Okay, so now it's time for us to have ANOTHER serious talk...Are you listening, yet?

Do you know what RGGI is?  I didn't either. It stands for Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative ("RGGI"). Wow, that sounds a little like cap n trade (crap n tax). Wow, guess what? IT IS crap n tax. Thought they couldn't pass it ... Right?  WRONG!  How many times have I said that if they can’t legislate, they will just regulate with the EPA and other departments, with their unconfirmed-with-no-oversight czars, with a liberal judiciary that thinks law is based on precedent (a new law based on a bad decision made by a bad (a/k/a liberal, progressive, and/or socialist and/or Marxist judge), and with White House's appointments that bypass the nomination process of the United States Senate with recess appointments (i.e., Elizabeth Warren (answering only to the FED, a department that has NO oversight), Donald Berwick, a man who incidentally believes in redistribution of wealth and in Britain's "rationed" socialized medicine/healthcare system, and Craig Becker for the NRLB who believes in Card Check, unionizing the world, and all in all, one bad dude, etc.). Enough about that ... let's get on with RGGI!

I can't sleep, and for the life of me, I cannot believe that no one is talking about this. If I can’t sleep, you can’t either!! So here we go … AGAIN!! This is Cap n Trade (crap n tax) and not a word anywhere in the news or from screaming consumers, or anything!! The September 19, 2010 Auction for carbon credits has already occurred. There is a calendar stating the next one is in 69 days; December . This makes the Chicago Exchange look like chump change. This is mega millions of dollars ... $729 million, and no one bats an eyelash! I hope someone can explain this because I'm sure not getting it. If you look at the Board of Directors, they are treating as a utility, just like they said they would. Congress and the people being irrelevant is a huge understatement. I feel like pork going through a meat-grinder right now, and no matter how hard I scream, it doesn't matter. Another night with no sleep as I follow the rabbit through the rabbit holes.

I am feeling more like "One flew over the cuckoo's nest," but a cuckoo that crashed and burned instead.

With the next auction scheduled for December 1, 2010 ... http://www.rggi.org/home

The site is: http://www.rggi.org/news and right there is Center for American Progress.. think I'm lying? Take
a look for yourself!

The Proof is in the Pudding: Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative Shows Pollution Pricing Works
Center for American Progress

As Congress looks for a way to price global warming pollution at the federal level, 10 Northeastern states have already put in place a market-based carbon emissions reduction program, the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), which just completed its seventh successful auction of pollution permits. While opponents of clean energy reform falsely claim that a cap-and-trade system would harm the economy, RGGI provides a working model and active case study of how reducing pollution can actually drive economic growth...

Under Program Design:

Program Design

The Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) is a cooperative effort among the states of Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, and Vermont. Together these ten states have capped and will reduce power sector CO2 emissions 10 percent by 2018.

RGGI is composed of individual CO2 Budget Trading Programs in each of the ten participating states. Through independent regulations, based on the RGGI Model Rule, each state’s CO2 Budget Trading Program limits emissions of CO2 from electric power plants, issues CO2 allowances and establishes participation in regional CO2 allowance auctions.

Regulated power plants can use a CO2 allowance issued by any of the ten participating states to demonstrate compliance with an individual state program. In this manner, the ten state programs, in aggregate, function as a single regional compliance market for CO2 emissions.

RGGI is the first mandatory, market-based CO2 emissions reduction program in the United States.

How Cap-and-Trade Works

To reduce emissions of greenhouse gases, the RGGI participating states (Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, and Vermont) are using a market-based cap-and-trade approach that includes:

• A multi-state CO2 emissions budget ("cap") that will decrease gradually until it is 10 percent lower than at the start

• Requirements for fossil fuel-fired electric power generators with a capacity of 25 megawatts (MW) or greater ("regulated sources") to hold allowances equal to their CO2 emissions over a three-year control period

• Allocating CO2 allowances through quarterly, regional CO2 allowance auctions.

