Comments on: No Nukes: DeVore Can’t Get Enough Signatures

By: DP Resident

DP Resident — Thu, 22 Nov 2007 03:42:14 +0000

A “47% improvement” – but what is the dollar cost?

Say if we were to implement all of the energy saving suggestions, without China and India playing along, what is the point?

By: Chuck DeVore

Chuck DeVore — Thu, 22 Nov 2007 03:26:49 +0000

Happy Thanksgiving to you too, Dan!

All the best,

Chuck DeVore

By: Dan Chmielewski

Dan Chmielewski — Wed, 21 Nov 2007 22:33:58 +0000

Happy Thanksgiving Chuck!

I can assure you, should this Turkey move to the ballot, there will be vigorous opposition.

By: Chuck DeVore

Chuck DeVore — Wed, 21 Nov 2007 22:28:54 +0000

Gentlemen,

I moved the initiative to the inactive file. Our polling showed majority support — not the mid- to high-60s that one needs at the beginning of a controversial ballot measure (yes, DanC, majority support — barely). Based on the results of our last poll, we decided it would not be prudent to force the issue onto the ballot at this time. Especially so given the tens of millions of dollars we expected the opponents would pour into the campaign.

As time goes on and electrical rates soar due to the shortsighted policies in Sacramento, we’ll try again. I expect that public opinion will begin to shift our way. After all, when people such as Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi announce that she has dropped her longstanding opposition to nuclear power in the face of global warming it is only a matter of time before other Democrats reevaluate nuclear power too.

All the best,

Chuck DeVore
State Assemblyman, 70th District

By: Dan Chmielewski

Dan Chmielewski — Wed, 21 Nov 2007 20:51:18 +0000

Actually Matt; it’s not a leap of logic. Most Californians identify themselves as Democrats, Liberals, Progressives and even Environmentalists. Chuck shoots down any argument for alternative energy. He didn’t get enough funds. He didn’t get enough signatures. If Californians truly supported the idea, he would have gotten the funds needed to get the signatures. But hey, an energy source with a millenium-class toxic waste byproduct can’t be all bad, right?

What sucks is I can’t tell Chuck to have the plant built near him because his house is about 2 miles from mine.

By: Jubal

Jubal — Wed, 21 Nov 2007 20:14:07 +0000

“…California voters have sent a clear signal that nuclear energy just isnâ€™t the answer.”

That is an enormous leap of logic, Dan. I haven’t talked to Chuck about this development, but failing to get enough signatures to qualify it for the June ballot is not ipso facto proof of your claim.

With enough money and circulators, one can qualify almost any initiative. It is rare to qualify a statewide initiative without plenty of either. Most likely, Chuck’s initiative was short-circuited by lack of funds.

I doubt more than a fraction of Californians were aware of Chuck’s initiative, so to spin this is a rejection of nuclear energy is absurd.

By: just asking

just asking — Wed, 21 Nov 2007 19:30:10 +0000

Mr. Devore my have just been effing with the people of California on his Nuke-em initiative. Glad to see he’s not giving up on his glowing dreams!

Devore’s persistance will ensure that we will be rid of him forever. I hope he runs against Tom Harman for Senate seat. It wil be fun to see how his nuke message goes over in Irvine, Costa Mesa and Huntington Beach!

Respectfully,

just asking?