The Great Green Hope: A Look at Some of California’s Gubernatorial Candidates

The race to the California governor’s office is on. So far, it’s been quite the production. At the center of this year’s gubernatorial spectacle is Republican billionaire Meg Whitman who, thus far, has spent a record-setting $70 million on her primary campaign. Her rival, Republican Steve Poizner, has recently made an unexpected jump in the polls, now trailing behind Whitman two points at 37 percent, according to last week’s SurveyUSA. And Democrat Jerry Brown is back, seeking a third term as California governor after a 27-year hiatus.

With the primaries coming up in a few short weeks, it’s time to turn our attention away from the mud-slinging and and take a look at where the candidates stand on important issues. In the case of this article, who’s California’s greenest gubernatorial candidate?

Whitman, a previous board member for Goldman Sachs and former CEO of eBay, has been the media’s favorite candidate to hate, granted she gives them plenty of ammo. Her bio on her Website conveniently omits any connection to Goldman Sachs raves about her passed accolades from Fortune, Business Week and Time for her successes as a business woman. But what about her experience in the political world? During the presidential primary in 2008 she served as Mitt Romney’s National Finance Co-Chair, then moved on to be Senator McCain’s National Co-Chair for McCain-Palin campaign. But that’s about the extent of her political experience, prompting some to accuse her of trying to buy her way into office with her hefty self-financing.

Now for the important stuff: Where does energy and the environment place in Whitman’s political priorities? If you go to her Website, you can find her views on these topics below jobs, spending and education in the section marked “other priorities” (which sounds bit oxymoronic). She bulleted some vague views on the environment, only some of which were supported in actions she says she would take. Here are some examples (or read them all here):

Establish a clean pathway for new sources of renewable energy.
Tread carefully on coastal drilling.
Take a new look at nuclear energy.

Vagueness aside, Whitman’s strongest (and most controversial) stance on energy and environmental policy is her pledge to put a moratorium on environmental law A.B. 32: Global Warming Solutions Act her first day in office, if elected. A.B. 32 was signed into law by Gov. Schwarzenegger in 2006 and essentially sets a cap on GHG emissions in order to reach a 25 percent reduction by 2020. In an editorial she wrote for San Jose Mercury News last September titled “To Create Jobs, Curb Environmental Regulation” Whitman called A.B. 32 and similar GHG regulations “far-reaching” and “job-killing,” despite numerous reports showing A.B. 32 would actually create jobs.

Now, as for Whitman’s rival Republican candidate, Steve Poizner, who is the current California insurance commissioner. On his Website you can find his stance on environmental and energy issues right–wait, where can you find his stance on those issues? Apparently not on his Website. However, on his Facebook page under his “interests” he lists: “Politics, beating my in-laws at cards, energy independence, going to concerts with my family.” So at least we know that “energy independence” is on his radar. Too bad it’s in between playing cards and going to concerts.

Though his Website does cover some of his positions on water conservation, it doesn’t address his views on key issues regarding carbon emissions or energy. Aside from his Facebook page, Poizner has done about everything he can to avoid a seemingly unavoidable issue. But why? A recent Sacramento Bee article speculates that it’s likely Poizner has tried to distance himself from taking any stance on environmental issues in order to win the conservative vote (while Whitman has adopted a similar tactic by remaining incredibly vague about her opinions on the subject). Sadly, all this tactic does is make him appear arrogant, by not considering it a problem worth discussing; disinterested in the issue, and, more importantly, uninterested in an issue that many Californians consider important; ignorant that environmental and energy issues and policies have profound effects on California’s economic and job climate.

It seems questionable to elect an official who flat-out ignores issues as critical as the environment and energy, regardless of your views on them. Especially since the state for which he is running for office has been a national and international leader for such issues. Who knows? Maybe Poizner has some great ground-braking energy policies up his sleeve that will get us to energy independence, 100 percent renewable energy use, and the lowest carbon output of any state, and he’s just waiting till he gets elected to reveal them to the public… But I wouldn’t count on it.

I was, however, able to find some video footage of Poizner and Whitman debating A.B. 32 at a March 15 debate. Here’s what Poizner had to say about the law:

“It’s called global warming, not state warming. The idea that we can put some kind of draconian set of regulations that just apply here in California, that doesn’t help the environment and it destroys the economy.”

He takes it a step further than Whitman and says he wants A.B. 32 to be suspended until California’s unemployment rate has been at 5.5 percent for four quarters.

A request I sent to Poizner’s campaign to respond about how he would propose reducing California’s GHG emissions without any sort of regulation was not responded to. Go figure.

Whitman’s campaign, however, did respond. A representative had this to say: “[Meg Whitman] believes we must get our get our economy back on track, and at a time when we have 12.5% unemployment, this [A.B. 32] will only further hinder job creation.” Which doesn’t exactly answer the question. Again, go figure.

Both Whitman and Poizner’s view that A.B. 32 and similar GHG reduction legislations would kill jobs lie in misconceptions about the impacts of A.B. 32. They ignore reports (like this one) that determines that A.B. 32 will actually create up to 2 million jobs in California. The industry that is most likely not to prosper from this law, not surprisingly, is the fossil fuel industry. Other than that, it is widely believed that laws like A.B. 32 will not only create jobs, but will particularly help small businesses and will allow California to regain its national and international competitiveness in the clean tech industry.

Then there’s Jerry Brown, the front-running Democratic gubernatorial candidate. Brown is currently the attorney general of California and is the former two-term California governor from 1975-1983 as well as the son of former California governor, Pat Brown. He was also elected as mayor of Oakland in 1998 where he served two consecutive terms.

In contrast to Whitman and Poizner, Brown has a solid, some might say impressive, record on the environment. Brown established the California Conservation Corp, and won a $19.5 million judgment against Shell Oil Co. for environmental violations at its gas stations.

Brown has criticized Whitman’s pledge to put a moratorium on A.B. 32 as governor, explaining that it would be harmful for California’s competitiveness and would likely eliminate the possibility of California reaching its goal to reduce GHG emissions 25 percent by 2020. Quite contrary to both Republican candidates, Brown has a history of supporting stricter environmental regulations, like urging Obama to allow California to enforce stricter GHG emissions law.

Brown, an early supporter of A.B. 32, writes in a 2007 opinion piece in The Planning Report:

“What California has done in adopting A.B. 32 is more comprehensive than any state in the United States and in some ways is more comprehensive than any other country in the world. It hasn’t accomplished these things yet, but it has laid out a framework where all the activities within the state will be subject to restrictions and changes such that we can reduce our greenhouse gases.”

California needs a lot of things right now, but less environmental regulations is not one of them.

Primaries are June 8, the last day to register to vote is May 24.
For information on voting in California, go here.

–Jenna Scatena