Full Story

California Air Resources Board March 22, 2007
1001 I Street
Sacramento, California 95814

RE: Global Warming Lawsuits. Will the State sue me? Should I sue the State?

This presentation is online at http://trafficbulldog.org.

Lawsuits are the great equalizer in America. For, if there is an injustice, a lawsuit is always an option.

As we move forward with Assembly Bill 32, I am deeply concerned that a lawsuit is required to wake up the State of California from allowing the illegal ongoing conflict of interest at our Regional Transportation Authorities. (Please see the Feb 22, 2007 ARB presentation for background).

I find it fascinating that a State like California, so addicted to the sales tax revenue from vehicle sales and gasoline, would sue the auto manufactures for Global Warming Damages.

The State of California has certainly played a key role in the buildup to our current crisis.

The State of California relies heavily on sales tax revenue from vehicle sales. To illustrate, just last week the County of Sacramento offered a sweet deal of $1 million for an Auto Dealer to stay in the County. Why does the County government love the Auto Dealer so much? Because new vehicle sales generate 20% of the sales tax revenue for the County.

Many other examples of the government's codependence on sales tax of vehicle sales include:
- Providing auto dealers free land for building dealerships
- Providing auto dealers free land for parking their unsold inventory
- Allowing auto dealers exemptions from city and county signage laws so that enormous Auto Mall signs can grab the attention of everyone within miles.
- And of course the illegal conflict of interest that keeps carpooling in check.

So as I look at California's suit against the auto manufacturers for Global Warming Damages, the irony actually gives me indigestion. Here we have a government that actively works to help increase the number of new vehicles sold in the state of California. And then, that same government is turning around and suing the auto manufacturers for contributing to Global Warming. It is fascinating that the State has recognized the potential for suits and is making a pre-emptive strike against the auto manufactures for all future claims against the State related to Global Warming Damages.

So, I have to ask. Should I expect the State of California to sue me for operating my SUV?

I also have to ask. Should I sue the State of California for its efforts in increasing vehicle sales? After all, there is a serious addiction that needs to be addressed.

Well, it may be difficult to sue the State just for the increased vehicle sales. However, the ongoing illegal conflict of interest by our Regional Transportation Authorities does leave the State open to valid claims. The State of California through the Department of Transportation allows the Regional Transportation Authorities to operate this illegal ongoing conflict of interest. Also, to date, I have not seen or heard of any government official actually taking action to combat the problem.

So, if a suit against the State is the answer, let's illustrate some of the potential claims.

- A class action suit by the 25% of Californians suffering from asthma. What is it worth to the young child struggling to breath at night? What is it worth to the parent watching their child suffer? Multiply that number by 8,000,000 ... this is likely a multi-trillion dollar law suit topic.
- A class action suit by all of the South Coast Air District residents that continue to live in a non-attainment area. The lawsuit would be based on the fear of developing lung cancer and other diseases from exposure to vehicle exhaust pollution. Are new vehicle purchases really the only way to clear the air?
- A class action suit by cities that may have less water due to less snow pack
- A class action suit by other States that are vulnerable to rising water levels due to melting polar cap ice.
- A class action suit by Animal Protection groups for the drowning of polar bears and other adverse Global Warming affects on animals

Is that the only way that we can move forward in California? With Lawsuits? Is the political courage to do the right thing gone in California?

At TrafficBulldog.org we advocate alleviating traffic congestion through rideshare and carpooling. Roger Snoble of the Los Angeles MTA has stated that "at 1.3 riders per vehicle, there would be no traffic congestion". Yes, carpooling. Incidentally, 1.3 riders per vehicle also gets us half way to Kyoto reducing our emmisions by 15%. 1.3 riders per vehicle would also go a long way to cleaning the air in the South Coast Air Basin.

I encourage the ARB to work to eliminate this conflict of interest at the Regional Transportation Authority. As mentioned in the Economy and Technology Advancement Advisory Committee, the outsourcing of government based Rideshare Matching Services should be a near term solution for our AB 32 implementation.

Sincerely,



Joseph Bishop
Founder - http://trafficbulldog.com
joe@trafficbulldog.org
15030 Ventura Blvd, #19-456
Sherman Oaks, CA 91403