Scott Miller
Staff Writer
On Sept. 27, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger visited Pepperdine to sign Assembly Bill 32, the California Climate Act of 2006, into law. Basically the bill would combat global warming threats by restricting greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from California businesses. While global warming is a threat, and needs to be solved, the answer is not through more regulations on businesses, which in turn, leads to more taxes on the citizens.
The government cannot solve this problem by restricting businesses. Restricting businesses may seem like an obvious answer, but it is only a short-term fix to the problem. What the government needs to do is step aside and let concerned citizens step up and lead fellow citizens; concerned citizens such as Sir Richard Branson, owner of Virgin Atlantic, who has pledged $3 billion to support research into clean energy sources.
The more the government restricts, the harder it is for business owners to produce and make a profit. By allowing for a free-market economy, businesses would be forced to evolve their products and practices to agree with the conscience of consumers. This does not raise taxes, or force any companies to comply with regulations. It allows the free-market capitalism to exist and affect the change that needs to occur.
By doing this, the public has the power to create change. If members of the public overwhelmingly demanded that businesses follow environmentally-friendly practices, and refused to buy products that did not agree with their environmental beliefs, then businesses would have no choice but to comply. They would have to comply and evolve their practices to stay in business. This is a better way to make businesses comply with environmentally friendly practices than government regulations, which can be circumvented.
If regulations are the case, then there are not only more restrictions on businesses, and more taxes on citizens, but there are still companies disregarding the regulations. That is not effective, nor is it fair. If some companies are using the double standard and ignoring governmental regulations, then the government has just wasted taxpayers’ money, while harming businesses that do comply with increased restrictions.
The public who opposes the proliferation of Global Warming has to be vocal and proactive about the situation. If they follow through, and make the decision to spend their money and time on more environmentally friendly products, the businesses will have no choice but to follow, or go out of business.
This is the kind of free-market response that is needed — not more government regulations. This gives the power to the people, allowing them to spend their hard-earned money on what they want and think is right, such as a new hybrid car, manufactured at an environmentally friendly plant, instead of a new Hummer H3. Also, citizens have more of their money, since the government is not increasing taxes to enforce their restrictions.
While the threat of global warming is serious, and new products and methods of production need to be created and utilized, the government should not impose regulations and restrictions. A free-market response, such as Branson pledging some of his personal wealth, is exactly what the situation needs.
Private citizens need the freedom and ability to choose which products they want to buy, depending on whether or not the products agree with their environmental concerns. Not only does this sort of response grant more freedom to citizens, it also allows businesses to maximize their profits through competition and marketing. More taxes and regulations is not the answer — let citizens and business owners decide what to do with their own money and products.
10-05-2006