Legislation

SACRAMENTO - Charging that the auto industry is working to “sabotage California's landmark greenhouse gas law,” California Attorney General Edmund G. Brown Jr. today attacked a proposed energy bill amendment and called upon the House to reject any effort to block state authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions.

Attorney General Brown joined 13 states and the City of New York in sending a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, voicing strong opposition to “troublesome language that may be used to eliminate existing Clean Air Act authority to address global warming, including California's landmark greenhouse gas emissions standards.”

In a statement explaining why he opposes the Hill-Terry Amendment, commonly referred to as H.R. 2927, Brown said: “California could be crippled by this brazen attempt to pre-empt our state emissions standards. The auto industry is working to sabotage California’s landmark greenhouse gas law.”

Under the Clean Air Act, California can adopt standards stricter than federal rules by requesting a waiver from EPA. Congress expressly allowed California to impose stricter environmental regulations in recognition of the state's “compelling and extraordinary conditions,” including topography, climate, high number and concentration of vehicles and its pioneering role in vehicle emissions regulation.

In the letter, the Attorney General points out that “while providing only modest increases in federal fuel economy standards, the bill includes language that has the potential to disrupt the statutory framework for controlling carbon dioxide emissions that was endorsed by the U.S. Supreme Court.”

Brown supports the Markey-Platts proposed amendment which sets aggressive but technologically feasible fuel economy standards that promote energy independence and advanced automobile technologies. Brown said that unless the Hill-Terry Amendment explicitly defends the right of California and other states to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, the Speaker should block its consideration and the House should vote to defeat it.

A vote on amendments to the bill is expected this Friday. The letter from Attorney General Brown to the Honorable Nancy Pelosi is attached.

# # #

SACRAMENTO—In response to Republican demands that major provisions of California’s environmental law be gutted as the price for approving this year’s state budget, California Attorney General Edmund G. Brown Jr. issued the following statement:

“It is an outrage that a small group of Republican Senators would gut California’s Environmental Quality Act as the price of their voting—a month late—on this year’s budget. Their proposal would profoundly undercut the positive efforts of cities and counties to reduce greenhouse gases and fight global warming.

It is the constitutional responsibility of the Attorney General to enforce all the laws of California, including our ground breaking environmental laws. California has a proud history as being the unquestioned leader in the fight to control global warming. We should not let a few Republican state Senators—all of whom opposed the Global Warming Solutions Act--turn back the clock with this misguided and retrograde maneuver. It represents global warming denial at its worst.”

# # #

California Attorney General Edmund G. Brown Jr. today called on Rep. Rick Boucher, D-Virginia, to scrap his assault on the Clean Air Act and drop his proposed legislation to repeal current U.S. EPA authority to curb greenhouse gases.

Brown said that Boucher’s proposal would be “a death blow to California’s pioneering efforts to restrict tailpipe greenhouse gas emissions and a blatant assault on the Environmental Protection Agency’s ability to fight global warming.”

The proposed bill is the subject of a hearing scheduled for Thursday June 7, 2007, before the House Energy & Air Quality Subcommittee. Rep. Boucher, who chairs the subcommittee, proposed the legislation to remove the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles and bar California from setting its own global warming standards.

Brown joined 14 state attorneys general in voicing strong opposition, noting that the proposed bill would amend the Clean Air Act in “fundamentally short-sighted ways.” Under the Clean Air Act, California can adopt standards stricter than federal rules by requesting a waiver from EPA.

The letter is attached.

WHAT:

Tomorrow, 9:00 a.m. Eastern, California Attorney General Edmund G. Brown Jr. will urge the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to allow vehicle regulations passed by California and 11 states which would be the most comprehensive effort to combat global warming in United States history.

Brown will also brief the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works following his EPA testimony.

Brown, California’s top law enforcement official, is supported by Connecticut, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington, all of which have adopted the regulations and are ready to quit stalling on global warming.

WHEN/WHERE:

EPA Testimony: 9:00 a.m. Eastern, Tuesday, May 22, EPA Potomac Yard Center, 2777 Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA.

News Conference: 12:00 p.m. Eastern, Tuesday, May 22, Hyatt Regency Crystal City, 2799 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington VA. (Prince William Room)

Senate Testimony: 2:30 p.m., Eastern, Tuesday, May 22, 456 Dirksen Senate Office Building, Room 406, Washington DC.

Note to Editors:

On May 21 and May 22, Mr. Brown will be in Washington, D.C. Please e-mail Press Secretary David Kravets for additional press availability: AGPressOffice@doj.ca.gov

Updates forthcoming.

# # #

The California Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld California’s $3 billion stem cell agency, which was approved by voters under Proposition 71 in 2004. California Attorney General Edmund G. Brown Jr.’s office defended the measure’s legal challenge. Fifty-nine percent of voters approved the groundbreaking measure in 2004.

Wednesday’s decision frees $3 billion in funding for stem cell research that was stalled by opponents’ frivolous legal challenges. California voters adopted the measure in the wake of the Bush administration’s failure to support research that potentially help people with Parkinson’s disease, diabetes, spinal cord injuries and other serious conditions.

“I pledged to vigorously support stem cell research and today is a victory for California’s voters and medical science,” Brown said. “This decision allows California to take on the groundbreaking scientific research that the Bush administration ignored.”

The KFC Corp. agreed Tuesday to comply with a 1986 voter-approved initiative requiring companies that expose consumers to harmful substances provide a 'clear and reasonable warning.'

The company agreed to warn California customers that its fried or baked potatoes contain acrylamide, a chemical known to cause cancer. Acrylamide, a byproduct created by the reaction of chemicals in food and high heat, is found in French fries and potato chips at high levels. For example, a serving of fries or potato chips has approximately 82 times more acrylamide than is allowed in drinking water under U.S. EPA standards.

Proposition 65, the initiative demanding the exposure warnings, was approved by 63 percent of California voters.

The KFC Corp., in settling a lawsuit with California Attorney General Edmund G. Brown Jr., agreed to supply consumers with acrylamide warnings to comport with Proposition 65, the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act. The company, without admitting wrongdoing, also agreed to pay $208,000 in civil penalties and $133,000 to fund Proposition 65 enforcement actions.

A hearing before Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Wendell Mortimer Jr. is scheduled May 29, when the California Department of Justice and the KFC Corp. will request the court's approval.

The settlement was the first as part of an ongoing Proposition 65 enforcement action against major food and beverage producers. They include: Frito-Lay Inc., Pepsico Inc., H.J. Heinz Co., Kettle Foods Inc., Procter & Gamble Distributing Co., Procter & Gamble Manufacturing Co., Wendy's International Inc., McDonald's Corp., and Burger King Corp.

The settlement agreement is attached.