Home | About | Donate

Why A “Revenue-Neutral” Carbon Tax Could Hurt – Not Help – the Planet


Why A “Revenue-Neutral” Carbon Tax Could Hurt – Not Help – the Planet

Ellicott Dandy

The climate crisis is upon us. Year after year, we break records for heat, droughts and extreme weather. Super storms like Katrina and Sandy have devastated communities and left thousands homeless years later. Already we have our first climate refugees as rising seas swallow indigenous communities in Alaska and the Gulf. And hundreds of thousands of Americans die prematurely every year because of the deadly pollutants that go hand-in-hand with greenhouse gases.


It's been thirty-five years since the solar panels were removed from the White House. Where could we be without that action? Where we should be...


Thirty five years later, Saint Ronny, who vanquished the panels, is more popular among Murkins than he was then, while Jimmy Carter, the panel installer, has been all locked away in a back room by the media and Democratic Party.

Unfortunately politicians in both the D and R parties, including Obama and Clinton quote and compare themselves to Saint Ronny more than any other POTUS (Trump is one of the few exceptions).

Ellicott, and the rest of us who have been pushing for a carbon tax and will continue to do so, realize that the devil is in the details. We have seen too much legislation crafted in both Washingtons that was alleged to be "better than doing nothing", only to find that nothing would have been better. We won't be fooled again.


Sure this measure is inadequate - but it is a start, and it is not stopping further measures in the future, isn't it? So why would anyone advocate voting "no" on it?

Why are leftist is such denial about the most basic principles of economics - like the relationship of supply, demand and price? Public transit is not going to expand until more poeple use the existing available service, and they are not going to use the existing service until the price of using a car goes up. (The poorest people are already carless and using public transit - at least in my area). The reason Europe - and to a lesser extent, Canada (Toronto and Montreal anyway) - has superior public transit is becasue gasoline has always been more expensive - through stiff taxes - to begin with!


IF WA did not have its history of flawed taxation and energy policy (via both initiative and legislature), none of which get altered when subsequent policy is enacted, perhaps voting yes and awaiting "further measures" would be prudent.

Stacking flawed policy on top of flawed policy has created results that are exponentially worse than the sum of all the flawed policy.

Revenue neutral in the context of I-732 means Boeing comes out ahead, workers paying for gas and utility bills come out behind, and low income folks break even. This result has been repeated too many times for many of us to be fooled again.