I found it on NPR. http://www.californiareport.org/archive/R201010110850/b http://www.californiareport.org/archive/R201010110850/b You can find more details on

I found it on NPR. http://www.californiareport.org/archive/R201010110850/b http://www.californiareport.org/archive/R201010110850/b You can find more details on wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_23_(2010) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_23_(2010... It covers the three refineries that are the primary donors, two from texas and one in kansas city. the fact that ab32's suspension would be for very long time (because unemployment is unlikely to be below 5% for a year for a very, very long time -- if ever.) There is an argument, but it's assumptions aren't good. The long-term job growth from green business will FAR outpace job loss from AB32. Further, if job loss was a real concern, one would expect to see pro-labour interest groups come out in support of prop 23, which did not happen! Even the California utilities (who will lose fiscally) from AB32 have come out against Prop 23.