• Investing proceeds from the CO2 allowance auctions in consumer benefit programs to improve energy efficiency and accelerate the deployment of renewable energy technologies

• Allowing offsets (greenhouse gas emissions reduction or carbon sequestration projects outside the electricity sector) to help companies meet their compliance obligations

• An emissions and allowance tracking system to record and track RGGI market and program data, including CO2 emissions from regulated power plants and CO2 allowance transactions among market participants

RGGI's phased approach means that reductions in the CO2 cap will initially be modest, providing predictable market signals and regulatory certainty. Electricity generators will be able to plan for and invest in lower-carbon alternatives and avoid dramatic electricity price impacts.

What the hell is an auction monitor report? http://www.rggi.org/docs/Auction_9_MM_Report.pdf

A benefit to consumers ... 60% goes to energy efficiency! http://www.rggi.org/rggi_benefits

"In many respects, RGGI is a slightly less ambitious version of what the Waxman-Markey bill attempts. While RGGI aims to cut greenhouse-gas emissions 10 percent by 2018, the House measure aims for a 17 percent reduction by 2020. Likewise, RGGI requires only electric power generators of more than 25 megawatts to participate in its auctions. Waxman-Markey would affect a much wider swath of industries, including coal, oil, and iron, steel, cement, and paper manufacturers." News & Updates (tab)
Source: http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Global-Issues/2009/0627/p25s12-wogi.html

Will someone please look at the money made from the "carbon auctions!" http://www.rggi.org/market/co2_auctions/results
There is an office at 90 Church St. with 6 employees handling all this.  It really makes the Chicago Xchange look like kids play!
*Six states participated in Auction 1

Cumulative Auction Results (Organized by State)

This chart displays cumulative auction results organized by state. To view an auction-by-auction breakdown for each state, click on the state name listed in the left-hand column. [Refer to link on website]

State Cumulative Current Control Period Allowances Sold Cumulative Future Control Period Allowances Sold Cumulative Proceeds

Connecticut      17,021,230       761,340         $42,528,739.93
Delaware            6,785,994       438,508        $17,632,412.12
Maine                  8,462,506      400,152        $22,212,477.93
Maryland           53,079,771    2,469,590      $139,117,061.91
Massachusetts    44,386,550   2,091,207      $115,881,456.43
New Hampshire 10,216,595     549,559          $26,540,835.39
New Jersey:       30,607,087   1,784,050         $83,056,201.89
New York        102,123,650  4,861,964       $265,358,611.27
Rhode Island        4,445,623     208,231          $11,604,733.02
Vermont               2,049,300       95,985           $5,349,429.83
Total                 279,178,306 13,660,586      $729,281,959.72

Post-Auction Data Release

The participating states have agreed to principles for the release of post-auction data. The document is available below.
Post Auction Data Release - PDF

**********
CO2 Auctions, Tracking & Offsets > CO2 Auctions > Auction Platform
CO2 Emissions & Allowance Tracking
CO2 Auctions
Auction Materials
Auction Results
Upcoming Auctions
>Auction Platform
Market Monitor Reports
CO2 Offsets
Auction Platform
This page provides a link to the Auction Platform login page.

Note: Each approved bidder will require a username and password to access the Auction Platform. The RGGI CO2 Budget Trading Programs Auction Manager will issue a unique username and password to the Primary (and Secondary, if applicable) Authorized Auction Representative of each qualified applicant.

For any questions related to usernames and/or passwords, please contact the RGGI CO2 Budget Trading Program Auction Manager at:

RGGI CO2 Budget Trading Programs Auction Manager
c/o World Energy Solutions, Inc.
446 Main Street, 14th Floor
Worcester, MA 01608
Phone: 1.800.578.0718
Email: auctionmanager@worldenergy.com

According to the Wall Street Journal on September 25, 2008, 10:59 AM ET Keith Johnson wrote the following. Unfortunately, WE WEREN’T PAYING ATTENTION! And we still aren’t!!

