Mark Riker, executive secretary of the Washington Building Trades, said I-1631 would likely jeopardize future investments in transportation projects. … “I-1631 has no definitive plan for how the tax money would be spent, and that will make it more difficult to adequately fund a new transportation package. Gas prices go up even more every time […]
Opinion
If You Worry About Climate Change and Care About the Environment, Vote No on I-1631
If you care about the environment, if you worry about global warming, and if this summer’s smoke is of concern, you should vote against Washington State Initiative 1631. … As I will describe below, I-1631 is a flawed, ineffective, and highly partisan initiative that does little to deal with increasing greenhouse gases. An initiative that […]
I-1631 will add to the costs of energy and result in job losses.
As president of the Iron Workers District Council of the Pacific Northwest, it is my responsibility to protect the good-paying jobs of our union’s hard-working brothers and sisters. … While reducing carbon emissions is an admirable goal, I believe Initiative 1631, if passed, will have a damaging effect on our area’s current era of growth […]
Shell game with carbon tax revenue
Along with truckers, the state’s chamber of commerce and public utility districts, private sector labor unions have also added their opposition to I-1631 … Unions against the carbon tax include both iron workers as well as the Washington State Building and Construction Trades Council (WSBCTC) … If passed, I-1631 is expected to increase the price […]
Carbon fee hurts businesses and families | Don Brunell
… Two years ago, carbon initiative backers drafted a “revenue neutral” ballot measure which voters rejected by a 59-41 percent margin. Today’s Initiative 1631 simply adds a new fee without cutting any state fee or tax, particularly on gasoline or diesel. For soccer moms commuting to work and driving kids to after school practices; and, […]
Vote ‘No’ on I-1631
Initiative 1631 is a simple, attractive concept: Impose a steadily increasing fee on large emitters of heat-trapping carbon dioxide, and put the money toward environmental causes. … But the initiative[I-1631’s] execution is neither simple nor attractive. Its writers are proposing a tissue of favoritism, exceptions and unequal treatment. … And I-1631 would be expensive indeed. […]
Here’s what the Tri-City Herald thinks of the carbon fee initiative
Like prior efforts to reduce carbon emissions in our state, Initiative 1631 has an important, worthwhile goal – to cut pollution and combat climate change. The problem is that, if approved, it will cost people more at the gas pump and more when they pay their power bills. And what will they get in return? […]
In Our View: Vote ‘No’ on Carbon Fee
… The Columbian’s Editorial Board recommends a “no” vote on Initiative 1631. … While we support efforts to promote clean energy, it is reasonable to ask whether $2.3 billion can be spent on projects that actually pass a cost-benefit analysis. Raising money for effective projects is a worthy goal; raising money simply to target polluting […]
I-1631 Puts Spending in Hands of Politicians and Lobbyists
Who would control spending of the billions in new taxes from the carbon tax initiative, I-1631? A panel of experts, say supporters. Unless politicians disagree, they now admit. I-1631 creates a fifteen-member board to make spending recommendations. Fourteen of those members are unelected and face no accountability for how the money is spent, or wasted. […]
Climate policy deserves a better solution
As a Washington resident and advocate for working families, I’m strongly opposed to Initiative 1631. … I-1631 is a flawed, unfair energy tax that would force Washington families, consumers and small businesses to pay billions in higher costs for basic necessities such as gasoline, electricity, heating fuel and natural gas. … Proponents claim that they […]