Republicans and Democrats in the Legislature generally agree that Washington’s transportation system is short on funding, and the shortfall is largely due to inflation driving the costs of projects beyond what was budgeted.
That prompted a longtime statehouse reporter to ask, recently: How can Republicans talk about providing more funding for transportation while also favoring Initiative 2117, which would repeal the cap-and-trade law adopted in 2021 and take away money earmarked for transportation?
Welcome to one of the arguments that will be made against Initiative 2117. Here’s why no one should buy it.
Through cap-and-trade — officially, the Climate Commitment Act — state government made “carbon allowances” a commodity, created a market for people to buy and sell that commodity, then gave itself the corner on that market. It’s a neat trick that has already raked in $1.8 billion while doing little if anything to make a measurable difference in air quality.
Of those proceeds, the Climate Commitment Act (CCA)appropriates $360 million per year toward transportation. That’s a lot of money, but not in the context of the $13.4 billion transportation budget adopted in 2023. It’s also only 20% of the CCA-generated revenue.
In addition, this is not your everyday transportation funding. Under the cap-and-trade law the money must be used to support “carbon-reducing investments,” such as reductions in single-occupancy passenger-vehicle miles traveled, or emissions-reduction programs for the state ferry system. Think free transit for kids and more money for walking, biking and hiking trails. Highway maintenance and construction don’t qualify. Nor do court-mandated fish-culvert replacements, which are considered a transportation expense and have become a real budget-buster.
Let’s try this question instead: How can Republicans talk about more funding for transportation while favoring the end of a law that is artificially inflating gas prices by 50 cents per gallon and enriching state government while doing nothing to support the maintenance and construction of Washington roads?
Every Republican lawmaker I know would gladly have that conversation.
In 2020 we began proposing a different approach to funding transportation that wouldn’t require a tax or fee increase, and also wouldn’t add to the state’s debt. Senate Bill 5743 and a bill I sponsored, Senate Bill 6041, would have taken the tax being collected on vehicle sales in Washington, which goes into the operating budget like other sales taxes, and put it into the transportation budget instead, allowing it to be used for roads and bridges.
The primary difference between these bills was how quickly the revenue shift would happen. We’ve continued to put the idea on the table, but our Democrat colleagues have never taken it seriously, even though our no-new-tax proposal would have been capable of generating significantly more transportation funding than the fee-heavy “Move Ahead Washington” package they pushed through in 2022.
Our transportation budget can do without the $360 million per year generated by the Climate Commitment Act, which amounts to government price-gouging at the gas pump. An extra 50 cents per gallon of gas is a price that is far too high for families already struggling with higher costs for food, energy and housing. Republicans know how to offset that $360 million and then some without raising taxes.
One more thing: The first carbon-reduction legislation to win a vote in the Legislature was a Republican proposal in 2015, when we controlled the Senate agenda. Coincidentally, this bill had a tie to another citizen initiative: Initiative 937, passed in 2006, which required utilities to purchase more renewable energy but, amazingly, didn’t define hydropower as renewable. The 2015 Republican proposal would have given utilities more incentive to make carbon-reduction investments in a market-driven way, without enriching state government or driving up gasoline prices in the process.
Beyond allowing a public hearing on Senate Bill 5735 nine years ago, the Democrat-controlled House did nothing. Let’s remember that when the argument becomes “How would Republicans propose to reduce carbon emissions while also favoring Initiative 2117 to repeal the Climate Commitment Act?”
Imagine where our state might be today had Governor Inslee and others opened their minds back then.
Initiative 2117 will reduce the harm being done to family budgets without harming funding for our roads. Washington can do better than the Democrats’ costly cap-and-trade Climate Commitment Act.
•••
Sen. John Braun of Centralia serves the 20th Legislative District, which spans parts of four counties from Yelm to Vancouver. He became Senate Republican leader in 2020.
