Republicans are Celebrating What Exactly

Color me confused, but what of consequence did the Republicans in the Senate get out of their month long hold out on the budget, other than the $700 million in blue line cuts? That was offered right at the beginning of the impasse. What they accomplished at the end might actually backfire on them. The Republicans wanted to try and restrict the ability of Jerry Brown to go after polluters. What they won in the end was a two year gap where the transportation bond projects cannot be slowed due to greenhouse gas emission concerns, and a few other minor things. The fact that it was not threatened in the first place seems to be of little consequence to the Republicans. Steve Mavigilio has all of the wonky goodness.

a. The Republicans have agreed to a law that, for the first time, amends CA’s 35 year old Environmental Quality Act to require regulations addressing climate change for all projects to which it applies (housing, transportation, smokestack industries etc). Prior to this law, it was left entirely to the courts to decide whether or not climate change was an issue under the law, and what to do about it.

b. The Republicans also have agreed to a law that says if and only if the ARB (Air Resource Board) adopts regulations to reduce GHG (greenhouse gas) emissions pursuant from 1-B transportation projects and flood control projects pursuant to AB 32 by 2010, that particular basis can’t be used to sue under CEQA.

c. It would be unprecedented in its 45 year history for the ARB to adopt regulations governing emissions from transportation and flood control projects. However, even if it did, under AB 32 the regulations would have to achieve "the maximum technologically feasible and cost-effective" emission reductions from those projects, arguably a more stringent standard than CEQA’s "feasibility" standard.

Either way, under the new law, emissions from transportation projects and flood projects will have to be addressed both under CEQA and AB 32.

d. Republicans have agreed to a law that says nothing in its provisions relieves any party of its obligations under CEQA or any other law. That means regardless of whether a particular cause of action is suspended for two years, parties may still petition the courts to enforce CEQA on other bases (e.g. air pollution, diesel exhaust, public health impacts etc)

Long story short, this is a Pyrrhic victory for the Republicans. They get a short term gain, but permanent regulations that strengthen the state's environmental laws.

Now, that is not to say that the budget that was passed was actually a good one. The LAT does a good job reminding us what all was in there.

The $145-billion budget they approved is nearly identical to the bipartisan plan passed by the Assembly on July 20 and endorsed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. It would increase spending on schools, reduce aid to the elderly and disabled, raise student fees at state universities and delay Los Angeles-area mass transit projects.

More than $1 billion intended for public transportation work, such as widening some freeways and extending the Expo light-rail line, would instead be used to help reduce the multibillion-dollar deficit the state has been carrying for years.

Oh yea, here is the Republican's bragging about their "accomplishments". Amusing no?

Senate Republicans expressed no regrets. They boasted of gains won at the bargaining table, including a temporary prohibition on lawsuits that invoke new global warming laws to stop development. The ban applies to suits aimed at transportation and levee projects authorized by voters last year.

Another concession that Democrats and Schwarzenegger granted the Republicans will allow railroads to access state subsidies for projects to reduce pollution.

"This is the first time in my seven-year legislative career that I've seen Republicans achieve so many of our budget priorities," Senate Budget Committee Vice Chairman Dennis Hollingsworth (R-Murrieta) said.

Earth too Hollingsworth, if you think you got what you wanted out of the budget than why didn't you vote for it? Only two Republicans voted for the budget in the Senate, just barely enough to pass it, and Hollingsworth was not one of them. They can't be all that proud of it, if they didn't vote for it. They are simply trying to save face with the activists they pumped up with their ridiculous hold out.