what’ s working
Building Bridges to Defeat I-732 Carbon Tax
Washington state is one of the greenest places on earth, but that didn’ t stop a group called Carbon Washington from proposing a flawed carbon tax, Initiative 732, which voters soundly rejected in November.
Bobbi Cussins
Employers share the environmental goals of all Washingtonians and are leaders in carbon reduction and energy-saving innovations. Regardless, authors of Initiative 732 proposed new and higher energy costs on consumers and employers under the guise of lowering carbon emissions. Voters didn’ t bite, thanks to a robust effort by a coalition of employers and labor groups, led by the Association of Washington Business.
There has been no shortage of carbon cap-and-trade and other tax proposals before the state Legislature.
One such measure, Initiative 732, made it on the November ballot and, if passed, would have immediately driven up the price of gasoline by $. 25 per gallon and raised the cost of energy and natural gas.
The carbon tax in I-732 threatened a hit of $ 800 million to the state budget at a time when lawmakers are tasked with completing K-12 education funding requirements, and it would have damaged the state’ s business competitiveness and hurt low- and fixed-income families with higher fuel and heating costs.
That’ s why AWB led a coalition, spearheaded by AWB Government Affairs Director Brandon Houskeeper, that included labor groups, employers, farmers, and chambers of commerce opposed to the initiative. The one goal: educate voters about the costs and flaws of I-732.
“ Although we’ ve had fundamental differences in the past, we were able to find common ground and work together in coordinating our efforts and focusing on how to defeat an initiative that would have harmed workers, businesses, and lowincome families.”
— Dan Wilson, president Local 338, United Steelworkers at a glance
Initiative 732, creating a new carbon tax, garnered enough signatures for consideration before the 2016 Legislature. Because lawmakers took no action on it, the proposal automatically qualified for the November 2016 general election ballot.
AWB and a coalition of 32 organizations, which included labor groups, employers and chambers of commerce, joined together as part of the AWB-led statewide campaign,“ No on 732.”
Many environmental and social justice groups also opposed the measure due to the higher energy and fuel costs that would hurt low- and fixed-income families without a guarantee of lower carbon emissions.
Billed as revenue neutral, the state’ s non-partisan budget office calculated I-732 would reduce the state budget by $ 800 million, something that raised concerns as lawmakers work to fund K-12 education.
The initiative was defeated with 59 percent of the vote, failing in all but two counties, King and Island.
The No on 732 raised $ 1.4 million, earned 14 newspaper editorials recommending a“ no” vote, placed more than 20 pieces of original content, including opinion pieces, blog posts, letters to the editor and emails, 100 story mentions and ran one television and digital ad.
winter 2017 29