Schwarzenegger bypasses legislature on clean energy bill
| Los Angeles
As promised, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger Tuesday signed an executive order, requiring California to get 33 percent of its electricity from renewable sources by 2020.
The state legislature had already passed two bills on Sept. 11, calling for the same standard and giving California the largest 鈥渞enewable portfolio standard鈥� in the country. But Governor Schwarzenegger declared that he will veto those bills when they reach his desk because they are 鈥減oorly drafted鈥� and 鈥渙verly complex.鈥�
So now, the serious debate is on as to what the governor is up to, whether his executive order will be legal or not, and why the order is any better 鈥� or worse 鈥� than the legislative alternative. Environmentalists and legislators are still trying to get the governor to reconsider.
The legislature鈥檚 plan is more pro-labor, containing limitations supported by unions which would restrict the purchase of energy credits from outside the state. Specifically, utilities could buy no more than one-quarter to one-third of renewable energy credits from outside of the state.
The goal of the restriction is to create an incentive for investors to invest in renewable businesses in the state. Supporters of the legislature鈥檚 plan say it would create more jobs than the governor鈥檚 plan.
By contrast, the governor鈥檚 plan would not include limitations on purchasing energy credits outside the state. He has argued that the legislature鈥檚 bills are protectionist and would increase the cost of energy.
鈥淚t鈥檚 important to note that the legislature-passed bills actually contain price controls,鈥� says Jessica Levinson, political analyst at the Center for Governmental Studies in Los Angeles.
She says some fear that the governor鈥檚 plan is less environmentally friendly because it appears that his definition of 鈥渞enewable energy鈥� would include coal-fired energy. Some worry his definition includes hydroelectric sources as well.
鈥淭he governor鈥檚 action today raises the question about the wisdom of accomplishing through executive order that which has already been passed by the legislature,鈥� says Ms. Levinson.
Schwarzenegger is acting boldly by taking the initiative from the legislature and handing it to one of his own, executive branch-controlled agencies, the California Air Resources Board, says Barbara O鈥機onnor, director of the Institute for the Study of Politics and Media at California State University in Sacramento.
She says the goal is creating his legacy. 鈥淕overnor Schwarzenegger is crafting his legacy about many things, and California being a leader in air quality is critical to that. He feels the legislative bills had too many things that could foil that.鈥�
Professor O鈥機onnor and others say it is up in the air whether or not the executive order will pass court muster or not.
Possible issues include violating interstate commerce laws and whether or not the order continues beyond Schwarzenegger鈥檚 exit from office at the end of 2010. There are also current laws on the books prohibiting the state from being required to go beyond a 20 percent renewable portfolio standard.
鈥淚t鈥檚 difficult to see how an administrative order can supersede an explicit provision of law,鈥� says Alicia Trost, press attach茅 for Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg. Mr. Steinberg sent the governor a letter today, saying Schwarzenegger鈥檚 criticism of the legislative law 鈥渟urprised and disappointed us.鈥�
鈥淩espectfully, an executive order does not have the force and effect of law,鈥� Steinberg wrote. 鈥淎dditionally, such a proclamation will only cause confusion and uncertainty to California鈥檚 energy markets, jeopardizing California鈥檚 role as the world leader in renewable energy development and green jobs.鈥�
Ms. Trost also cites the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, which expressly prohibits the state Air Resources Board from altering 鈥渁ny programs administered by other state agencies for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions.鈥�
The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) has also expressed concerns about the 鈥渆xtremely optimistic timeline鈥� in the executive order.
鈥淲e still believe legislation is necessary to solidify this strategy into law,鈥� says Laura Wisland, energy analyst for UCS. 鈥淚t鈥檚 too early to say what this process will yield compared to the bills.鈥�
-----
Follow us on .