Ten northeastern U.S. states will dive into the brave new world of selling carbon-emissions credits today, officially kicking off the nation’s first cap-and-trade scheme designed to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases

But don’t get too excited. The Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, or “RGGI,” is more likely to start with a whimper than a bang. Prices for the carbon permits are likely to be low, and that will probably undermine the scheme’s plan to force utilities to generate cleaner power.

RGGI’s first auction today, of about 12.5 million emissions permits, isn’t attracting a lot of interest. For starters, that’s because the program’s overseers allocated more pollution permits than power companies need to meet their obligations. That means there’s no red-hot demand to get permits. At the same time, utilities have three years to start really tightening their belts, so there isn’t a lot of urgency to get emissions credits in the bank.

What will it cost to emit a ton of carbon dioxide in the Northeast? Probably about $4—those are the early signs from futures markets, at least. While higher than RGGI’s floor price for the auction—a paltry $1.86 a ton—that doesn’t really make old-fashioned power generation much more expensive. A ton of carbon dioxide currently goes for about $37 in the European emissions-trading scheme. RGGI says it will publish the details of today’s auction on Monday.

So will RGGI’s new carbon pricetag drive big changes in power generation? Not likely. Any price above $5 a ton makes traditional coal less attractive, granted, and makes utilities prefer natural gas for power plants. But thanks to “lowish” prices for the stuff, utilities are already diving massively into cleaner-burning natural gas, anyway—that’s one reason the ten states in RGGI have more wiggle room than they expected under the program.

The low price tag won’t do much to promote “clean coal,” either. An Australian study estimates that carbon has to cost at least $25 a ton just to cover the added expense of sticking coal-plant emissions underground—and that doesn’t include the added expense of building and running clean-coal plants in the first place.

Nuclear power fares even worse. The Congressional Budget Office figures carbon has to cost at least $45 a ton for nuclear economics to make sense. Neither RGGI’s early auction, nor any of the climate-change bills rattling around Washington, come close to putting such a high pricetag on carbon.
Over time, as other regional schemes like the Western Climate Initiative kick off, and Washington designs its own nationwide scheme, the price of carbon might rise enough to make a difference. But for now, RGGI’s cautious approach doesn’t appear it will make much difference.
Source: http://blogs.wsj.com/environmentalcapital/2008/09/25/rggis-rules-northeast-launches-first-us-carbon-cap-but-will-it-work/  

So why exactly is it so bad?  Crap n tax, cap & trade is a creeping way to tax carbon in the air.

Nex, they will want to collect property tax on the "square footage of air" above a single story house.  My example: Suppose someone came and said since you have one story house, you should be taxed on the second story of air above in your property taxes, since you could have used it for extra square feet, but didn't. Would you revolt?

RGGI has established a MANDATORY tax. In this case it's sort of like trading futures. By example, please let me explain in really simple terms, as I understand it.

Suppose this winter is a killer winter for New England, and every household is allocated a certain number of carbon "units" that they can spend in any given year. For the purposes of explanation only, I will assign a fictitious and arbitrary number of 20. If the Northeast, including Maine, Vermont, NH, MA, and New York have a horrendous winter with -30˚ weather and 10 blizzards, and the households spend 40 units ... they would have to go and BUY units on a carbon trade commission, and purchase carbon units or risk being fined for the extra "carbon" they need. It caps the amount of carbon one can put in the air, and charges you to put more imaginary CO2 into the universe. From whom do they buy these imaginary carbon credits? From a couple retired in FL? No, the government sells you the right to use these units. Theses auctions are currently scheduled for AUCTION on the RGGI site http://www.rggi.org/home in Sept. and Dec. They will buy them from underdeveloped countries like Africa, India, etc. We are giving our citizens’ money for to whom and why? Is this the motivation for barf’s trip to India on November 6, and prior to the next “climate change” conference at the end of November?

