Californians voted overwhelmingly against Proposition 30, a ballot measure that would have taxed the rich to fund emission-reducing electric vehicle programs for low- and middle-income Californians as well as fund programs to fight wildfires.The windfall would have been used to fund EV-subsidy programs and charging-station initiatives, and provide funding for fighting and preventing wildfires, over the next 20 years.In a frequently-aired TV spot, Newsom called Prop 30 “one company’s cynical scheme to grab a huge taxpayer subsidy.” The company in question is Lyft, the ridehailing firm, because its drivers would be able to use the subsidy to convert their fleet to electric cars.Gregory Pierce, a professor at the UCLA Luskin Center for Innovation, told Motherboard earlier this week that “it’s ridiculous” to characterize Prop 30 as a corporate handout.There’s nothing about Lyft drivers or Lyft, or anything in particular benefiting them except that Lyft drivers have vehicles like other folks who might benefit from a lot more money for EVs.”Nevertheless, polling on Prop 30 swiftly swung after Newsom came out against it and, as a result, the defeat was expected."