AREP Opposes Proposition 10. NO on Prop Ten

Proposition 10, also known as the California Alternative Fuels Initiative will be on the ballot this November. This initiative was funded and promoted by T. Boone Pickens. Mr. Pickens is a big energy entrepreneur and the author of “The First Billion Is the Hardest.” Mr. Pickens knows how to keep making those billions: He uses his money and political influence to socialize investment risk and privatize profit. Proposition 10 will appropriate nearly 10 billion dollars of California tax payer funds that will mostly benefit the so called Clean Energy Fuels Corp., a natural gas company owned by Mr. Pickens and the trucking industry. Because he is a smart operator, Mr. Pickens’ plan throws some million-dollar bones in 8 California city treasuries and a handful of new car buyers. Let us send Mr. Pickens a clear message: California voters will not let you abuse the voter initiative process to make a few more billions for yourself - VOTE NO ON PROPOSTION 10.

AREP's Argument Against Proposition 10
Also Known as California Alternative Fuels Initiative

Vote NO on Proposition 10. This initiative is another costly big energy scheme that will cost California taxpayers 9.8 billion dollars over the next 30 years.

Proposition 10 is another attempt to abuse California’s voter initiative process to benefit T. Boone Pickens a multi-billionaire, his big energy company, bond market investors and the trucking industry.

Proposition 10 claims to improve our health, our environment, our economy and our national security. Proposition 10 also claims to be a comprehensive alternative energy strategy. In reality, proposition 10 mandates 5 billion dollars of taxpayer money to subsidize and promote the fossil fuel natural gas industry.

Proposition 10 claims to reduce greenhouse gasses by providing 3.4 billion taxpayer dollars in incentives to purchase vehicles that run on natural gas. In fact, proposition 10 does not require natural gas vehicles to improve their exhaust emissions over current gasoline levels.

Proposition 10 claims to use industrial wind turbines to generate electricity thereby increasing natural gas reserves for vehicles. The 1.25 billion dollars of taxpayer money allocated for this provision would provide miniscule amounts of electricity generated from wind, especially when the cost of transmission lines is included. Additionally, energy production statistics document the fact that industrial wind turbines actually generate less than 20% of the energy they claim to produce.

Proposition 10 provides funds for “Demonstration Projects” by creating a 200 million dollar “Public Education Account.” These funds would be administered by the California Energy Commission and given to 8 Cities (Los Angeles, San Diego, Long Beach, Irvine, San Francisco, Oakland, Fresno and Sacramento). Each city would receive grants of 25 million dollars for these so-called “Demonstration Projects” whose real purpose is to use taxpayer dollars to advertise natural gas vehicles.

Proposition 10 also wants to get more natural gas into our homes. 25 million taxpayer dollars are allocated to provide 2 thousand dollars incentives to the first 12,500 original purchasers of a new natural gas appliance. Unfortunately to qualify for this incentive a buyer must also demonstrate ownership of a natural gas vehicle.

Proposition 10 allocates 100 million taxpayer dollars for low and zero loans, grants or tax credits to companies to develop natural gas vehicles. Another 400 million dollars of taxpayer funds will be spent on research and development for non-renewable liquid and gaseous fossil fuels. And, 50 million of our tax funds will also be allocated to test and certify natural gas vehicles.

Therefore, 5 billion dollars that will ultimately cost California tax payers 9.8 billion to fund when interest costs are included will benefit the natural gas industry, the trucking industry, and bond investors all while simply trading our dependence upon one fossil fuel for another.

VOTE NO ON PROPOSITION 10