How does one know what you will need in Jan. or February? This is an arbitrary tax or expenditure being required on top of fuel and heating costs. Is this carbon trade commission another layer of bureaucracy for control by redistributing wealth, in simple terms, taking money from Americans and giving it to third world countries. You bet it is! Who gets the money? Who sells the "carbon units?" Who benefits? By the same token on a global scale, it will bankrupt American companies. Africa, Egypt, Lebanon have no industry. What happens to American companies that make steel and need more carbon units than they are allotted? They are fined, or are forced to buy carbon units from Africa or Egypt, or Lebanon. How can one justify paying for this manufactured commodity? If they get insane enough with it, they may decide carbon dioxide from exhaling may be allocated at 2 adults and one child per family. If you have 10 children, will you be taxed on their carbon dioxide (exhaled)? And then, at what rate? Does the penalty or costs per unit rise exponentially vs. arithmetically with each child over 1? To whom do you pay? Who collects? Isn't breathing a God-given right? While these examples are over-simplified and over-generalized and perhaps exaggerated to make a point, I did it with the hope of explaining how incredibly intrusive it is. It is a stupid, arbitrary, and total subjective way to increase the scope and power of government(s), the establishment of another bureau, an attempt to redistribute the wealth, a stealth tax against which American firmly stand, and a "regulated" tax by changing the regulation and not allowing legislation by our Congress. This is one more abuse where barf, Carol Browner, the progressive head of EPA, and this administration are saying we can change a law by twisting and re-interpreting an old regulation to avert having a congressional vote that is guaranteed to fail.

I hope this is helpful. Again, it is exaggerated and simplified to help people understand how bad this is for America and for American industry. It will further put us behind China who is on compliant. Please do not hesitate to contact with questions or comments, or to advise if "stealth" new legislation is passed.

Perhaps I post too much or that the content of my posts is unimportant; however, I am really surprised that no one commented on this. Maybe I didn't explain it well enough, or maybe no one is interested, but guys ... this is the single most expensive goal that obarfo wants to achieve outside of hellcare.

Remember when he said in the video, "under my plan of a cap n trade, cost of electricity will necessarily skyrocket!"


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HlTxGHn4sH4

In California:



This cap n trade "green initiative" is the single, #1 job-killer for the US, after posting the moratorium on drilling in the Gulf.

In Spain:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9Cr4q4CiCs



RGGI is run by 6 people in the NY office. http://www.rggi.org/rggi/about_rggi

"In many respects, RGGI is a slightly less ambitious version of what the Waxman-Markey bill attempts. While RGGI aims to cut greenhouse-gas emissions 10 percent by 2018, the House measure aims for a 17 percent reduction by 2020. Likewise, RGGI requires only electric power generators of more than 25 megawatts to participate in its auctions. Waxman-Markey would affect a much wider swath of industries, including coal, oil, and iron, steel, cement, and paper manufacturers." News & Updates (tab)
Source: http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Globa...5s12-wogi.html 

The Board of Directors ... http://www.rggi.org/rggi/board. They are all utility people, EPA, etc.

When this administration said that if he could not pass it through legislation, he would do it through regulation and run it like a utility ... just as he would the FCC under Mark Lloyd, the FCC/net neutrality czar.

The last carbon auction netted $720 million and change. How do I know? They posted it!
http://www.rggi.org/market/co2_auctions/results (See the money raised at Auction Results)

The site is: http://www.rggi.org/news  and right there is Center for American Progress a progressive group that supports obarfo ... think I'm lying? Take a look for yourself!

The Proof is in the Pudding: Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative Shows Pollution Pricing Works
Center for American Progress

"As Congress looks for a way to price global warming pollution at the federal level, 10 Northeastern states have already put in place a market-based carbon emissions reduction program, the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), which just completed its seventh successful auction of pollution permits. While opponents of clean energy reform falsely claim that a cap-and-trade system would harm the economy, RGGI provides a working model and active case study of how reducing pollution can actually drive economic growth ..."

