As a person who worked in the automobile business almost all of my adult life, I can’t help but react to Bill Lockyer’s latest high jinks. His lawsuit against the automobile manufactures is one of the most ridiculous abuses of an official office for political gain in an election year that I have ever seen. This suit is completely without merit or precedent, and it is clear that he has only taken this action generate publicity.
Here are few questions I would like Mr. Lockyer to answer regarding how illogical this lawsuit is:
• If the auto industry has caused economic damages to the state of California because of global warming, then what are they and how did he determine the amount he is suing for?
• If you can sue the auto companies because they are contributing to global warming, why not sue every company on earth that might be contributing to global warming?
• Why not sue every consumer who has ever driven a car in the state of California?
• Isn’t this the wrong time to making unsubstantiated attacks against American companies that are going through difficult times right now?
• Toyota and Honda have received accommodations from many environmental groups for their willingness to develop alternative fuel technology; so why reward them with a lawsuit?
• How much taxpayer money are you willing to waste in pursuit of good publicity?
September 21st, 2006 at 12:00 am
John, please stop giving Lockyer new ideas on who to sue. His election plan is to sue some productive member of society each day until election day when it will not matter that the courts throw out all of the suits. In my humble opinion Lockyer is the source of global warming.
September 22nd, 2006 at 12:00 am
I think Lockyer is up to something much more sinister than election year politics. Consider what New York’s Attoney General, Eliot Spitzer, did during his tenure. He would file suit on behalf of the state against a deep-pockets industry, creating front page headlines. Trial lawyers would follow up with class action suits, also generating headlines. Those collective headlines cause concern among the investor community. Corporations, being risk averse, would often settle out of court. Money flows to the the trial attorneys, which in turn flows into the campaign coffers of Spitzer — or in our case, Lockyer.
Funny how that works.