Big Oil is Spending $26 Million to Defeat I-1631

“Oil company money keeps rolling in to campaign to defeat Washington state carbon fee”

“…a wide array of oil and gas companies—including Phillips 66, Chevron, BP, and Shell—have collectively donated or pledged millions to oppose the measure”

“Major contributors to the opposition campaign include Chevron, BP, Andeavor and the trade association American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers, according to documents filed with the state Public Disclosure Commission.”

“The No campaign has raised $26 million, 99 percent of which has come from oil and gas. The oil and gas industry is spending $30 million just to crush a citizen initiative in Colorado, so there’s no reason to think it can’t keep increasing the total right up through November.”

“Four out-of-state oil groups in Washington, D.C., California and Texas have bankrolled the No on I-1631 political committee with most of the nearly $22 million raised by the No on I-1631 campaign.”

“Opponents including top oil companies have raised nearly $22 million to defeat it.”

“…the specter of accountability has rushed some of the world’s largest oil and gas companies into a defensive crouch, readily providing more than 99 percent of the opposition campaign’s multi-million dollar funds.”

The State’s Largest Polluters will Pay A Fee on Pollution

“The measure would charge large polluters a fee for every ton of greenhouse gases they emit and invest the revenue in clean air, clean energy, clean water, and healthy forests in Washington.”

“(1631) would charge some of the state’s largest polluters a fee of $15 per metric ton of carbon.”

“I-1631 covers the overwhelming majority of carbon emissions in the state by targeting major polluters like oil refineries, industrial facilities, and utilities that have not yet transitioned to clean energy.”

“Ballot Initiative 1631, also known as the Carbon Emissions Fee Measure or the Protect Washington Act, would impose a fee on the state’s largest industrial polluters.”

I-1631 Ensures the States Only Coal Plant Will Shut Down

“TransAlta coal plant is scheduled to shut down in 2025 through a prior agreement with the state government. Any additional regulation of Centralia’s emissions would push that date further into the future, increasing the overall amount of air pollution.”

“A coal-fired power plant in Centralia, which emitted more than 5 million metric tons of carbon dioxide in 2016, was (exempted) because it had already agreed to stop burning coal as of 2025.”

“Big Oil also argues that the fee exempts too many big emitters, pointing to the TransAlta coal plant in Centralia—but that plant will be completely shut down by 2025.”

“The “No on 1631” campaign points to the TransAlta coal-fired plant in Centralia as an example. It’s true that TransAlta would be exempt… However, the ad fails to mention the plant is already scheduled for shut-down by 2025.”

Experts and Leading News Outlets Across the State Agree, This is a Sensible Step to Reduce Pollution

“Initiative 1631 marks an important step in slowing climate-change emissions.”

“A “yes” vote will show the country we’re leaders in combating a climate collapse in the next two decades. A “yes” vote will show our grandkids we won’t gamble with their futures.”

“Washington has mandated goals for reducing pollution, set by the Legislature in 2008, but no pathway to achieve them. I-1631 was crafted to reach the goal of lowering carbon pollution by 25 million tons a year by 2035 and 50 million tons by 2050.”

“The price signal alone (excluding the anticipated investments in clean energy projects using fee revenues) would reduce 350 to 450 tons of PM 2.5 from cars and trucks in the Puget Sound region from 2020 through 2035. That would be the equivalent of taking about 200,000 cars off the road.”

“I-1631’s clean air investments would filter even more pollution out of the air. The agency estimated if 35 percent of the I-1631 revenue is invested into programs to reduce diesel pollution, those programs would cut nearly 1,000 tons of … pollution during the first 15 years after implementation. That’s a pollution reduction equivalent to removing half of all vehicles from the roads in the region.”

“I-1631, an initiative that would drive down carbon pollution and set the state on a forward course toward an economically robust and climate-resilient future.”

I-1631 Has Strong Accountability & Transparency

“A new Public Oversight Board, made up of 15 governor-appointed voting members, would broadly oversee the effort. It would receive counsel from three new advisory panels: the Clean Air and Clean Energy Panel, the Clean Water and Healthy Forest Panel, and the Environmental and Economic Justice Panel. Each would have nine governor-appointed members, meant to reflect diverse stakeholders.”

“Those projects would be selected by a 15-member public oversight panel, including governor appointees and state officials.”

“As to the board’s accountability to the public, legislators supportive of the initiative say that the final decision on project funding will rest with lawmakers.”

“15-person public oversight board that would ensure riggorous implementation of the proposal, as well as accountability and public involvement.”

I-1631 Will Help Create 40,000 Jobs

“By encouraging development of solar, wind and other renewable resources, the state could become a hub for development of those technologies, creating tens of thousands of jobs.”

“Clean energy investments in Washington State that would be sufficient to put the state on a true climate stabilization trajectory and will generate about 40,000 jobs per year within the state.”

