SPRING Three Steps to Reducing Carbon Emissions Effectively

Transcription

1 SPRING 2016 The quarterly magazine of Washington Policy Center Three Steps to Reducing Carbon Emissions Effectively

2 BOARD OF DIRECTORS Craig Williamson, Chairman John Otter, Vice Chairman Richard Alvord Bill Baldwin Dave Barber Roger W. Bowlin Artie Buerk Jim Coles William Conner John Connors Kathy Connors Anne Cowles Hon. Kemper Freeman, Jr. John j. Hennessy Matt McIlwain Daniel Mead Smith, President Hon. George R. Nethercutt, Jr. Hon. Mary Odermat Mark Pinkowski Greg Porter Sarah Rindlaub Phil Scott Schlaepfer Irene Song Hon. Brian Sonntag Heidi Stanley Randy Talbot Robert M. Tippett Janet True Roberta Weymouth Wayne Williams Len Zarelli Viewpoint is the quarterly magazine of Washington Policy Center, an independent Washington state-focused think tank. Board Chairman Craig Williamson President Dann Mead Smith Vice President for Research Paul Guppy Communications Director & Viewpoint Editor Lisa Shin Viewpoint Design Director Elizabeth Toledo Find Us Online At: The quarterly magazine of Dear Friends, Craig Williamson Board Chairman Washington Policy Center It s hard to believe that 2015 has come and gone and we are already nearing the end of the 2016 Legislative Session! 2015 was a tremendous year for Washington Policy Center and we are extremely proud of our work and our impact. And now in 2016, our research directors are working tirelessly to help our state s policymakers and you, our supporters, understand the key policy issues facing our state. We launched our Save Charter Schools project a major, statewide media campaign. To date, we have produced several videos, run TV ads statewide, launched an aggressive digital campaign and published a half-page ad in The Seattle Times. Charter schools and education options have been a longstanding WPC recommendation and we will continue our efforts to see choice remain a reality to students and parents in Washington. In this issue, you will find pieces written by our policy experts on the I-405 tolling controversy, the recent move to force Uber drivers to join a union in the City of Seattle, results of a recent poll commissioned by WPC on the two-thirds tax issue, as well as an opinion-editorial written by our board members George Nethercutt and Brian Sonntag. You will also find an overview of what 2015 looked like for Washington Policy Center; just a snapshot of our upcoming 2015 Annual Report. In 2013, we created a three-year strategic plan to guide WPC and as we enter the final year of the current plan, we are excited to report that much of that plan has been accomplished as you are seeing with our marketing efforts, increase in our social media presence and with the expansion of our Young Professionals program. This year, we will begin drafting our next strategic plan which will guide the organization for the next three years. Our board of directors will spend time at a board retreat to set the vision and the stage for what lies ahead for WPC. We hope you enjoy this issue of Viewpoint and find the news and analysis valuable and informative. As always, we invite you to share it with your friends, family and at your office. Thank you for your continued support of our work as we start a new year! Very truly yours, SPRING 2016 Facebook: WashingtonPolicyCenter

3 FEATURED IN THIS ISSUE COVER STORY 12 Remote testimony & Agriculture 5 Greater civic learning will pay off in more responsible citizens 8 introducing the new WPC young professionals leadership 6 Court tosses I-1366; poll shows 65% of voters want Legislature to still act 9 Forcing Uber drivers to join a union takes choice and freedom from workers 3 Steps to Reducing Carbon Emissions Effectively 7 10 I-405 tolls aren t providing relief for frustrated drivers Snap shot of 2015 Annual Report 15 3

4 SolutionsSummit Washington Policy Center's Statewide Policy Conference Education Environment Government Reform Health Care Small Business & Labor Reform Transportation WPC s Solutions Summit will be the policy conference of 2016! This event combines our popular center-specific events into back-to-back half-day policy conferences in Bellevue and the Tri-Cities each concluding with a national keynote lunch speaker. With the huge success of last year s Solutions Summit, which brought together over 600 policymakers, business owners, community leaders and concerned citizens to discuss solutions to our state s most pressing issues, we are sure to have another informative and high-quality event in Eastern Washington Western Washington Learn more and register now by visiting For sponsorship opportunities, contact Katie Bulger: (206) or Kbulger@washingtonpolicy.org. 4

