Washington state may yet lead on a carbon tax

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

The Evergreen State rejected the Green Wave last week. But there may yet be hope for it to one day wash ashore.

This past summer, Washington Gov. Jay Inslee, a Democrat, pitched his state to me as a model for the country, one that illustrated how Democrats could push through a popular, progressive and ecofriendly agenda that was good for the economy. Inslee highlighted a state ballot initiative he was backing, one to create the country’s very first carbon tax, Initiative 1631.

Over subsequent months, other Democrats told me they held hopes that Washington state’s proposal might offer a template for the party to run on in 2020.

A carbon tax, after all, offers a market-based approach for curbing the emissions that cause climate change. It can incentivize innovation for cleaner technologies and raise revenue in less distortionary ways than, say, income taxes. The idea is embraced almost universally by economists and has been endorsed by prominent Republicans.

Alas, Washington’s ballot measure failed spectacularly last week, receiving less than 44 percent of the vote. This was, in fact, the third time in two years that a carbon tax was rejected in the state: Earlier this year, the state legislature failed to pass a similar proposal and, in 2016, another ballot measure bombed.

There’s been some debate about what went wrong. The state is not exactly a bastion of conservatism, after all.

-more-

https://www.heraldnet.com/opinion/rampell-washington-state-may-yet-lead-on-a-carbon-tax/?utm_source=DAILY+HERALD&utm_campaign=0a59a114f0-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_d81d073bb4-0a59a114f0-228635337

[MFM008]

1. I noted

Confusion between the initiatives.
Some werent sure of it was yes or no or what.
Needs clear language next time.

[violetpastille]

2. The other side had way more advertising in my area.

I mean of course. They had all the money in the world and they were keen to spend it.

But the messaging for YES assumed some prior knowledge about the measure. For example the one where a guy is standing outside and says, I worked in the oil industry for 25 years and I'm voting YES on 1631. That is just not enough information. That just tells me how one guy is voting and the fact that he identifies himself as a former oil industry worker. Better to say, I'm a person who cares about the planet and get the message across clearly.

And the advertisements for NO were unfortunately more persuasive.

We need to do a better job with marketing on the ground next time.