Report Says California Global Warming Law Will Cause Job Losses
A report released Monday says that California's new global warming law will increase unemployment in the Golden State.
The announcement was in stark contrast to continual claims by the Left and their media minions that proposed cap and trade legislation at the federal level will result in an explosion in green jobs.
As reported by the Los Angeles Times Wednesday, the nation's most populated state, which is the first to impose laws concerning carbon dioxide emissions, might see a net reduction in employment as a result:
The state's nonpartisan legislative analyst's office examined 2008 economic modeling by the California Air Resources Board and concluded that it "may overstate the number of jobs" attributable to future implementation of the 2006 climate law.
While acknowledging the uncertainty of such projections, the report said, "On balance, however, we believe that the aggregate net jobs impact in the near term is likely to be negative, even after recognizing that many of the . . . programs phase in over time."
The report comes at a politically charged moment, when polls show employment to be Americans' top concern. Signature gathering began last week on a November ballot initiative that would delay the law, known as AB 32, until unemployment drops to 5.5% for at least a year. California joblessness is over 12% today.
With U.S. unemployment near ten percent, and the economy consistently viewed as the nation's top priority in poll after poll, one would think this report would be quite newsworthy.
After all, with belief in Nobel Laureate Al Gore's favorite money-making myth plummeting, and Congress beginning to work on compromise cap and trade packages, the public should be informed that California's Legislative Analyst's Office believes its state's climate change legislation will result in job cuts.
Unfortunately, Google news and LexisNexis searches found that outside of California, American media have not shown much interest Monday's announcement.
The Associated Press ran a story about this Tuesday, but only on its State and Local Wire.
Reuters also did a piece on the matter Tuesday which ran in the U.K.
From what I can tell, outside of California, the only major media outlet to find this issue newsworthy was Investor's Business Daily.
I wonder why.