Oil allies mislead about the cost of I-1631. Shocking, right?
Vlad Gutman-Britten

Last week, the Washington Budget and Policy Center published a new analysis of I-1631, Washington’s Clean Air and Clean Energy initiative which is on the ballot this fall. The proposal, whose opposition is overwhelmingly funded by Big Oil, will cut Washington’s annual emissions by 25 million tons by 2035 through big investments in clean, renewable energy, electric vehicles like buses and trucks, and expanded energy efficiency and transit. And the Budget and Policy Center found that it would do all of this for less than the cost of a cup of coffee per week--$13/month per household.

But, as always, the forces of the oil-fueled status quo come back to their message—the sky is falling and we cannot afford this. The Washington Policy Center, a right-wing mouthpiece that has never encountered a climate action policy it supports, claims I-1631 will cost the average household between $234 and $305 per year.

Is that number correct? Does it hold up to basic scrutiny? No—it’s flat out wrong. It’s yet another example of opponents being willing to say anything to get their way.

So how wrong is it? If Washington Policy Center’s numbers were correct, then the State of Washington could expect to collect between $695 million and $905 million per year just from individuals. But the state’s projection anticipates that revenue will total $842 million per year, with just $472 million coming from individuals. So Washington Policy Center claims that individuals will pay nearly double the state’s estimate, and more than the total revenue the state expects from all sources.

This isn’t a simple mistake. Washington Policy Center knows full well how the state projects fiscal impacts, and has raised no objections or concerns with the published fiscal projections. This is intentionally misleading.

As the Budget and Policy Center’s analysis concludes, “voters shouldn’t let the overly broad and unrealistically high cost estimate circulated by large oil companies and climate-science deniers dissuade them from approving I-1631 on the November ballot.”

Push back against the deception. Vote Yes on I-1631.

 

Author Bio

Vlad Gutman-Britten

former Washington Director, Climate Solutions

Vlad was Washington State Director until 12/1/21.  He brought varied and deep experience in policy, advocacy, and campaign politics to his work at Climate Solutions.

Before coming to Climate Solutions, Vlad was Senior Policy Director for the Washington Wildlife and Recreation Coalition, where he successfully secured tens of millions of dollars in state investment in habitat and recreation lands. He was previously a key part of issue advocacy and communications efforts for large companies, including Microsoft and GE, and before that served as AIPAC's Deputy Midwest Political Director. A veteran campaign operative, he has run congressional and state legislative campaigns and worked on races ranging from mayoral to presidential.

Vlad is a graduate of Northwestern University, where he received a degree in political science. In his free time, Vlad bikes, listens to everything from opera to folk music, and smokes whatever fish or meat fits into his smoker.  He is soon off to New York City to start a new adventure as the Assistant Director for Policy and Markets at NYSERDA, New York State's energy agency.  

Give for a brighter future

More On

Carbon pricing
Washington State Government

Did you enjoy this article?

Support our work

Recent posts