In today’s Sacramento Bee, Andrew Chang has some tough things to say about California’s AB32 and about Bo Cutter and myself.  He omits some details that are worth mentioning.   First, some background.  Last week, Bo Cutter and I published this OP-Ed in the Sac Bee.  Chang’s response was published today.

Point #1:  We were not paid to write our OP-ED and we collect no payments at all from the Air Resources Board.  I do serve on its Research Screening Committee and I am paid $400 a year for the work (roughly 20 hours a year).

Point #2:  Dr. Chang does not reveal how much his firm was paid for their “study” but I guess his firm was paid around $100,000.  He has the right incentives to push his case that AB32 will end the world.

Point #3:  Dr. Chang refers to us by name but doesn’t mention that we are academic economists.  The words “UCLA” and “Pomona College” do not appear in his piece.   Are all economists’ opinions about economic issues weighted equally by the public?  Do we all have equal expertise about topics?  You know my answer to that question.   Here is one ranking of ...

Link to original article / Continue Reading...

Legal Planet , a collaboration between UC Berkeley School of Law and UCLA School of Law, provides insight and analysis on energy and environmental law and policy. The blog draws upon the individual research strengths and vast expertise of the law schools’ legal scholars and think tanks.