Policies to combat climate change are running on parallel tracks between Olympia and Seattle currently, as Gov. Jay Inslee is spearheading an effort to get the Legislature to adopt a cap-and-trade program this session. An outside group, Carbon WA, is gearing up for a signature gathering drive to put a revenue-neutral carbon tax on the ballots in November 2016.

Whether that ever makes the ballots depends on the outcome of Inslee’s cap-and-trade efforts, which is now in bill form but has gotten off to a rocky start in Olympia.

House Speaker Frank Chopp has been noncommittal of his support for the program, while Transportation Chair Judy Clibborn, D-Mercer Island, told King 5 News its transportation dollars were a “nonstarter” after two years of negotiating over a gas tax increase to fund transportation. Senate Majority Leader Mark Schoesler, R-Ritzville, said he opposes a cap-and-trade program.

That’s why Yoram Bauman, an economist, comedian and leader of Carbon WA, says he’s starting the initiative to get a revenue-neutral carbon tax on the ballots next year.

He told an audience at the University of Washington Wednesday night that he is not trying to compete with Inslee’s efforts, and used a baseball metaphor to compare his group to a relief pitcher — to come in and finish out the game after the starting pitcher tires. He debated KC Golden of Climate Solutions, Todd Myers of the Washington Policy Center and Nicole Keenan of Puget Sound Sage. About 200 people attended the event.

From L-R: KC Golden, Todd Myers, Yoram Bauman, Nicole Keenan

It’s a playbook that worked well for Democrats and their progressive allies on gun control and renewable energy resources mandates over the last decade. Inslee spearheaded the push for universal background checks during the 2013 session, but it failed to make it out of the House; it would have assuredly been blocked in the Republican-held Senate. But the legislation was revived through the initiative process, qualified for the ballots last year, and passed statewide in November with about 60 percent approval.

A decade ago, after numerous attempts in the Legislature, a renewable energy resource mandate initiative was passed by the citizens. Ironically the drafters removed hydro power, a universally considered renewable resource, from the allowable energy mix. Early discussions about a potential carbon tax initiative raise the same questions about the lack of balance of the drafted statutes that end up on the ballot. An Elway Research poll released earlier this month found 71 percent support for taxing carbon.

It’s a long way from the polls closing in 2016, but Bauman said his group has raised about $100,000 to gather the signatures necessary to qualify. The governor’s cap-and-trade program also hasn’t even had a committee hearing yet.

The debate Wednesday centered on the merits and drawbacks of a cap-and-trade program vs. a carbon tax.

There are several key differences between the two. A cap-and-trade program sets a hard limit on the amount of emissions allowed among various industries, utilities, manufacturers and other sources. These firms are given allowances they can swap on an open market.

Inslee’s proposal would hit any firm generating more than 25,000 metric tons of carbon annually, and he is estimating a price of $12 per ton that would net about $1 billion of revenue each year. He would devote 80 percent of that to funding education and transportation projects such as the 520 floating bridge retrofit, with 10 percent going to the working families tax credit, for low-income workers, and the rest trying to offset impacts to affected manufacturers, or spark new economic development in rural areas.

Gov. Inslee speaks to the House and Senate during his state of the state address Tuesday

A revenue-neutral carbon tax, on the other, levies a flat tax rate but doesn’t include the cap, instead relying on the higher price point to spur carbon emitters to cut their emissions. British Columbia has a carbon tax, while California has a cap-and-trade program.

Bauman’s group is proposing a $15-per-ton starting point, which steps up to $25 in the second year and then incrementally over time. The money generated would be returned in the form of tax credits —$200 million for the working families tax credit, $200 million for tax credits for manufacturing firms, and $1.3 billion for cutting the state sales tax by a percentage point.

Golden started off the debate by saying that the policy to combat climate change is needed urgently, and laid a series of scenarios where the global temperature will rise rapidly by the end of the century, disrupting all life on Earth, unless steps are taken now.

But he warned that a climate-change policy that potentially raises costs needs to socially equitable. He also favors the hard cap. Inslee has argued that a flat carbon tax doesn’t do enough to cut emissions. Golden said the price of carbon is too high now, contending the costs associated with increased pollution and higher temperatures have caused health risks or burdened public treasuries combating the effects of climate change.

“It has to be equitable,” Golden said. “A carbon tax by itself can be regressive. We’re paying too high a carbon price now. That’s exactly what we’re trying to address.”

Myers advocated for using free-market principles to address climate change, using the example of a law California passed in the early 1990s on electric vehicles. Car manufacturers like Toyota and Honda said the technology wasn’t there yet, and came up with the hybrid instead.

He also contended that the cap is negotiable, and that favored industries or firms could strike deals with elected officials to lessen their burden through the political process. That, in turn, undercuts the effectiveness of the policy’s goal to begin with. It’s also subject to price swings and market volatility, particularly in a hydropower-reliant state like Washington, where the price for electricity will depend on the annual snowpack.

“That’s the fundamental problem I have with cap-and-trade,” Myers said. “Politicians too often choose feeling good over results.”

Bauman said British Columbia has had success with lowering carbon emissions, and said Inslee’s program is running headlong in a debate over the size and cost of government because it opted to use the money as operating revenue.

“Put a price on carbon and you will get results,” Bauman said. “It’s a question on, ‘What can we actually get passed?’ I think the governor’s approach is more the ‘progressive take over of the world’ approach. We sidestep the debate.”

But Golden responded, saying the state’s electorate and the political system have a dislike of many proposals that use the word “tax.”

“I wish the world were that clean,” Golden said. “If everyone were economists, I’m pretty sure there’d be a bill for a revenue-neutral carbon tax.”

Your support matters.

Public service journalism is important today as ever. If you get something from our coverage, please consider making a donation to support our work. Thanks for reading our stuff.