The next carbon auction is scheduled for Dec. 1, 2010 http://www.rggi.org/home  with 68 days to go. Does NJ, DE, NH, MA... do all 10 states know that their emissions being "charged" and that they will have to "buy" credits if we have a bad winter?

These are being regulated, NOT legislated.  Our congress and we become more and more irrelevant... Toothless, paper tigers, and people don't even know it's happening.

A patriot posted this on another site responded with this information:

"I went to Lowes last week to buy a replacement ceiling fan/light for my kitchen. The only light kits available to buyers now are the CFL designed light kits. So what’s the history here? Compact fluorescent lamp - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Seems the Energy Independence and Security Act was signed into law by President George W. Bush in December of 2007: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-6
"Fluorescent Vs. Incandescent Light Bulb Laws:"  http://www.ehow.com/about_6566172_fl...#ixzz10Y7lu3Bz

Will this stimulate new industrial growth in America? or will the cost of safety limit it's productivity?
http://www.marketresearch.com/produc...ductid=2601061
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directo...L%29_Downsides
ttp://www.americanthinker.com/2010/...ight_bulb.html

Supplier Locations:
China (Mainland) (5526) Taiwan (43) South Korea (5) Hong Kong (378)
United States (103) India (51) United Arab Emirates (35) South Africa (24)
Belgium (17) Singapore (16) Pakistan (14) Vietnam (5)
Turkey (5) Libyan Arab Jamahiriya (5) United Kingdom (4) Canada (4)
Poland (3) Malaysia (3) Thailand (2) Sweden (2)

On the conspiracy/alarmist side: http://www.bobbyshred.com/fools/cfls.html
Will there be a new government department to control waste? http://www.epa.gov/cfl/cflcleanup.html
"Too Little, Too Late - Media Discover Mercury in Fluorescent Bulbs"??? http://www.businessandmedia.org/arti...326103035.aspx

Did you know that China produces most of the CFLs sold in the US today? I have faith that, over time, America will build a better mouse trap."

Obama’s hidden bailout of General Electric
By: Timothy P. Carney
Senior Examiner Columnist

March 4, 2009 While many companies hire lobbyists to win earmarks, General Electric’s unmatched lobbying force has secured a tax increase — or its equivalent — in President Barack Obama’s budget.

Labeled “climate revenues” and totaling $646 billion over eight years, this line item in Obama’s budget has inspired confidence in GE Chief Executive Officer Jeff Immelt. As Immelt put it in a letter this week, he believes that the Obama administration will be a profitable “financier” and “key partner.”

On page 115 of Obama’s fiscal 2010 budget is Table S-2, titled “Effect of Budget Proposals on Projected Deficits.” The chart forecasts the costs of Obama’s spending proposals and the added revenue of his proposed tax increases. It also forecasts, beginning in 2012, billions of dollars a year in “climate revenues.” This budget line, which has struck fear into some lawmakers from coal-dependent states, could spell salvation for GE in these times of uncertainty.

How can Obama generate “climate revenues”? By forcing companies to pay for the right to emit greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide.

A tax on greenhouse gas emissions could accomplish this, but Obama’s preferred policy — and the approach embraced by a few congressional bills in recent years — is called “cap and trade.” In short, cap and trade requires businesses to spend “credits” to pay for their emissions. Businesses can buy or sell these credits, and the market — not the government — would directly set the price of a credit. Government would initially auction them off, generating revenue.

GE — a member of the U.S. Climate Action Partnership, which advocates cap and trade — leads the push for greenhouse gas restrictions.

In the fourth quarter of 2008 as the company’s stock fell 30 percent, GE spent $4.26 million on lobbying — that’s $46,304 each day, including weekends, Thanksgiving and Christmas. In 2008, the company spent a grand total of $18.66 million on lobbying.

Reviewing their lobbying filings, you might think you were looking at Al Gore’s agenda. GE’s specific lobbying issues included the “Climate Stewardship Act,” “Electric Utility Cap and Trade Act,” “Global Warming Reduction Act,” “Federal Government Greenhouse Gas Registry Act,” “Low Carbon Economy Act,” and “Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act.”

