I thought the Reporter did a decent job of breaking down the election results. With one exception: I think you missed the boat on why I-1631 was rejected.
Sure, “Big Oil” chipped in big bucks to beat it. Glad they did. But we “no” voters didn’t need their help in making a decision.
There are plenty of us who retain a basic mistrust of the “climate change” oracles. We’re beyond trusting someone just because of what they do for a living. We know an agenda when we smell it.
I-1631 would have raised money to do … what, exactly? It was to be dished out at the whims of some “to-be-named later” government apparatchiks, with no apparent plan even mentioned. Oh yeah, we’re “down for that.”
One need not be a “climate scientist” to know that the three primary factors in the climate are (a) solar cycles; (b) the ocean’s thermal cycles; and (c) volcanoes. Everything else, e.g. atmospheric CO2 content, is small potatoes – at most.
CO2 a poison? Without it there would be no life of any sort on Earth.
I-1631 was just another government money grab, wrapped in the bogus righteousness of “climate change.”
– Ted Reinhart