Lopez, Nadia. (2023, January 10). Environmentalists say Newsom’s budget cuts jeopardize climate programs, electric car mandate. Retrieved February 9, 2023, from https://calmatters.org/environment/2023/01/california-climate-budget/

In the face of a $23 billion budget deficit for California, Governor Newsom proposed to cut $6 billion from a $54 billion climate package, making it a $48 billion package. The majority of the spending cuts take from clean transportation initiatives, including rebates for zero-emission car buyers, EV subsidies for those who cannot afford electric cars, and charging infrastructure in disadvantaged communities. Opponents of the budget cuts, including progressive climate lobbyists and state legislators, argue that the cuts indicate that the state is slowing its momentum at a time when it needs to push harder than ever for comprehensive environmental policy. Proponents of the budget cuts argue that the size of the bill is unprecedented, regardless of the $6 billion dollars cut from it. 

I think that the budget cuts are pragmatic; it is sensible to try and diminish a budget deficit, especially given the size of the bill. However, the budget cuts mean that the bill will forgo necessary policy and infrastructure. This exclusion will disproportionately harm people and existing programs, despite the relatively small budget cuts. This relates to environmental science because it is about environmental policy to fund the fruits of environmental science, research, and invention.  

Sanchez, Zaydee. (2023, February 8). California’s new pesticide notification system aims to protect public health. Will it work?. Retrieved February 9, 2023, from https://www.ehn.org/pesticide-drift-2659335062.html

Governor Gavin Newsome has appropriated $10 million dollars to the California Department of Pesticide Regulation for the creation of a statewide notification system about toxic pesticides. Farmworkers work in fields that are treated with toxic pesticides, and this has caused many people to fall ill with bleeding and rashes. However, there has never been a notification system alerting the public that a toxic pesticide has recently been used. The new notification system hopes to generate more awareness of pesticide exposure and strengthen the push for legislation limiting pesticide use in California. Furthermore, the notification system will help researchers to track the effects of pesticides. 

Given how harmful pesticides can be, I am shocked that there isn’t more information available to workers about pesticides and when they are used. Thus, I am relieved to know that this notification system is going to be implemented. I think it will be useful to the health of farmworkers, and to the fight against pesticide-use. The main drawback of this policy is that the notifications will only apply to restricted/proven-to-be-dangerous pesticides, not all pesticides. This is disappointing, but the notification policy is a solid start. This topic is related to environmental science because it has to do with awareness and regulation of pesticides, which are deeply harmful to soil and plant health. 

Luna, Taryn. (2022, February 8). Corporations turn to ballot to combat California’s progressive agenda, raising alarms. Retrieved February 8, 2023, from https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2023-02-08/oil-referendum-setbacks-california

In August, Governor Gavin Newsom passed a package of climate change bills that included a law requiring a certain amount of space around new oil and gas wells in order to keep them away from homes and schools. Oil and petroleum organizations have spent at least $20 million dollars to collect signatures and otherwise achieve a referendum on that law. The referendum will last until November, 2024, at which point voters will decide whether or not they want to uphold them. Given this use of the referendum process, labor unions are considering reforms to it.

This referendum sends the message that successful fuel-producing companies value maximizing their profits more than the health of the community; drilling for oil and gas results in asthma, birth defects, and exposure to toxic chemicals. I am frustrated that the democratic process is so easy for companies to exploit in such a way that they harm living beings and the environment in which they live. However, it shows how impactful that legislation could be if oil companies are willing to go to such pains to hinder its effects. This relates to environmental science because companies are using policy to go against scientific advice so that they can further their enterprises.

Degen, Courtney. (2023, January 31). California bills call for CalPERS, CalSTRS to divest fossil fuels, company climate disclosure. Retrieved February 8, 2023, from https://www.pionline.com/esg/california-bills-call-calpers-calstrs-divest-fossil-fuels-company-climate-disclosure

As part of the Climate Accountability Legislative Package (which includes SB 253), State Senator Lena Gonales introduced a bill to ban California’s state pension funds—California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS) and California State Teachers Retirement System (CalSTRS)—from investing in fossil fuel companies. CalPERS is $456.6 billion, and CalSTRS is $302.1 billion; each fund has billions of dollars invested in fossil fuel companies. Opponents of this legislation argue that CalPERS and CalSTRS’ investments in those firms would simply be bought by other investors, and California pension funds would ultimately lose assets with no positive benefits. 

I have mixed feelings about this bill. On the one hand, secure pensions for government employees are more important than acting on principle, especially if this action may not cause significant change in environmental policy. On the other hand, the government should not invest in fossil fuel companies, pensions are already fairly secure, and the divestment has the potential to significantly harm the fossil fuel industry. Since it could go either way, I lean in favor of the bill. This article relates to environmental science because the bill in question aims to preserve the environment by lessening support for the primary producers of fossil fuels.

Plachta, Ari. (2023, January 31). California could force large corporations to disclose carbon emissions under new bill. Retrieved February 8, 2023, from https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article271831502.html

State Senator Scott Weiner introduced a bill (SB 253) that would mandate companies with annual revenues of over a billion dollars to publicly report their carbon emissions. California is the fifth largest economy in the world, and this bill would impact almost 6,000 companies that operate within the state. The data about our current emissions patterns will be incredibly useful to know the extent of the emissions problems in California, so that legislators can use this information to pass future regulations. 

This article relates to environmental science because this bill would give experts information about the ways that California is impacting the environment. With this information, qualified individuals and groups will be able to apply environmental science in order to shift these behaviors and set goals for the changes that we need to make. I think that this bill could be very constructive to limiting greenhouse gas emissions. If we know which industries are producing greenhouse gases and how much they are producing, then it will become much easier to legislate those emissions; without information about the problem, it is very hard to solve it efficiently. Although I don’t think that this bill will cause change, it is a stepping stone to causing change, and that is important. I hope that it passes the legislature.