Long before being recognized as the "greenest governor" in America, Jay Inslee of Washington authored a book advocating for a clean-energy revolution akin to the Apollo space program in its commitment and innovation.
During his 12 years in office, Inslee's ambitious climate policies faced political challenges, even in a predominantly liberal state. A notable setback occurred in 2018 when voters rejected a carbon tax he supported.
Last year, Washington became the second state to enact a law capping emissions, mandating that businesses pay for significant carbon dioxide emissions. As Inslee approaches the end of his third term, he is actively campaigning against a well-funded ballot initiative aimed at repealing this climate law.
Inslee described the upcoming election as potentially the most critical in the U.S. aside from the presidential race, emphasizing the national and global implications of Initiative 2117.
The initiative's vote is being closely monitored as leaders grapple with implementing effective climate plans while addressing voter concerns about costs. Inslee asserts that Washington's approach utilizes funds from carbon allowances to support climate initiatives, including electric ferries and public transit access for youth.
A diverse coalition supports the law, including prominent figures like Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer, as well as environmental groups and BP, which operates the largest oil refinery in the Pacific Northwest. BP stated that repealing the law would hinder climate action and jeopardize funding for essential low-carbon projects.
The repeal campaign is led by Brian Heywood, a hedge fund manager who opposes the climate measure due to concerns over consumer costs. His campaign has garnered support from various industry groups.
Since the climate law's implementation in 2023, gas prices in Washington have risen, with projections indicating higher heating bills for residents this winter. Some voters express conflicting feelings about the law, balancing environmental concerns with immediate financial pressures.
The repeal campaign has raised $8.5 million, while the campaign to uphold the law has raised double that amount. Opponents of the repeal have launched numerous advertisements highlighting the benefits of the law.
Other states have yet to adopt similar climate measures, despite discussions in Maryland, New York, and Pennsylvania. Activists warn that a setback in Washington could hinder future climate initiatives nationwide.
Washington's cap-and-invest program aims to reduce emissions to 45 percent of 1990 levels by 2030, ultimately achieving net-zero emissions by 2050. Businesses generating substantial emissions must purchase allowances, which have funded over $2 billion in environmental investments.
Concerns about consumer costs persist, with Inslee previously downplaying potential price hikes. However, gas prices have risen significantly compared to neighboring Oregon, and utility companies have increased natural gas heating prices, although relief measures exist for low-income customers.
Washington has also faced economic impacts from climate change, including extreme heat waves and declining shellfish populations linked to rising carbon dioxide levels. Inslee argues that investments will foster a new clean-energy economy.
The Canadian province of Quebec, which has a cap-and-trade program linked to California's, is interested in partnering with Washington if the climate law remains intact. This partnership could potentially enhance carbon reduction efforts while minimizing financial burdens on consumers.
Quebec's environment minister expressed optimism about the collaboration, stating that the decision ultimately lies with Washington voters, who will be closely observed during the repeal vote.