5 East of the cascades Short session, tall tasks, remote possibilities Even though legislators were expected to spend just 60 days in Olympia during the short 2016 legislative session, Eastern Washingtonians can still feel disconnected to the lawmaking process when the gavels are falling at the state capitol. Technology, however, has helped change the way those who live long distances from legislature feel about their government. Thanks to Washington Policy Center and Wake- Up Call Coffee, hundreds of Eastern Washingtonians are able to connect live to legislators at the capitol building during session. At once-weekly Wake-Up Forums, lawmakers video conference with citizen town hall-style meetings at locations in Spokane, Tri-Cities, Moses Lake, Yakima and Wenatchee. The forums have changed the way legislators communicate with their constituents. And on one side of the capitol, it has changed the lawmaking process. In the Washington State Senate, lawmakers are now hearing remote testimony from locations in Eastern Washington. Instead of concerned citizens having to risk their lives driving across a treacherous pass, they can testify at locations set up at Columbia Basin College in the Tri-Cities or Spokane Community College. Currently, only the Senate is allowing remote testimony. Agriculture: The cornerstone of Washington s economy & new focus of WPC Washington state is blessed with four key ingredients that make it an agricultural powerhouse: a diverse climate, rich soil, abundant water and hard-working people. Throughout our state s history, agriculture has remained a key component of the state s economy. In fact, $49 billion a year is pumped into our state s GDP thanks to agriculture and more than 13 percent of our state s economy depends on agriculture. More than 39,000 farms dot the state s landscape and more than 160,000 work in the agriculture and food processing industry in Washington state more than Boeing and Microsoft combined. Washington state ranks 14th nationally in overall commodity production and is in the top five in many categories including apples (1st), potatoes (2nd), wheat (4th), lentils (3rd) and hops (1st). These are just some of the key findings of a new research publication soon to be released by Washington Policy Center titled Agriculture: The cornerstone of Washington s economy. Keeping the agricultural community vibrant and strong is critical to keeping our state healthy. However, there is currently no free-market, independent voice in the public policy debate over issues important to the agriculture community. WPC wants to change that. Our upcoming publication will coincide with a special announcement by our organization related to our research team. We invite you to stay tuned for this exciting effort. We re confident you ll want to be involved! 5

6 Allow us to introduce you to the new Young Professionals leadership... Samantha Bowman WPC Young Professionals Board Chairman & Treasury Manager at Microsoft I got involved with WPC to stay involved in free-market policy as a working professional. The YP group gave me a way to stay informed and to meet others who were thinking about the same issues I was. Since I joined the board in 2012, the growth and development of the board, the YP group, and WPC has been amazing to watch. I am excited to see the group expand both geographically and in number of events. For the first time this year we are having a YP-dedicated event in the Tri-Cities hosted by fellow YP Board member Kate Lampson, an event in Olympia following our board's Olympia Day, and are adding quarterly happy hours to keep existing members involved on a more regular basis. Benjamin Petter WPC Young Professionals Board Vice Chairman & President of Avara Construction I ve been extremely fortunate to be part of the growth of WPC s Young Professionals group over the last several years. It s been exciting to see a small group of passionate young people grow into such a powerful membership with the power to truly create significance in our community. WPC s dedication to providing high-quality research around policy decisions actively supports an environment which promotes the best interests of the public. I look forward to being part of the growth and to continuing the message of the WPC. YOUNG PROFESSIONALS Educating, engaging, empowering the next generation of free-market leaders Lisl Stadler WPC Young Professionals Coordinator I m the new Young Professionals Coordinator for Washington Policy Center. As such, I work to assist the Young Professionals Advisory Board in achieving their vision for the YP program, and aid our college Young Professionals as they advocate for free market solutions and rational government policies on campuses around Washington state. Prior to joining the WPC staff, I received a Bachelor s degree in Political Science from Seattle Pacific University, taught 5th and 6th grade English as a Teach for America teacher in Greenwood, Mississippi, and worked briefly at a litigation consulting firm. 6 To get involved and learn more about sponsorship opportunities visit