This isn’t altruism or public relations. GE has started a joint venture called Greenhouse Gas Services, which invests in — and hopes to manage the trade in — greenhouse gas credits. But these investments and this trading floor are of basically no use and nearly no value without government restrictions on greenhouse gases.

Hence the lobbying, buttressed by generous campaign contributions: Employees and executives gave $1.35 million to politicians in the past election while GE’s political action committee shelled out $1.55 million. About 64 percent of this $2.9 million went to Democrats, with Obama easily the top recipient of GE money.

Obama’s budget includes the payoff, promising to start a multibillion-dollar greenhouse gas industry by 2012. In a letter this week, GE’S Immelt told shareholders that current events present an “opportunity of a lifetime,” because “capitalism will be ‘reset.’ ”

Immelt wrote: “The interaction between government and business will change forever. In a reset economy, the government will be a regulator; and also an industry policy champion, a financier, and a key partner.”

In short, GE plans to get rich by being one of the government’s closest partners — which it has always been, thanks to its unmatched lobbying efforts.

The environmentalist at this point might respond, “Well, good for GE. If they can get rich while helping the planet, more power to them.” But this ignores important issues. First, restraining greenhouse gas emissions will cost Americans dearly. Gas, electricity and heating prices will all go up. The prices of manufactured and shipped goods will go up. A Clemson University report on similar cap-and-trade proposals forecast a 1 percent decline in the U.S. gross domestic product by 2015 if they were implemented.

There are environmental costs, also, to such a focus on greenhouse gases: Ethanol’s damage to water supplies, soil health and air quality is the fruit of government pushing the product as a climate-friendly fuel.

When the lobbying fingerprints of GE and other well-connected firms are considered, it’s not hard to conclude that the policy that will finally emerge won’t be the one that is best for the planet and least bad for the economy, but the one that is best for General Electric.

The following is Tenth Amendment Center approved legislation to nullify federal overreach through proposed Cap and Trade or other environmental laws and regulations. As the legislation affirms, such power was not delegated to the federal government and thus, was left in the hands of the states. Activists, we encourage you to send this to your state senators and representatives – and ask them to introduce this legislation in your state.

Americans must band together.  Contact your representative and get after this!!

BE IT ENACTED BY THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF (enter state):

SECTION 1. Pursuant to (SECTION AND ARTICLE) of the (STATE) Constitution, there is hereby ordered the following legislative referendum which shall be filed with the Secretary of State and addressed to the Governor of the state, who shall submit the same to the people for their approval or rejection at the General Election, to be held on (DATE).

SECTION 2. NEW LAW A new section of law to be codified in the (STATE) Statutes as (SECTION AND TITLE), unless there is created a duplication in numbering, reads as follows:

This act shall be known and may be cited as the “(STATE) Environmental Authority Act”.

SECTION 3. NEW LAW A new section of law to be codified in the (STATE) Statutes as (SECTION AND TITLE), unless there is created a duplication in numbering, reads as follows:

The Legislature finds that the:

1. Tenth Amendment defines the total scope of federal power as being that which has been delegated by the People of the Several States to the federal government, and all power not delegated to the federal government in the Constitution of the United States is reserved to the States, respectively or to the People themselves. The powers reserved to the People and the State of (STATE) are those powers as they were understood at the time that (STATE) was admitted to statehood, excluding amendments. The reservation of those powers is a matter of contract between the state and people of (STATE) and the United States as of the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by (STATE) and the United States;

2. Ninth Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits the federal government from violating or infringing upon rights not specifically enumerated in the Constitution and reserves to the people of (STATE) certain rights as they were understood at the time that (STATE) was admitted to statehood, excluding amendments. The guarantee of those rights is a matter of contract between the people and the State of (STATE) and the United States as of the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by (STATE) and the United States; and

