A Green Ballot Trouncing Voters reject a carbon tax, energy mandates and drilling restrictions.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-green-ballot-trouncing-1541719310?cx_testId=16&cx_testVariant=cx&cx_artPos=2&cx_tag=collabctx&cx_navSource=newsReel#cxrecs_s
Tuesday’s election highlighted that more voters like Donald Trump’s policies than like him. Consider this week’s voter embrace of Mr. Trump’s pro-growth energy positions, via nationwide rejection of initiatives to raise energy costs.
Most notable was Washington State’s defeat of a carbon tax for the second time in two years. Climate activists designed the 2016 measure to be “revenue neutral” in hopes of masking the costs but still lost big. This time they aimed to win over progressives by promising to earmark carbon tax revenue for green subsidies and other spending.
The tax would have raised gas prices by 13 cents a gallon in 2020 and 59 cents a gallon by 2035—in a state that already has some of the highest gas prices in the country. While Seattle residents bought it, suburban and rural voters killed the measure 56%-44%.
Colorado voters rejected (57%-43%) a ballot measure that would have shut down most new oil and gas exploration. Proposition 112 would have banned such exploration within 2,500 feet of any structure deemed a “vulnerable area” by the state or local government—which would have meant most of the state.
A Common Sense Policy Roundtable analysis estimated a $218 billion hit to Colorado’s GDP from 2018-2030, and Democratic Governor John Hickenlooper warned that strangling an industry that accounts for 15% to 20% of the state economy could trigger a recession. Democratic Gov.-elect Jared Polis has supported drilling limits in the past, though even he opposed Prop 112. We’ll see if he and the all-Democratic state Legislature continue to heed voters.
Arizona voters obliterated Proposition 127, which would have required the state to derive 50% of its electricity from renewable sources by 2030. This would have more than tripled Arizona’s current mandate of 15% by 2025, even as it barred utilities from counting nuclear and most hydropower. The 70%-30% vote was a rebuke of California billionaire Tom Steyer, who funded the measure.
Alaskans also told outsiders to butt out, defeating (64%-36%) a ballot initiative that was also funded by national interests that would have imposed significant development restrictions around salmon habitats. Montanans rejected a measure to put more restrictions on hardrock mines.
One exception to the good news was Nevada, where voters approved a separate Tom Steyer-backed renewable energy mandate, even as they rejected a measure creating a more competitive retail electricity market. The curious result is in part a result of Nevada’s unusual initiative process, which requires that ballot measures that would amend the state constitution win two consecutive elections.
This was the first year Mr. Steyer’s renewable mandate was up for a vote, which meant it was largely ignored—depriving voters of information about its consequences. All eyes instead were on the billionaire smackdown over competition—Question 3—since it garnered 72% voter approval in 2016.
Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway owns NV Energy, a regulated monopoly that provides 90% of the state’s electricity and spent millions to defeat the competition measure. NV Energy scared consumers into thinking competition would make energy costs go up, and 67% of voters rejected Question 3.
Mr. Trump gets some credit for Tuesday’s good initiative results as an unabashed cheerleader for America’s energy revolution. Voters are beginning to see the economic fruits of smarter environmental policy and are more reluctant to indulge regulatory schemes.
Comments are closed.