7 Forcing Uber drivers to join a union takes choice and freedom from workers by Erin Shannon, Director, Center for Small Business and Labor Reform This Opinion/Editorial originally appeared exclusively in The Puget Sound Business Journal. Continuing their efforts to enact mandatory social policies, Seattle officials have become the first in the world to force Uber drivers to join a union. Under the proposal just passed by the Seattle City Council, if a majority of ride-share drivers vote to organize a union, any driver who does not agree to join a union and pay dues would be fired, or would not be hired in the first place. It would be illegal to drive for Uber or Lyft without joining the union. While the City Council frames the new law as an effort to protect workers and balance the playing field, the reality is this legislation will discriminate against drivers who want a choice in whether they have to join a union. A simple majority vote in favor of unionization will force every independent contract driver to have their incomes and work schedules subjected to union control. The only choice drivers will have is to join the union and pay mandatory union dues, or lose their jobs. A man who drives for Uber and Lyft recently told me he considers himself an independent contractor, and is responsible for working as much or little as he wants. He is opposed to Seattle s move to force unionization of his industry. He says he enjoys the freedom, choice, accountability and extra income that comes with driving for Uber and Lyft. He expressed frustration that collective bargaining would not only bind him to agreements he does not want, it would unfairly shield drivers who provide lackluster service, and likely provide poor-performers the same income as those who work hard to cater to their customers. Uber and Lyft riders score their satisfaction with their drivers service. If a driver s satisfaction rating falls below a certain minimum, they are suspended or deactivated. Most drivers are given a second chance to get reinstated upon completing a customer service test. Part of the push for forced unionization came from disgruntled drivers who complained they received low ratings from riders. They think being held accountable for not providing good service is unfair. The driver I spoke with has a different take: Appbased drivers don t need collective bargaining. They choose to be a driver. They are responsible for and in control of when they drive, where they drive and for providing acceptable service. If any of these criteria are not acceptable, it is not for the City of Seattle to intervene. A city can t (shouldn t) legislate work protection for unsatisfactory service. The [complaining] driver should seriously consider another line of work. Unionization of Uber and Lyft is an unfortunate solution in search of a problem; the overwhelming majority of drivers are happy. A recent survey showed 91 percent of Uber drivers like their ability to balance work with Uber with the rest of their life, and 97 percent of Uber drivers are satisfied with the flexibility of their schedule. Such flexibility, freedom and personal accountability will become a thing of the past if drivers vote to unionize. We cannot overlook the self-interest of Seattle s elected officials in creating a new source of campaign money for themselves. Unions are one of the most prolific and influential campaign donors in the state. They use their considerable war chest to reward politicians who agree with them and punish those who don t. Many Seattle City Councilmembers receive large campaign contributions from multiple labor unions, including the union that wants to forcibly organize Uber and Lyft drivers. Union executives are always looking for new ways to fill their coffers with mandatory union dues that can be used to influence policymakers. With 14,000 registered drivers-for-hire in Seattle, this legislation has handed unions a new source of revenue, which they can funnel into the campaigns of politicians who advance their political causes. Seattle voters recently said they want to reduce the amount of special interest money in local politics. The City Council has now done the opposite, adding a powerful new source of campaign cash in Seattle, funded by mandatory dues taken from unwilling ride share drivers. POINT OF VIEW 7

