Next month’s statewide ballot in Washington will include a question about whether to repeal a controversial cap-and-trade program, which is said to have resulted in higher fuel prices.
Implemented by the state in January 2023, the Climate Commitment Act requires covered entities to reduce their total greenhouse gas emission over the next three decades. As a result, industries that produce more than 25,000 metric tons of greenhouse gas emission yearly, as well as transportation-related gasoline and diesel exhaust, must reduce emission to 95% below 1990 levels by 2050.
Advocates of Initiative 2117
The ballot question, Initiative 2117, resulted from immediate pushback after implementation of the program.
The citizens’ advocacy group “Let’s Go Washington” began a petition drive to qualify a question for the November 2024 ballot to end the program.
The group has said cap-and-trade in the state is causing multiple problems for residents. Members cite higher fuel prices, increased grocery costs and price increases on other goods in the supply chain that result from industries acting to recoup expenses related to the program.
Additionally, they report that estimates show Washington drivers are paying the third-highest amount in the nation at the pump due to the tax on emission. Only California and Hawaii have higher prices at the pump.
California is the only other state with a cap-and-trade program.
Washington state Senate Republicans oppose the program. They have said they have no problem with the idea of transitioning to cleaner energy sources, but “this is something that should occur naturally, over time, driven by market forces and the advance of technology.”
When you see mailers like this, just remember that billion dollar donors are funding the no campaigns because they stand to lose too much when the voice of the people is heard. #voteyespayless pic.twitter.com/zAwTwKsWZm
— Let’s Go Washington (@letsgowa) October 1, 2024
Critics of Initiative 2117
Opponents, including the group No on 2117, have said passage of the initiative would worsen health and traffic in the state.
They’ve also claimed that transportation funding in the state would be trimmed by one-third if the question passes – putting road projects at risk of delay or cancellation, reducing public transit service, cutting funding for new ferries and making traffic worse.
“One guarantee of I-2117 is more traffic and fewer transportation choices for Washingtonians,” the group said in a news release. LL
NEW AD 📺 I-2117 is deceptive and dangerous.
It would mean:
❌ More pollution
❌ More toxic chemicals
❌ Our roads and bridges at riskIt’s bad for our health AND our economy.
That’s why more than 450 orgs and Tribal Nations are joining together to say: NO on I-2117. pic.twitter.com/PqgxArO0C4
— No on 2117 (@No_on_2117) September 5, 2024
More Land Line coverage of Washington state news is available.
Credit: Source link
