Talking on Facebook

Our main gig is discussing Prop 16 with people on the fence. Why preach to the choir? So, I ( Ben Zolno ) thought I'd show you a comment left on a friend's Facebook page recently, in a thread about Prop 16. There's not enough time to make it perfect and fancy, like an article or anything, but raw is what it is. Thoughts?

Tom, regarding 2/3 voting, here's a clarification. What I meant was, on June 8th, 51% of state voters will decide whether or not my town or any other must have a 2/3-vote special election to break off from PG&E, which is not only nearly impossible to achieve, it is impossible to even hold an election due to the fine print, which PG&E would pursue in court anyway. In other words, Tome (employee of PG&E) and other Californians will decide the fate of people who do not live in his town.

I have read PG&E's commitment to going green. I have also read BP's and Chevron's too. I need not go further.

The article from the NY Times shows leadership in electric cars by preparing for more people to buy their products? That's responsibility? Do we give credit to Exxon when they put more gasoline at their stations? When they give special incentives for those who promise to use more gas, if they use it at night? Who benefits from that?

You know there will be green lining and green washing everywhere, but the basics far outweigh the PR. I'll repeat. This corporation is motivated by profit, and nothing else. To do so otherwise is not their m.o. and not good for shareholders. If they can get away with having 30% less clean energy than required by law in 2010 and then seek a rate increase on top of that, then they will do so. And they have, and they are.

I have a friend who works for a bank, and they hold charity bowling tournaments for kids. It's awesome. And the CEO made over $21.3 million dollars last year, able to do so by jumping heavy into the derivatives game, doing automatic withdrawals and charging people $35 fees for doing so, constantly up-selling to people who can not afford it, using TARP money to buy other banks and more. And that's just the legal stuff.

I think you're deep, deep into the trees, Tom. Every environmental group not funded by PG&E is against Prop 16. Conservatives see it's a scam to destroy a monopoly's competition, liberals see it's a scam that will kill hopes for cities to compete by offering higher amounts of clean energy, and independents with their eyes open see it's just unfair to have 51% of CA decide if 1/3 of any town's population should be able to decide 100% of the town's right to choose between city power and the monopoly.

Vote No on Prop 16