Gino DiCaro

Judge orders amendments to Prop 23 ballot wording

By Gino DiCaro, VP, Communications

Capitol Update, Aug. 6, 2010 Share this on FacebookTweet thisEmail this to a friend

On August 3rd, the state Superior Court ordered significant changes to how the Attorney General’s office worded official Proposition 23 ballot language, the measure that would temporarily suspend implementation of AB 32. The Judge found the original language “false,” “misleading” and “prejudicial.”

The term “polluters” was found to have negative connotations that would give voters a false impression of entities regulated under AB 32.  The judge ordered that regulated parties be referred to as “sources of emissions” instead. The judge also found that Prop. 23 would not lead to the “abandonment” of the state’s global warming law, but would indeed merely “suspend” its implementation.

Importantly, the judge’s ruling makes clear that Prop. 23 only impacts AB 32-related regulations which apply only to greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) associated with global warming, not state pollution laws that protect the environment and the public from smog‐forming emissions and those related to asthma and other health risks.

CMTA is pleased that voters will be provided with a fair and accurate official description of Prop. 23.

For more information, go to

Read more Energy articles

Capitol updates archive 989898989