8 8 POINT OF VIEW Greater civic learning will pay off in more responsible citizens George R. Nethercutt, Jr., WPC Board Member & former Member of the U.S. Congress ( ) Brian Sonntag, WPC Board Member & former Washington State Auditor ( ) This Opinion/Editorial originally appeared in The News Tribune. Retired UC Berkeley Professor Phillip E. Johnson once declared, Constitutional democracy is in serious trouble if its citizenry doesn t have a certain degree of education and civic virtue. If society is to be bolstered and our communities made stronger, Washington State citizens need a heavy dose of civic learning. It s in the best interest of the citizens of our beloved state to encourage greater study of US history, economics, government and foreign policy through education efforts in schools and everywhere. As Washington Policy Center board members, we are proud that our Center for Education is dedicated to improving student learning in schools and agrees that there is evidence of failed education policy all around us and that schools should focus on civic education. Its Director, Liv Finne, has written extensively for both local and national publications in favor of responsible educational spending, but sensible and efficient educational spending is only part of the remedy for what ails public education. A greater emphasis on civic learning will produce not only well-educated graduates, but responsible citizens, aware of the world around them and prepared to meet public leadership challenges that lie ahead. The evidence of a failed civic education policy is all around us. Several years ago, Newsweek Magazine published a story identifying the results of 1000 random Americans taking the kind of immigrant citizenship test that applicants for American citizenship must pass. The results showed the ignorance of too many citizens, some unable to name the Vice President, circle Independence Day on a calendar or identify how many years a US Senator is elected to serve. Likewise, the Intercollegiate Studies Institute (ISI) administered a similar civics test to 14,000 college freshmen and seniors from 50 American universities, testing their general knowledge of US history, government, foreign policy and economics. All except Harvard students flunked the exam. Harvard students scored an underwhelming D+. Later, ISI gave the civics test to 3500 adults. The average score was an unimpressive 49 percent, with those who previously served as public officials scoring an abysmal five percentage points worse than the average adult. In 2012, the nonprofit George Nethercutt Foundation surveyed 800 Americans nationally asking three questions: Should elected officials be knowledgeable about civics? Seventyfour percent said yes. Should America s schools focus education efforts on civic learning? Eightyfive percent said yes. Should all Americans be able to pass the immigrant citizenship test that applicants for citizenship must pass? Sixty-seven percent said yes, likely reflecting Americans fear of having to take such an exam. The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), administered periodically by the US Department of Education, shows a disturbing lack of civics proficiency among American students. Though Washington State has enacted laws requiring graduating high school seniors to have onesemester of civics to graduate, that s not enough. Civic learning is nonpartisan. Democrats and Republicans alike favor citizens knowing how America came to be, understanding basic Constitutional principles and appreciating America s unique characteristics over its more-than 200 year history. Greater civic knowledge among all citizens can yield better economic results, too. The non-profit Opportunity Nation, dedicated to enhanced economic opportunity for all, and the Citi Foundation conducted a recent study showing that greater civic knowledge produces better economic opportunity and fosters individuals who vote more often and volunteer in their communities, both hallmarks of a winning equation for achieving success in the United States. Several years ago, the US Endowment for the Humanities found that greater civic knowledge can lead to stronger families, greater interest in local affairs and the propensity of individuals to actively engage in solving local problems. Prominent think tanks, such as the Washington Policy Center, can lead our nation by emphasizing greater civic learning in its support for responsible educational policies. If prominent leaders support enhanced civic learning, it will secure prominence Continued on following page.