I-1631 Will Invest in Clean Energy and Reducing Pollution

“Money raised from the carbon fee on large polluters would be invested in clean energy projects. Among the uses: reducing pollution, boosting energy efficiency, producing clean energy and fuels, creating rural and urban jobs in Washington and providing transition assistance to workers and communities.”

“Initiative 1631 would inject hundreds of millions of dollars per year directly into communities in Washington by imposing a carbon pollution fee on businesses that emit large amounts of carbon dioxide or sell carbon-laden fuels.”

I-1631 Will Improve Public Health:
it will save lives, and reduce billions in health care costs

“The bottom line is that the benefits of I-1631 – cleaner air, improved public health, clean energy and transportation infrastructure investments in communities, and new good-paying green jobs, just to name a few – far outweigh its costs.”

“In addition to reducing greenhouse gas pollution and combating climate change, Initiative 1631 would clear dangerous pollution out of Washington’s air, saving lives and slashing health care costs by billions of dollars in the Evergreen State.”

“Washington’s residents are already paying the price of pollution. Pollution from vehicle exhaust has been linked to cancers, respiratory ailments, cardiovascular disease, and premature death. Diesel exhaust accounts for 78% of the potential cancer risk from all air toxics in the Puget Sound area. More than 600,000 people in Washington suffer from asthma, and rates for asthma and other respiratory ailments are disproportionately higher for people with lower incomes and communities of color.”

1 month ago

Yes On 1631

What this campaign has shown is you can bring diverse voices, from every corner of our state together around a common solution. Despite the most money spent in our state's election history and an unprecedented mis-information campaign from out-of-state oil companies, Washingtonians took an other step forward towards solving this challenge. We were not successful in passing this initiative but this coalition of tribal nations, communities of color, health professionals, environmental and clean energy advocates, labor unions, businesses, and faith leaders stands ready to continue this fight.

The solution may change but our values and goals remain the same. We will continue to center the voices of those most impacted by pollution and work for a just transition for communities in our state so that everyone can share in a clean energy future.

The growing problem of climate change will only get worse the longer we delay solutions. This issue is not going away and neither are we. We stand ready to fight in next year's legislature and beyond, together.
... See MoreSee Less


Comment on Facebook

I think you should all be so proud that you got 850,000 people to say YES! That is amazing! You are an inspiration! Don’t stop!

This coalition needs to stick together and press the legislature.

"I'm so fucking proud of you guys!"

We'll keep fighting the good fight and spreading the word about legislation that is necessary to make green energy the status quo! Proud to have taken a stand with all of you wonderful supporters.

You need to press the state legislature to pass this. If they stand up for what’s right they will do the right thing, but they didn’t earlier this year....so, what are the chances this time? There needs to be a concrete plan on where this money will be spent. Voters need to know how much subsidized home solar they will be able to qualify for, or exactly how big of a rebate on a qualifying long range electric vehicle would be before a bill like this gets a yes vote from the low income areas of WA. The low income need to know how much in energy rebates they are going to get from the state before voting yes. I live in a county where it was defeated by 70% because a 14 to 59 cent increase in gasoline would have hit them very hard. It’s not big oil’s money and false advertising that caused this to lose. The plan simply needs to be better.

heroes and sheroes and awesome humans every one of you!

I believe much more advertising was necessary, I saw hardly any. The only signs I did see went up on the final day. 😞 We have to continue the fight though! ♻️💚 it’s not over.

We will all just move to mars.lol

It's not over. We got to start over.

and, no, it wasn't the advertising money spent, it was the details that you lost me with. we are not all dazzled into stupidity by an overabundance of tv ads.

I am sad but also knew when my mother, significant other and their 2 friends who are heavy supporters of the environment (have even worked with politicians on issues for environmental isduesin past) voted No, that we had a problem. It was written confusing and as everyone knows, heavily funded by the opposition. I live in Clark County and didn't see one, not ONE, sign while driving around town that said to Vote yes... Didn't see one ad and only read 1 article in our local Paper that was neutral about it all. My hubby also voted no due to "we will have to pay and the companies won't" belief...

I consider myself environmentally concerned, but I could not vote for this. It exempted too much, punished/taxed too little, needed to be revenue-neutral to the average WA State taxpayer ... too many things wrong with it for me to vote in favor. Come back with something smart that will affect real change and I'll vote yes.

It was great to be a part of this. Dealing with cranky people when calling or a wet afternoon when canvassing was worth it for this! Now I’m trained for future elections!!

The only county this idiotic bill passed in was liberal King County. You must like paying high taxes. Quit trying to raise everyone else's.

There is always next election. Money is needed to counter the funds that went to No on 1631.

People won’t care until pollution is killing their children.

Hey. Now that this horrible tax was defeated can you please get rid of your signs (made from petroleum products) from Shuster Parkway and Ruston Way in Tacoma?

+ View previous comments

Load more