3. Power to regulate interstate commerce was delegated to the federal government in the Constitution. As understood at the time of the founding, the regulation of commerce was meant to empower Congress to regulate the buying and selling of products made by others (and sometimes land), associated finance and financial instruments, and navigation and other carriage, across state jurisdictional lines. This interstate regulation of “commerce” did not include agriculture, manufacturing, mining, malum in se crime, or land use. Nor did it include activities that merely “substantially affected” commerce; and

4. Power vested in Congress to “regulate” an activity does not include the power to “prohibit” such activity; and

5. Regulation of intrastate commerce is reserved to the States or to the People under the Ninth and Tenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.

SECTION 4. NEW LAW A new section of law to be codified in the (STATE) Statutes as (SECTION AND TITLE), unless there is created a duplication in numbering, reads as follows:

A. The Legislature of the State of (STATE) declares that the regulation of hazardous waste, clean air, water and of the production, exploration, drilling, development, operation, transportation and processing of oil, natural gas, petroleum, and petroleum products that originate and remain inside the State of (STATE) and have not been proven and adjudicated by the (STATE) court system or the federal court system to specifically be causing, or to have caused, quantifiable harm to any persons or places beyond the borders of (STATE) shall be intrastate commerce and shall not be subject to federal law or federal regulation under the authority of the United States Congress to regulate interstate commerce.

B. Each state environmental agency and each state agency with limited environmental responsibilities, within its areas of environmental jurisdiction, shall to the extent deemed necessary cooperate with federal environmental agencies in the regulation of hazardous waste, clean air, water and of the production, exploration, drilling, development, operation, transportation and processing of oil, natural gas, petroleum, and petroleum products but shall not be required to enforce federal laws or regulations relating to such environmental regulation.

SECTION 5. Any federal law, rule, order, or other act by the federal government violating the provisions of this act is hereby declared to be invalid in this state, is not recognized by and is specifically rejected by this state, and is considered as null and void and of no effect in this state.

SECTION 6. Any official, agent, or employee of the government of the United States, or employee of a corporation providing services to the government of the United States that enforces or attempts to enforce an act, order, law, statute, rule or regulation of the government of the United States in violation of this act shall be guilty of a class B felony.

SECTION 7. Any public servant of the State of (STATE) that enforces or attempts to enforce an act, order, law, statute, rule or regulation of the government of the United States in violation of this act shall be guilty of a class B misdemeanor.

SECTION 8. This act shall become effective (DATE), upon approval by the people of the State of (STATE)

Finally, I told you, but no one was listening! I told you about this... Welcome RGGI to California!! WAKE up America!!! We can win the elections; however, they will bleed us with food costs (gas prices, emissions, etc.), heat/cooling costs, appliances ... we will be out beating our clothes in a lake, but wait ... Pukehead barfof*ckhead took the word navigable out, mirrored the UN water treaties ... Where the hell does that leave us? Who asked, "What's so bad with this?!"

California unveils greenhouse gas trading plan

California green vote could hurt voluntary CO2 market Wed, Oct 27 2010
China greenhouse gas growth "daunting": U.S. envoy  Fri, Oct 22 2010
Money, polls rebuff California green law challenge  Thu, Oct 21 2010
California vote has Canadian green partners on edge  Wed, Oct 20 2010
Green energy aspirations for Obama’s India visit 

GOP poised to gain tax, banking clout in U.S.
Credit: Reuters/Fred Prouser
By Peter Henderson
SAN FRANCISCO
Fri Oct 29, 2010 7:52pm EDT

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - California unveiled on Friday its final blueprint of a market system to curb greenhouse gases, relaxing expected rules in the face of a weak economy in a measure that could set the tone for the nation's climate policy.

By agreeing to give away virtually all necessary permits to factories and power plants when the program starts in 2012, rather than sell them at auction, the U.S. state with the biggest economy and population is acknowledging the challenges of double-digit unemployment -- and the reality that pollution decreases as the economy slows.