9 as a top education priority, and can lead to higher voting percentages in national and local elections, greater numbers of candidates seeking to lead their communities because they re more knowledgeable about issues affecting their neighbors and higher percentages of citizens engaging in the crafting of public policies. Civic learning can be a catalyst for citizen action. We therefore call on policy makers, thought-leaders and organizations that care about the future of young people our next generation of leaders to support educational efforts to enhance civic learning. Doing so is good for students, good for citizens, good for Washingtonians and good for America. Court tosses I-1366; poll shows 65% of voters want Legislature to still act POINT OF VIEW By Jason Mercier, Director, Center for Government Reform This Opinion/Editorial originally appeared in The Tri-City Herald. Unconstitutional! That s the word from King County Superior Court this past week on voterapproved I Does this mean the Legislature has just been handed a get out of jail free card to punt on this issue? Well, that depends on how much respect lawmakers have for their constituents. Anticipating an adverse ruling from the state s courts against I-1366, Washington Policy Center commissioned a statewide poll last month conducted by Elway Research, INC asking voters what they want the Legislature to do if the court tosses I percent said they want lawmakers to send voters a constitutional amendment if this occurs. It appears some in the Legislature are ready to provide voters this option. As I told KOMO radio this past week, already six separate proposed constitutional amendments have been introduced this session (SJR 8208, 8209, 8211, 8212 and HJR 4213 and 4214). In fact, on Thursday, the Senate Government Operations Committee heard public testimony on one of those proposals. Testifying remotely, I encouraged lawmakers to honor the will of their constituents and let the sovereigns of the state, the people, be the ones to finally end this decades old debate. Having repeatedly approved some version of a supermajority restriction dating all the way back to I-62 in 1979, Washingtonians must feel like they are stuck in the movie Groundhog Day when it comes to whether the Legislature will honor their votes. Considering the fact that 17 other states already have a similar supermajority restriction (ranging from 3/5 in Oregon, to 2/3 in California, to requiring voter approval of all tax increases in Colorado) and there are already 20 plus supermajority vote restrictions in Washington s constitution, there is nothing to fear by acting on a constitutional amendment other than what the voters may do. Based on the unequivocal pronouncement in Article 1, Section 1 of the state s constitution, however, lawmakers should not fear the people but instead should provide them the opportunity to settle this debate: All political power is inherent in the people, and governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, and are established to protect and maintain individual rights. Visit for complete poll results and Jason s legislative memo on this issue. 9

10 POINT OF VIEW I-405 tolls aren t providing relief for frustrated drivers By Bob Pishue, Director, Coles Center for Transportation This Opinion/Editorial originally appeared in The Seattle Times. Washington State Department of Transportation officials say their plan to impose tolls on drivers on Interstate 405 is working. They say demand has exceeded expectations, that use of the toll lanes is higher than expected and has caused the price to hit the maximum cap of $10 on multiple occasions, including three days in a row last week. But before officials ask the state Transportation Commission for the ability to raise toll prices higher, they may want to pause. A growing number of citizens and lawmakers are backing an effort to remove the toll lanes, raising questions about WSDOT s implementation strategy and the lanes effectiveness. The decision to toll I-405 has been wildly controversial. To start, the public was led to believe they would receive new generalpurpose lanes paid for from gas-tax hikes in 2003 and The public started to see some initial benefits as early as 2007, when WSDOT announced travel speeds doubled to 45 mph through Kirkland after adding a lane. But state lawmakers changed that plan in 2011, allowing WSDOT officials to build toll lanes instead of the regular lanes promised. Also, traffic congestion is worse than WSDOT projected. WSDOT officials said general-purpose speeds during a typical afternoon commute between Bellevue and Lynnwood would average 37 mph after tolling. However, WSDOT officials have reported the actual travel speeds in 10

