The report had a tantalizing hook: “Proposition 23 will create 1.3 million jobs by 2020,” including 150,000 jobs next year.
Proponents of the campaign to roll back the state’s landmark greenhouse gas reduction law touted the nonprofit Pacific Research Institute’s study in an Oct. 5 news release as “good news for California’s more than 2.2 million unemployed and good news for the state’s economy.”
What they didn’t say is that the Yes on 23 campaign paid for that study.
Campaign filings show the Yes on 23 committee paid the Pacific Research Institute $40,000 on Sept. 2.
Ben Zycher, author of the Pacific Research Institute report, said he “wasn’t paid by the oil companies to do this paper.”
Zycher said his study, which was reviewed by outside experts, provides an accurate account of the impacts of California’s greenhouse gas reduction law, which he characterizes as a costly energy tax.
“I have no idea who funded it, but I do know I wasn’t paid $40,000,” said Zycher.
“If they think I was a prostitute, let them point to an error in the paper.”
Nothing contained in this blog is to be construed as necessarily reflecting the views of the Pacific Research Institute or as an attempt to thwart or aid the passage of any legislation.
Economc Study Funded by Prop. 23 backers questioned
Pacific Research Institute
The report had a tantalizing hook: “Proposition 23 will create 1.3 million jobs by 2020,” including 150,000 jobs next year.
Proponents of the campaign to roll back the state’s landmark greenhouse gas reduction law touted the nonprofit Pacific Research Institute’s study in an Oct. 5 news release as “good news for California’s more than 2.2 million unemployed and good news for the state’s economy.”
What they didn’t say is that the Yes on 23 campaign paid for that study.
Campaign filings show the Yes on 23 committee paid the Pacific Research Institute $40,000 on Sept. 2.
Ben Zycher, author of the Pacific Research Institute report, said he “wasn’t paid by the oil companies to do this paper.”
Zycher said his study, which was reviewed by outside experts, provides an accurate account of the impacts of California’s greenhouse gas reduction law, which he characterizes as a costly energy tax.
“I have no idea who funded it, but I do know I wasn’t paid $40,000,” said Zycher.
“If they think I was a prostitute, let them point to an error in the paper.”
Nothing contained in this blog is to be construed as necessarily reflecting the views of the Pacific Research Institute or as an attempt to thwart or aid the passage of any legislation.