Opponents of Proposition 23 say passage of the California ballot measure could impact national security. The proposition seeks to delay the state's greenhouse gas emissions law.
If passed by voters in November, Proposition 23 would delay implementation of the state's global warming law until California's economy improves.
California's global warming law, AB 32, includes programs to limit industrial greenhouse gas emissions. The law requires the state to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020.
Former U.S. Secretary of State George Shultz co-chairs the 'No On 23' Campaign.
Shultz said the proposition would undercut efforts to reduce reliance on fossil fuels that put America's security at risk.
"Revenues that are generated by our use of oil, and that of others, goes in part to countries that don't wish us well," said Shultz. "Undoubtedly some of this money is slopping over into the hands of terrorists."
Retired Vice Admiral Dennis McGinn agreed.
McGinn said some of the dollars the U.S. spends on imported oil are used against soldiers.
"Some of that money finds its way into the hands of those, Taliban and Al Qaeda, who are actually killing our troops with money that comes from petrol dollars," said McGinn, a former Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Warfare Requirements and Programs at the Pentagon.
McGinn said relying on foreign oil affects U.S. policy decisions, including placing troops in harm's way.
Shultz said delaying the law could hurt research efforts into alternative fuel sources that could lead to reduced dependence on oil imports.
Some of the research is underway at companies in San Diego County and elsewhere in California.
"So there's been a virtual explosion of research, development, venture work of one kind or another," said Shultz. "And if we keep at it we're going to get somewhere because this is playing from our strength as Americans and I might say Californians."
Prop. 23 calls for the greenhouse gas emissions law to be suspended until California's unemployment rate is 5.5 percent or less for four consecutive quarters.
Opponents say the four-quarter requirement has been met only three times in the past 30 years.
Backers of Prop. 23 say they want to delay the global warming law until California's economy improves.