11 the regular lanes are around 26 mph, per their latest data release. Toll prices are also higher than projected, as WSDOT estimated the average toll during the commute period would be less than $2. Before the holidays, the average was $3.75. Still, WSDOT officials say toll lanes are needed. They argue these lanes can better accommodate growth because additional regular lanes would just fill up. Transportation planners in the Puget Sound region call for all lanes of every highway to be similarly tolled by If the plan is fully implemented, the public might find they have to pay tolls to drive on public lanes and highways that have already been built this is like charging an entrance fee to use a city park. Between 2030 and 2040, these new tolls would generate an estimated $22 billion from toll payers. In other words, drivers and transit riders are being told to choose between having toll lanes or suffering permanent gridlock. This false choice fails to consider other options the public may prefer. Officials could work to relieve congestion as laid out in the official 2002 Interstate 405 Master Plan not just manage it through pricing. In fact, the toll lanes on I-405 may act as a deterrent to providing adequate capacity in the future to meet growing population and employment expectations. Changes to I-405 may be on the horizon. Reflecting the mood of their constituents, state Sen. Andy Hill, R-Redmond, (chair of the Senate Ways and Means Committee) and state Rep. Mark Harmsworth, R-Mill Creek, (assistant ranking member of the House Transportation Committee) drafted legislation to change the way I-405 works. Their bills would open a toll lane in each direction between Bothell and Bellevue to the general public, leaving a single toll lane throughout the 17-mile corridor. They also want to open the highway equally to all travelers in the evening, as it was before WSDOT officials imposed the tolls. Their bill received a public hearing just a week into the legislative session. If state officials want an additional express toll lane, they should make their case to the voters or look to partner with the private sector to provide it. Or, officials could cut the gas tax that funded the I-405 project since the road was not delivered as promised. Tolling is a tool that can be used to add mobility that serves the community and funds needed public infrastructure. Express toll lanes have worked in other regions and should be explored, but not at the expense of taking away a lane the public was promised and already paid for and would provide congestion relief for commuters. 11

12 COV ER S TORY 3 Steps to reducing carbon emissions effectively By Todd Myers, Director, Center for the Environment AS GOVER NOR INSLEE and others recently traveled to Paris to tout their own climate credentials, our state s own climate policy is in shambles. The best way to describe Washington s approach on climate policy during the last decade is fail and blame. City of Seattle officials failed to meet their own carbon reduction targets and blamed oil companies, rather than its own flawed public policies. In 2015, Governor Inslee failed to get even a simple floor vote on his cap-and-trade tax and blamed Republicans, even though it was House Democrats who killed his bill. Instead of policy failure prompting an honest reassessment, it prompts a ramping up of the rhetoric and a hardening of positions, leading to more policy failure. For example, despite saying we have no time to lose in addressing climate change, the governor refused to compromise on his plan, demanding billions of dollars in new government spending, and promising to kill any plan that did not include new taxes. Imposing a higher tax on people was more important than passing an effective climate policy. Now the governor is doubling down, going around the bipartisan opposition to his plan and hoping to institute through regulation what could not be achieved through legislation. This is the wrong approach. To break the cycle of fail and blame, we need to step back and find some simple, near-term approaches that can build bipartisan cooperation and get some simple wins. There are three steps we can take in this positive direction. First, do no harm. The sad truth about most of Washington state s climate policies over the last 10 years is that they have actually increased carbon emissions or wasted millions on trendy projects that accomplished nothing. For example, Snohomish County officials spent money on a canolacrushing plant that was to power all of its diesel fleet on the locally grown biodiesel by Currently the costly plant is producing nothing. The state s Clean Energy Fund made public loans to four renewable energy and fuel projects in Washington state. The record? Of four companies given loans, one company went bankrupt, another had loan repayments deferred to 2018 and a third suspended the project because prices fell dramatically. The list of efforts that have actually harmed the environment is equally long. We have written repeatedly about the fact that the state s green schools mandate is expensive and creates school buildings that, by the state s own accounting, actually increase energy use. Our analysis has also shown that subsidies for electric cars have gone overwhelmingly to the wealthy, people who do not need a subsidy to buy those expensive cars, yielding tiny environmental benefits at very high cost. We support investments that reduce carbon intensity, often called carbon offsets, but not all approaches are equal. The most recent example is a 12

