The team that advocated for I-1631 at downtown Seattle’s Arctic Club on Nov. 6, 2018. Photo by Melissa Hellmann

The team that advocated for I-1631 at downtown Seattle’s Arctic Club on Nov. 6, 2018. Photo by Melissa Hellmann

Washington rejects carbon fee

I-1631 campaign organizers say they will continue pushing for a cleaner future.

On Tuesday evening, the banquet room of downtown Seattle’s Arctic Club bustled with climate action advocates awaiting the results of the nation’s first fee on carbon pollution. The historic ballot measure, known as Initiative 1631, would have raised money for environmental projects by imposing a fee on large greenhouse gas emitters — and would have served as a testing ground for the states’ role in paving a cleaner energy future.

But by 10 p.m. on election night, over 56 percent of the 1.9 million counted votes rejected that possibility. It was the second time that Washington voters had struck down a ballot initiative designed to reduce greenhouse emissions, following the 2016 rejection of carbon tax Initiative 732. Jefferson, King, and San Juan counties were the only counties that had approved the measure by the end of election night, according to Secretary of State Kim Wyman’s office.

“We are on the right side, no matter what the numbers say,” Tyson Johnson, vice president of the Quinault Indian Nation and Yes on 1631 board member, said Tuesday at the Arctic Club. “We’ve given a voice to a lot of our communities that have been disenfranchised, that have been crying out for help.”

Initiative 1631 would have levied a $15 per metric ton fee on carbon emissions beginning in January 2020, with a $2 increase each year adjusted for inflation. The fee would have continued to rise until the state reached its 2035 greenhouse gas reduction goal, at which time the fee would have been capped if it was on track to meet the state’s 2050 target of reducing emissions to 50 percent below 1990 levels.

Among the emitters that would have been imposed fees include motor fuel licensees and power plants that generate electricity using fossil fuels. In return, 70 percent of the money would go toward clean energy programs that help low-income people or affected workers. Another 25 percent would have been used in clean water and forest investments; and the final portion would have helped communities particularly affected by climate change to prepare for and prevent the effects.

While a diverse group of over 600 organizations and businesses endorsed the Yes on 1631 campaign that raised a total of $15.5 million in contributions, according to the Clean Air Clean Energy Washington committee, it paled in comparison to the opposition campaign fueled by the oil industry that gained over double the funding.

Although the race was not called on Tuesday night because of the thousands of late return ballots, Washington voters in the Arctic Club accepted the projected defeat with solemn understanding. One organizer on stage encouraged the audience to high-five or embrace others in the room for their efforts on the I-1631 campaign.

Got Green Executive Director Jill Mangaliman told the crowd that the environmental justice organization — led by local people of color — was not deterred by the initiative’s failed passage. The organization will continue advocating for the communities most impacted by climate change, Mangaliman said: “We know that big oil can’t buy us.”

Johnson concurred that the failed initiative did not signal the end of community efforts to address greenhouse gas emissions.

“We have to continue to stand together, this coalition has to maintain our ties, and we have to continue this work,” Johnson said. “We are fighting for the future of our climate, as well as the ability for our future generations to continue to live and operate in a way that is loving, that is caring.”

mhellmann@seattleweekly.com


In consideration of how we voice our opinions in the modern world, we’ve closed comments on our websites. We value the opinions of our readers and we encourage you to keep the conversation going.

Please feel free to share your story tips by emailing editor@bellevuereporter.com.

To share your opinion for publication, submit a letter through our website https://www.bellevuereporter.com/submit-letter/. Include your name, address and daytime phone number. (We’ll only publish your name and hometown.) We reserve the right to edit letters, but if you keep yours to 300 words or less, we won’t ask you to shorten it.

More in News

Bellevue Police car
Bellevue police officer placed on administrative leave for social media posts

Department is investigating the posts, which included conspiracy theory about George Floyd’s death.

King County assessor wants Legislature to fix laws to help small businesses

Changes needed because of COVID-19 impact on commercial properties

File photo.
Bellevue police investigating fatal stabbings

The city announced in a news release an ongoing investigation of a June 1 domestic disturbance.

King County could be in Phase 2 in two weeks

The county is also hoping the state lets them reopen several businesses by Friday.

Bellevue lifts curfew scheduled through Saturday

The city no longer has a curfew in the downtown area, as of June 4

Bellevue Chamber CEO: Volunteers help with downtown cleanup

Update: They are not seeking additional volunteers at this time. Cleanup comes after a few stores in Bellevue faced property damage from looters.

Bellevue City Hall. Photo courtesy city of Bellevue
How is COVID-19 impacting Bellevue?

New King County data dashboard breaks down case rates, number of unemployment filings and more.

Kabal Gill, owner of East India Grill in Federal Way, wears gloves to hand over take-out orders at his restaurant on March 23. File photo
New guidelines for Phase 2 reopenings in King County

All workers will need to wear masks as restaurants, retail shops and other businesses reopen.

Most Read