Published Tuesday, May 21, 2002, in the Los Angeles Times

Exhaust Legislation May Hit a Red Light

By Miguel Bustillo, Times Staff Writer

SACRAMENTO -- Legislation to make California the first state to
regulate tailpipe emissions of greenhouse gases, a suspected cause of
global warming, is foundering in the Assembly amid a lobbying and
advertising blitz by automakers, car dealers, oil companies and
organized labor.

The measure by Assemblywoman Fran Pavley (D-Agoura Hills) has already
cleared both houses by rail-thin margins and needs only final
approval of the Assembly to reach the desk of Gov. Gray Davis. But to
the dismay of the environmental groups behind the legislation,
support is eroding, and the bill may now be defeated.

In a well-funded campaign of television, radio and newspaper ads,
opponents have portrayed it as an un-American attempt to force soccer
moms from their beloved SUVs into smaller, less safe vehicles that
will hurt the economy and cost workers their jobs. Many of the
commercials feature Cal Worthington, the colorful California car
dealer whose offbeat television ads with his "dog Spot"--usually a
tiger, elephant or some other beast--made him a cult figure. The
result has been a flood of calls, letters and e-mails to legislators
from voters worried that their cars of choice could soon be
endangered--and flip-flops from some Republican and Democratic
legislators whose swing votes Pavley was counting on for victory.

"I've had a change of heart on this issue," said Assemblyman Tom
Harman (R-Huntington Beach), a moderate who touts his environmental
credentials and got 500 calls one week from angry constituents. "SUVs
and light trucks are very popular in Southern California, and people
don't want to lose the ability to ride these vehicles,
notwithstanding the fact that they are polluters and gas guzzlers."

Environmentalists call the campaign wildly misleading, saying it
features claims of tax increases and higher prices at the pump that
have little basis in reality. But they say they have grown accustomed
to scare tactics from the auto industry, which used similar arguments
to fight California's pioneering efforts to control air pollution
with unleaded gasoline and catalytic converters, only to be proved
wrong each time.

"I understood they were going to mobilize, but they really do a
disservice to the democratic process by waging a campaign not based
on facts," Pavley said. "That millions of dollars by special interest
groups can deceive and dupe people--if this is the message sent, that
this is how to ... win at any cost, that's a sad commentary."

The Sacramento showdown mirrors--with good reason--the recent dispute
in Washington over tougher federal fuel efficiency standards that
resulted in a victory for automakers. The easiest known way to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions in cars is to produce more fuel-efficient
vehicles, so that would be the likely result of the California
legislation.

"It really is an attempt to regulate fuel economy on new motor
vehicles; make no bones about it," said Ray Buttacavoli, a lobbyist
for General Motors.

Thus, it has major national repercussions, not only because
Californians buy more cars than anyone else and shape the automobile
market, but because under federal law, only California can pass
higher air pollution standards than those set in Washington. Other
states can then choose California's standards, but they cannot be the
first to surpass those set by the federal government.

Faced with such restrictions, car dealers contend, automakers will
restrict the number of models offered in California.

"All the Suburbans they don't sell here they will sell in Texas, and
there will be just as much emissions of CO2; only Californians will
have less choice and more expensive cars," said Peter Welch of the
California Motor Car Dealers Assn.

Greenhouse gases, primarily carbon dioxide, do not directly form smog
or otherwise imperil human health; in fact, they are some of the
basic building blocks of life on the planet. But carbon dioxide
absorbs heat from the sun, and as excessive amounts are released into
the atmosphere from human activities such as burning fossil fuels, it
helps form a warm blanket of air around the planet that leads to
global warming, scientists believe.

Though that problem remains an abstraction to many, some scientists
say it is beginning to have effects that are hitting home in
California.

In perhaps the most serious example, research shows that the Sierra
snowpack, the concentration of mountain snowfall that feeds the
state's reservoirs and trickles south as it melts during the summer,
is becoming smaller because of global warming. That could eventually
affect the supply of water to the state's agricultural heartland and
growing urban centers.

"People come to California because of the beauty of the environment,
the oldest and tallest trees in the world, the scenic beaches with
sea lions--and all those species are threatened by global warming,"
said Peter Miller, a scientist with the Natural Resources Defense
Council.

"It's critical that California take leadership on this issue," he
added. "California has always been a leader in technology that not
only benefits the state, but eventually the nation and the entire
world."

Pavley's legislation, AB 1058, attempts to address the problem in
sweeping fashion. Rather than stating how the emissions would be
reduced in automobiles and trucks, it directs the California Air
Resources Board to come up with regulations that "achieve the maximum
feasible reduction of greenhouse gases" by 2005. The new standards
would apply to all vehicles from model year 2009 forward.

That hazy mandate frightens the auto industry. Though the measure
balances its call for maximum reduction with assurances that the
regulations should not outlaw any vehicle types, including sport
utilities, or place uneconomical demands on car owners, opponents
cite a recent report by the air board and the state's Energy
Commission as a peek into what the measure might bring.

The report on ways to reduce petroleum use mentioned raising gasoline
taxes, reducing speed limits and taxing the number of miles traveled.
None of those ideas is mentioned in Pavley's bill, and in fact, the
air board does not have the power to raise taxes. Nonetheless, they
are the basis for the more sensational accusations in the opposition
ad campaign.

Initially, "the proponents were able to debate the issue in the
abstract: Global warming is a problem; we need to do something about
it," said Phil Isenberg, a former Sacramento mayor and legislator who
is the spokesman for the opposition campaign. "They have proven far
less effective on the technical questions of how this would actually
work."

The recent report, he added, "makes politicians nervous, because they
see this is not only about taxes, but about the air board designing
cars and everything that goes with that."

With support from the Legislature's leaders, Assembly Speaker Herb
Wesson (D-Culver City) and state Senate President Pro Tempore John
Burton (D-San Francisco), Pavley was able earlier this year to
navigate past strong Republican opposition to get her measure through
both houses.

But she appears to have hit a wall. Largely because of the high-
pressure lobbying against her bill by the United Auto Workers union
and others, the legislation has languished in the Assembly for two
weeks. To pass, every bill in the Legislature must obtain a second,
final approval from the house in which it originated.

Two moderate Republicans who voted for the measure in January, Orange
County's Harman and David Kelley of Idyllwild, have reversed their
positions. So have two business-friendly Democrats: Joe Canciamilla
of Pittsburg and John Dutra of Fremont. Pavley had vowed to take up
the bill last Thursday, but backed down as UAW representatives in
union jackets patrolled the Capitol's hallways. Without their votes,
the measure--which received 42 votes the first time around--would
fall short of the 41 needed for passage.

"I was never in love with the bill in the first place," Canciamilla
said, adding that he voted for the measure in January as a favor to
Democratic leaders, but always made clear that he would reserve
judgment until later. "This is simply pressure to get the automakers
to build more hybrids, and if that is the case, they should just come
at it clean."

Some lawmakers privately say the fight over the measure, the most
significant heard thus far this year in Sacramento, is proving to be
a test of Wesson's clout as speaker. But he plays down his powers,
saying that the days of speakers twisting arms and bullying
colleagues ended with the arrival of term limits.

"I think it's important for California," Wesson said. "But I am not
Attila the Hun. This is a different office in a different time, and I
think everyone has to be treated with respect.

"I personally don't know if things can be 'speakerized' anymore."