13 project, facilitated by the Washington Environmental Council (WEC), to pay for trees that are already growing in a forest, claiming they reduce carbon. This assertion is simply false. It violates a basic principle of offset projects, that they provide additional carbon reduction. Forestry projects like the WEC s don t do that. The best way to use forestry to reduce carbon emissions is to harvest wood and use it to build houses in place of highenergy concrete or steel. University of Washington scientists have produced excellent research, showing a massive increase in carbon reduction with this approach. The U.N. s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the U.N. agency the left used to call the climate consensus, agrees, noting in 2007 that, a sustainable forest management strategy aimed at maintaining or increasing forest carbon stocks, while producing an annual sustained yield of timber, fiber, or energy from the forest, will generate the largest sustained mitigation benefit. Last month s U.N. climate conference in Paris offered carbon reduction investments to offset the emissions of attendees who traveled to the event. Not a single one of the U.N. s recommended offsets is related to forestry. Most dramatically, however, is Governor Inslee s proposed carbon regulation. The promised burden of that regulation was one reason Alcoa idled two aluminum plants in Washington. Not only has this closure cost hundreds of union jobs, it will push aluminum production overseas to plants that emit more carbon and increase damage to the environment. Despite this obvious warning about the consequences of illconceived climate policy, the governor traveled to Paris to brag about his commitment to such destructive policies. The governor and his Seattle environmental allies repeatedly claim we have no time to lose. But wasting money is wasting time and the opportunity to cut emissions. We have wasted a lot of both. This needs to stop. Second, while many environmental activists say we must force a lifestyle change, improvements in technology is a much better approach. Left-wing environmental groups argue we need to change our lifestyle to reduce climate change. Nationally recognized climate activists like Naomi Klein and Bill McKibben argue that we need to destroy the free market and move to a more planned economy. Bellingham activist John de Graaf wrote that Lifestyle change [is] needed to reduce carbon emissions. This narrow mindset is widespread. For example, the taxpayer-funded King County Eco-Consumer Tom Watson lamented that people were choosing Car2Go rather than transit. He wrote Governments and the public need to support public transit. If a new transportation option is resulting in people getting off public transit...that could be a problem. In fact, Car2Go, which uses extremely fuel-efficient SmartCars can be more fuel efficient per person than transit. Policies that give people more freedom, however, regardless of environmental benefit, are automatically suspect on the left. The simple fact is, policies that force people to change their lifestyle do not work and violate the basic American principle that people guide the government, not the other way around. Technology, on the other hand, has done what efforts to force lifestyle change have not. America s carbon intensity has fallen dramatically, allowing economic growth even as carbon emissions fall. U.S. carbon emissions have been flat or falling since 2000, even as our population has increased. There are a number of reasons for this. The natural gas revolution has replaced coal. Laptop and smartphone battery technology was applied to hybrid and electric cars. And many small technologies pushed by the free market let people do more with less. Can anyone say the U.S. has changed its lifestyle since 2000? Can anyone deny the dramatic energy-saving improvements in technology that have occurred since then? Finally, create near-term successes. A couple years ago, Governor Inslee told a legislative panel on climate change that everything he was reading said that climate change was even worse than had been predicted. I asked his office what he had been reading. They did not respond. In fact, the opposite is true. The IPCC has actually reduced its projections of temperature increase from three degrees Celsius in 2001, down to two degrees C in its most recent report. This is not zero, but it gives a chance to breathe and focus on incremental success rather than grand schemes. Rather than panic, policies should be guided by focusing on effective and cooperative efforts. For example, State Senator Doug Erickson has offered a bill that would turn the state s renewable energy mandate into a more flexible and effective approach. The goals would be the same, but the cost to improve efficiency and cut emissions would be lowered. In the past we have offered the Environmental Priorities Act, which would prioritize state spending on carbon reduction, focusing on efforts that yield the greatest environmental benefit for every dollar spent. Elements of this approach were included in the governor s initial climate bill one we supported in Sadly, he has moved away from this bipartisan approach and now advocates subsidies for the very policies his own analysis show to be the least effective. If, as the governor claims, we don t have time to waste, prioritizing environmental spending is even more critical. Some will argue these steps don t do enough. These same people, however, have spent the last decade in the cycle of fail and blame. Twice in the last decade, bipartisan legislative majorities have killed cap-and-trade proposals. Twice, Washington governors have issued executive orders on climate change to no effect. Each time, as these policies have failed, we have been lectured that others are the blame and then told we need to be even more aggressive than the policies that failed. And the cycle of failure begins again. For a decade, grand climate promises and policies have failed to pass, wasting time and resources. A more pragmatic approach of small, near-term successes and improved technologies would be a better way to change the political, and the global, climate. 13