California aims to cap total emissions of gases linked to global warming and let factories and power plants trade for an ever-decreasing number of permits to emit gases. In theory, market forces will drive efficiency in the system, known as cap and trade.

There is still a debate about the economic merits of the plan, which planners in the Friday draft estimate will shave about 0.1 percentage point from annual state growth.

Many Californians see such environmental regulation as positive for the economy by spurring "green" jobs. Voters next Tuesday could put on hold a climate change law, including the emissions market, but polls show the Proposition 23 challenge to the state's climate change law is set to be rebuffed.

After the failure of federal climate legislation, the fate of California's law and the details of its cap-and-trade plan are seen as a U.S. turning point -- either away from addressing climate change or toward stronger action.

"California is the biggest icebreaker there is, and if that ship stops moving it will have a huge effect on everyone else," said former state climate change planner Jon Costantino, a lawyer at Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, who said passage of the rule, rather than its details, was the key for alternative energy clients.

Many in traditional industry consider the state climate initiative to be too ambitious, at least for now.

"The economy is still bad. We can't afford it," said Anita Mangels of the Yes on 23 campaign to suspend the climate law.

But a group of manufacturers, farmers, petroleum companies and others who have been critical of plans, said the new draft better reflected the reality of the weak economy.

"It also provides a gradual approach in the early years that will allow California businesses the time needed to meet the 2020 goals," said Shelly Sullivan, executive director of the AB 32 Implementation Group.

The state's 2006 law, AB 32, requires it to return to 1990 levels of greenhouse gas emissions by 2020, and the hobbled economy has produced fewer greenhouse gas emissions than expected, making the goal less onerous.

The state agency planning cap-and-trade has responded in part by ignoring a suggestion by a panel of economists last year to auction off the emissions permits.

Under the plan unveiled on Friday and likely to be adopted December 16 by the powerful Air Resources Board, the brunt of the market force will not be brought to bear for years.

Planners say that by setting clear limits and clear rules for the scheme, it hits a compromise that will allow polluters flexibility to act, investors’ certainty, and improve the environment without causing economic disruption.

In conclusion:

This is from MY TRUSTED FRIEND .. NOT heresay or secondhand information!!


"... I saw Senator Hutchison earlier this week and asked her if she was aware of the Cancun summit scheduled on November 29th whose goal is "to complete what was started in Copenhagen". The AlertNet article has some interesting info with Mexico speaking on behalf of the U.S. to the U.N.... Hutchison became agitated and said it was a "serious concern" and she and the other Republicans are going to do everything they can to fight this. She seemed fully aware of the big picture. You can tell that she is very worried - and she said they are all "concerned" about this issue. But her tone of voice was very grave and focused on this set of questions, as opposed to all other political questions she dispatched."

U.N. ALERT - NOVEMBER 29 !!!
"Climate Change" leaders want to sign the "non-binding" treaty... full speed ahead!
UN agrees to host two more rounds of climate change talks before summit in Mexico

“The UN Climate Change Conference in Cancun must do what Copenhagen did not achieve: It must finalize a functioning architecture for implementation that launches global climate action, across the board, especially in developing nations”
http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=34339&Cr=climate&Cr1=&Kw1=Mexico&Kw2=&Kw3=

Mexico says world should trust U.S. on emission (U.S. keeping low profile...)
September 16, 2010

- OBAMA plans to give away American sovereignty with this "New Green Economy" & Global Governance treaty, which will end a dollar-based economy

- EPA can enforce programs to reduce carbon footprints ....(The plan is to bypass Congress to legislate "by policy" without a vote on a proposed legislative bill, which is unconstitutional.)

- There are "undue conflicts" over US emissions goal (i.e. Congress is merely an impediment, not an obstacle)

****QUOTE: "But Obama's climate envoy Todd Stern said last month the United States would honor the short-term goal, despite the Senate's failure to act." [ID:nN0297673]
- Next round of talks in Mexico, end of November 2010
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N16557622.htm