive gubernatorial and U.S. Senate races.

“It’d be a huge signal that if this doesn’t fly in California, it really doesn’t fly anywhere,” said Phil Kerpen, director of policy at Americans for Prosperity, a conservative group pushing to kill state climate laws across the country.

Supporters of the law are using talking points similar to the ones plied by environmental activists in Washington: The state law will help reduce consumption of foreign oil and keep the state’s clean energy industries ahead of foreign competition. They’ve raised $8 million so far and enlisted former Secretary of State George Shultz — a Republican who served under Presidents Ronald Reagan and Richard Nixon — to oppose the ballot initiative.

“AB 32 can be administered sensibly, so it’s not highly disruptive,” Shultz told POLITICO. “You’ve got to be able to think long term about our national security, about our economy and about our climate. This isn’t about tomorrow. This is about thinking ahead.

It’s like Nancy Reagan’s drug awareness campaign, Shultz added. “Just say no.”

Beyond California, climate policy opponents have their sights trained on the Northeast and mid-Atlantic states, where electric utilities must curb their emissions under the eight-year-old Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative.

Americans for Prosperity organized a protest of hundreds last week outside RGGI’s New York headquarters, including Nan Hayworth, a Republican challenging Rep. John Hall (D-N.Y.).

“What is the best way to cripple the innovation, the initiative and the problem solving of the American people?” Hayworth asked in a spirited exchange captured on video and posted on the conservative group’s website. “What do you do? Tax them.”

After she gave up the bullhorn, Hayworth signed a pledge never to support cap-and-trade policies.

The biggest RGGI target on Americans for Prosperity’s list is New Jersey. The group is trying to drum up support for Republican-sponsored bills in the state Legislature that would yank the state out of the climate compact. And it is lobbying Christie to issue executive orders to do essentially the same thing as the legislation. If Christie doesn’t, the group says there will be repercussions if the governor attempts a campaign for the Republican presidential nomination.

“It’s difficult for him to be a credible option for conservatives nationally if he doesn’t take a stand on cap and trade, and that’s why we think we’ll be able to appeal to him,” Kerpen said.

Christie spokesman Kevin Roberts said, “Gov. Christie’s top priority is taking action on his reform agenda that addresses the most pressing issues facing New Jerseyans and governing in the best interest of the state and people of New Jersey. And given the governor’s prior comments on the topic, it should be crystal clear to everyone at this point that he is not running for president in 2012.”

Republicans have had success in other states over the years in knocking down climate policies. Former Gov. Mitt Romney yanked Massachusetts out of RGGI while it was still under formation in 2006, though his Democratic successor, Deval Patrick, put it back in. Utah Gov. Gary Herbert and Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer earlier this year also moved their states out of a budding cap-and-trade compact in Western states.

Going forward, climate opponents also expect legislation to be introduced in about a dozen states in 2011. And they have their eyes on the outcomes of several gubernatorial races where Republicans could undo efforts to set up a Midwest cap-and-trade program, especially in Illinois, Kansas and Wisconsin.

“Everyone is holding their breath and waiting to see what hand we are dealt come November,” said LuCinda Hohmann, Midwest Outreach Coordinator at the Union of Concerned Scientists.

Advocates for the state climate laws say they are on high alert over the conservatives’ efforts. But they think some states will have a hard time backing away from their participation, considering they’ve already been on the receiving end of millions of dollars in newfound revenue to curb their budget deficits, thanks to the auctioning to industry of valuable cap-and-trade permits.

“It’s a huge concern,” said John Coequyt, a senior Washington representative at the Sierra Club. “But I think it’s going to be very difficult to unwind the source of revenue.”

Vicki Arroyo, executive director at the Georgetown Climate Center, said existing state climate laws and compacts have so far generated $700 million in new revenue for energy efficiency and renewable programs.

“Hopefully, the public will not be fooled by the industry-funded efforts to paint a picture of a parade of horrible flowing from these programs that actually bring both economic and global and local environmental benefits,” she said.