14 Your membership with Washington Policy Center is an investment in a better tomorrow. Our annual budget of $2.7 million, though impressive for a state-based think tank, is dwarfed by those of special interests. We don t receive any government money; we don t ask for it and we wouldn t take it even if it were offered. WPC relies on the generous support of our donors people like you who understand that free-markets are superior to a government-rigged economy, and liberty is the air that a free people must breathe. As we work off of our momentum from 2015, here are just a few of our goals that you can help us accomplish this year with your support: 1. Enact a state constitutional amendment as well as local laws requiring a twothirds super-majority vote for all tax increases. 2. Save charter schools and increase the freedom to receive a good education. 3. Defeat the job-killer and small business-destroyer known as the statewide $15 an hour minimum wage. 4. Grow WPC s Young Professionals group to engage, educate and empower the next generation of leaders including expanding WPC s Young Professional campus clubs to more colleges around the state. About WPC s Pillar Society: WPC s Pillar Society distinguishes donors who make a substantial three-year pledge to Washington Policy Center. Pledge levels start at $15,000 over three years and include Annual Dinner tickets or a table and personalized support programs to fit the donor s interests. About WPC s Legacy Partners: The Legacy Partners program recognizes anybody who has made a bequest or indicated they have included WPC in their estate plans. As a Legacy Partner you have all the same benefits as our highest level of membership and satisfaction of knowing your legacy will live on through WPC s important work. Membership levels & benefits Research Publication Mailings Quarterly Viewpoint Magazine Regular WPC Updates Invitations to General WPC Events Invitations to Private WPC Events Quarterly Updates from President Exclusive Membership Lapel Pin Membership level WPC Member Leadership Council Member Patron Member Presidents Council Member Champion Member Pillar Society Legacy Partners Young Professionals 14 Tax Id #: For more information on how to support WPC with a gift of stock, monthly giving or to join our Pillar Society or become a Legacy Partner, please contact WPC s Development Director, Sydney Jansen at sjansen@washingtonpolicy.org or (206) Washington Policy Center is a tax-exempt 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization. To preserve our independence, we accept no government funding, and we do not perform contract work. Contributions are deductible for federal income tax purposes as allowed by law.

15 SNAP SHOT OF 2015 ANNUAL REPORT WPC revenue comes from: Total 2015 Revenue: $2,746,786 (New record for WPC) Foundations Corporations & Businesses Individuals WPC Events: 4,768 attendees enjoyed 40 WPC events held across the state Complementary Tickets to General WPC Events Recognition in Annual Report Annual Recognition in Quarterly Viewpoint Exclusive Update on Session & Elections with WPC VP of Research VIP tickets to Annual Dinner Invitation to Private Annual Dinner Lunch & Speaker Q&A Session Recognition at all WPC Events Exclusive Name Badge Invitations to Private Pillar Society Events WPC impact : 2,558 media hits on average7 hits per day 51 bills introduced based on WPC research 41 legislative testimonies 15

16 PO Box 3643 Seattle WA Non-profit Organization U.S. Postage PAID Seattle, WA Permit No Jennifer Dunn-Thomson Scholarship Join the legacy! For the sixth consecutive year, WPC will award its annual Jennifer Dunn-Thomson scholarship to female college students who embody the late Congresswoman's values of leadership, commitment to public service and personal values. From the $10,000 in total scholarship funds available, recipients may use the money to pay for tuition or an internship on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C. WPC will help the recipients with an internship placement with a member of Congress. Application Deadline: April 15, 2016 For more information on Jennifer s life and full details on the scholarship: