XPost: seattle.politics, alt.law-enforcement, or.politics

Democrat Gov. Inslee lied when he said,"it would cost only “pennies.”
key is
Gov. Jay Inslee rejected my estimate, claiming it would cost only “pennies.” His administration even went so far as to ban utilities from showing the cost of the CO2 tax on home heating bills.
When the tax was put in place in 2023, The Seattle Times editorial board
noted there was “a palpable jump in the cost of gas in Washington,” increasing prices about 40 cents per gallon last summer, the highest in
the nation.

from https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/yes-on-i-2117-to-repeal-climate-commitment-act/

Yes on I-2117 to repeal Climate Commitment Act

Sep. 22, 2024 at 12:00 pm Updated Sep. 22, 2024 at 12:00 pm
It is clear that the CCA will be yet another expensive policy that does
little for the planet while wasting money on political agendas, writes
the author. Pictured is Let’s Go Washington’s Gas Price
Rollback in Federal Way on Aug. 29, 2024. (Erika Schultz / The Seattle
Times)

It is clear that the CCA will be yet another expensive policy that does
little for the planet while wasting money on political agendas, writes
the author. Pictured is Let’s Go Washington’s Gas Price Rollback in... (Erika Schultz / The Seattle Times)More
By Todd Myers
Special to The Seattle Times

If voters vote “no” on Initiative 2117, they will lock in place a badly flawed and highly politicized system that even its supporters admit does
not make reducing CO2 a priority.

At its core, the argument for keeping Washington’s expensive and
wasteful tax on CO2 emissions, known as the Climate Commitment Act, is
that “Climate change is a crisis, and we should trust politicians to
solve it.” It is a strategy that should be absurd on its face. It
becomes more absurd when we consider the miserable record of Washington
state politicians at cutting CO2 emissions.

This fall, Washingtonians will decide how to vote on Initiative 2117,
which would repeal the state’s steeply regressive CO2 tax — the largest energy tax in state history. Some admit the very high cost, but argue it
is worth it to do something about climate change.

Related No on I-2117 to retain Climate Commitment Act
I have supported efforts to reduce the risk from climate change for two decades. It is clear that the CCA will be yet another expensive policy
that does little for the planet while wasting money on political agendas.

Video Player
00:00
01:09:11

The good news is that there is a way to cut CO2 emissions that is
effective and accountable and is already used by innovators like Microsoft.

How can I be certain the CCA will be an expensive failure? Because there
has been a consistent pattern of political dishonesty and environmental
failure among tax supporters.

For example, before the CO2 tax took effect, using basic math every
other climate economist uses, I predicted it would add about 46 cents to
the cost of a gallon of gasoline. Gov. Jay Inslee rejected my estimate, claiming it would cost only “pennies.” His administration even went so
far as to ban utilities from showing the cost of the CO2 tax on home
heating bills.

When the tax was put in place in 2023, The Seattle Times editorial board
noted there was “a palpable jump in the cost of gas in Washington,” increasing prices about 40 cents per gallon last summer, the highest in
the nation.

Despite that pattern of dishonesty, some still believe we can trust
politicians to competently fight climate change. That is wishful thinking.

In The Seattle Times editorial board debate on I-2117, Rep. Joe
Fitzgibbon admitted there is no system for tracking the results of
government programs funded by the CO2 tax. Instead, he said, the
spending is based on the “democratic process” of politicians picking and choosing.

That politicized approach has failed repeatedly. Washington’s CO2
emissions consistently increased for a decade until 2019. After that,
the Inslee administration — in what is a pattern of hiding bad
information — stopped releasing the data.

The city of Seattle missed its 2020 emissions goal, even with the
COVID-19 shutdown. King County is worse, with countywide CO2 emissions
falling only 6% between 2007 and 2020, far short of the goal of 25%, and
that is with COVID.

For politicians, this system is fantastic — raking in billions of
dollars to spend on special interests with zero accountability for
repeated failures to deliver environmental results.

For the planet, it is a mess.

Supporters claim the CCA’s emissions cap law guarantees CO2 reductions.
That is another false hope. If Washington sticks to its existing CO2
cap, total state emissions would have to decline by the equivalent of
two COVID economic shutdowns in just the next six years. That would be
an economic disaster. That is why Fitzgibbon and other politicians are
already promising to make arbitrary changes to the cap if it is
politically useful.

There is a better way: Put power in the hands of innovators and people,
not politicians.

Across the political spectrum, many who previously supported political solutions to climate change have turned to innovation. Many companies developing those innovative solutions are right here in Washington
state, from smart meters built in Spokane to AI tools in Redmond and
Kirkland. Remarkably, the CCA actually bans many of these innovations as
a tool to meet the state’s CO2 goals.

Rather than locking us into a failed environmental path, voting “yes” on I-2117 not only eliminates a regressive tax and reduces high energy
costs at a time of inflation, it gives Washington a chance to choose a
path that prioritizes our planet over politics.

Todd Myers is the Washington Policy Center’s vice president for research
and a member of the Puget Sound Salmon Recovery Center.
Most Read Opinion Stories
Yes on I-2117 to repeal Climate Commitment Act
No on I-2117 to retain Climate Commitment Act
Fixing what ails Seattle schools hinges on listening to families
The ticking time bombs among us
UW president must be much clearer on standards for protest and safety
View 69 Comments / 69 New

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)