Logue, venture capitalist clash over Proposition 23

For a discussion centered on global emissions, the air didn't grow dirty with nasty accusations or personal attacks at a debate in Sacramento on Wednesday over Proposition 23.

Assemblyman Dan Logue and venture capitalist Tom Steyer, representing the pro and con sides of the measure, respectively, had a discussion of more light than heat before about 100 journalists and interested observers at the Sacramento Press Club's monthly luncheon.

After opening remarks, both men answered questions from journalists and others, including many with a stake on either side of the measure.

"The fact of the matter is, this clean energy revolution is happening," said Steyer, who was defending Assembly Bill 32, the state law regulating carbon emissions Proposition 23 would suspend if approved by voters on Nov. 2. "It'll keep happening, but it just won't be here."

Logue, R-Linda, said if the state really wants to boost green energy, it should work on improving the economy in others ways to give governments the revenue to continue subsidizing such ventures, as Proposition 23 backers say AB32 does at taxpayer expense.

"This is not a campaign against AB32, this is about a change in our economic times," Logue said in his opening remarks. "The bottom line is the middle class of California is trying to create jobs and create wealth, and all these green jobs are subsidized."

Both men, while acknowledging their differences occasionally in pointed remarks, said they respected the other's viewpoints and even agreed the state's beleaguered economy is the number one issue to solve.

But Logue, who wrote Proposition 23, said opponents have focused too much on the out-of-state oil companies that have contributed the vast majority of the money to support the measure.

Such companies pay taxes and own property in California, Logue said, and also employ thousands of people.

"Why are we demonizing people who work here?" Logue said, adding many other businesses have left California because of state regulations and taxes, and AB32 will accelerate the trend. Steyer, co-chairman of the No on 23 campaign, said in response that he was in favor of private enterprise, but not government ballot measures paid for almost entirely by a private concern.

"I'm not against the gas and oil industry," Steyer said. "I'm for increased efficiency."

Both men also made some eyebrow raising remarks. In response to a question, Steyer acknowledged his firm is invested in both oil and gas companies and green energy companies. "I'm not doing this professionally," he said. "If I thought AB32 was bad for oil and gas companies, I'd be acting against my own self-interest."

Logue said he felt the health effects of carbon emissions were overblown, adding overall health in California would improve more if unemployment dropped than AB32 went into full effect.

"Last year, 3 million people died worldwide of malaria and starvation," Logue said. "I don't know one person who died from carbon emissions."

That the forum happened at all was in question a week earlier, when Logue said a representative from the business community would go in his stead, to the dismay of the luncheon organizers. Logue later said he'd go, citing a misunderstanding.

Proposition 23, if approved, would suspend AB32 until the state's unemployment rate drops to 5.5 percent and stays there for a year.

CONTACT Ben van der Meer at 749-4709 or bvandermeer@ appealdemocrat.com.