Here is the forward from Zycher here: "The California electorate next month will vote on Proposition 23, which would suspend the implementation of the state's global warming (i.e., energy taxation) law ("AB32″) until the unemployment rate reaches 5.5 percent for four consecutive quarters. My new paper on the employment effects of this initiative can be found in the link below.

In a nutshell: Based upon official estimates of the reduction in state energy use attendant upon implementation of AB32, Proposition 23 would increase California employment by over half a million in 2012, and over 1.3 million in 2020. (Total employment in 2009 was about 16.2 million.) Not a trivial benefit from suspending a law the original justification for which was -- I am not kidding -- "California has to be a leader," a shallow rationale even by the standards of political sloganeering. The California unemployment rate stands at 12.4 percent; it will be interesting to see if the voters in this deep-blue state will choose to turn away from a regulatory juggernaut promising massive costs and, literally, no benefits".

As most of you know I am an avid supporter of Proposition 23, and in the honor of full disclosure I also work for Assemblyman Logue who authored this proposition. I do realize that there are arguments to be made for environmental reform, but I believe this report makes clear the gravity of our situation. The earth might need environmental reforms, but California cannot afford to do it alone, nor would we have any success if we tried. Attempting to do so will live us economically crippled, and unable to enact real change, baby steps if you will, towards a cleaner environment. It is clear that Proposition 23 must be passed if our state is ever to recover from the endless national recession.

Read more:http://www.norcalblogs.com/post_scripts/2010/10/republican-corner-major-s.html