California Sends Pickens Packing – Prop 10 Loses

Outspent 130 to 1, No on 10 Campaign Stops Oil Tycoon’s Money Grab.”

From PR Newswsire:

The No on Proposition 10 campaign claims an early landslide victory as election night results from throughout California indicate a lopsided defeat of T Boone Pickens’ ballot measure.

“California voters didn’t fall for a Texas oil tycoon’s $10 billion money grab, no matter how much he spent camouflaging it as green,” stated Richard Holober, spokesman for the No on Prop 10 campaign, and Executive Director of the Consumer Federation of California. “Proposition 10 is the ultimate example of a wealthy special interest abusing the ballot initiative process to enrich itself. We built a coalition of major environmental, consumer, business, labor, taxpayer and civic organizations that triumphed over Prop 10’s $23 million war chest. The defeat of Prop 10 sends a signal that California’s ballot initiative process is not for sale to the highest bidder.”

It also signals, you can’t fool all the people all the time (see “Memo to T. Boone Pickens: Your energy plan is half-brilliant, half-dumb“). More details on Prop 10’s failure below:

Mr. Pickens’ Clean Energy Fuels Corporation contributed nearly $19 million to the Yes on Prop 10 campaign. Chesapeake Energy and its owner Aubrey McClendon donated $3.5 million to the Yes on 10 campaign. Clean Energy is the nation’s largest operator of natural gas fueling stations, and Chesapeake is the largest independent producer of natural gas in the U.S. Both corporations would have made a fortune under Prop 10’s multibillion dollar giveaway program to create a market for natural gas-fueled trucks.

The No on Prop 10 campaign raised about $170,000.

The defeat of Proposition 10 is the first test of voter support for the self-styled “Pickens Plan.” News reports state that Mr. Pickens has spent $58 million on national television ads since July promoting his plan. One key component of his plan is the conversion of vehicles to run on natural gas. Pickens Plan ads do not spell out who pays for this conversion, and who benefits from it.

“Proposition 10 pulled back the veil from the Pickens Plan, and revealed that taxpayers would be hit hard with the cost of funding giveaways designed to put money in Mr. Pickens’ pockets. The Pickens’ Plan flunked the smell test with California voters,” Holober stated.

OK, that’s the harsh PR from, but still.

Related Posts:

3 Responses to California Sends Pickens Packing – Prop 10 Loses

  1. Joe Galliani says:

    Good riddance to bad rubbish. Don’t let the door hit you on your old, carbon-filled ass Mr. T.

    Slim Pickens was all he offered and we beat him as well as McCarbon like a pair of borrowed mules.

  2. I am very happy this bill didn’t pass but I don’t think the No on 10 campaign can take credit for it. I searched vainly on my TV for any signs of resistance to 10 and couldn’t find it. Meantime we were bombarded by ads by the pro-10 group.

    I was very worried that voters would take the bait but apparently Californians are wiser and saw through the hype without the help of ads that explained, for instance, the proposition’s promotion of natural gas over other non-petroleum alternatives. Maybe if some representative of the No on 10 group could tell me how they reached out to the public in ways that I am not aware of, I will change my opinion. I consider myself well-informed and I read a lot but I did not see any trace of their activity.