Clean & Prosperous Washington: Nearly 30 Leading Economists Sign Open Letter Opposing Washington State's Initiative 2117 & Warning of Its Costs to State

Economists Warn I-2117 Would Force State to Rely on "More Costly Policies Such as Direct Regulation" to Meet State's Carbon Reduction Requirements

SEATTLE, Oct. 31, 2024 /PRNewswire/ -- Nearly 30 leading economists have signed an open letter opposing Initiative 2117 and warning of its costs to Washington state, arguing that by repealing the state's market-based cap-and-invest program, I-2117 would force the state to rely on "more costly policies such as direct regulation" to meet the state's current carbon reduction requirements. 

"Reducing greenhouse gases without carbon pricing would leave Washington fighting climate change with one hand behind its back. Carbon pricing saves on costs because it marshals the entire economy in a collective search for reductions in greenhouse gases," said Clayton Munnings, a signer of the open letter and a climate economist who has designed and researched carbon pricing programs on six continents over the last decade. "It acts as a force multiplier to Washington's existing portfolio of climate policies. Voting No on 2117 upholds Washington's commitment to economically achieving its climate targets."

"Smart designs like Washington State's cap-and-invest program turn it into a win-win-win: for the climate, for people, and for businesses, the local economy, and jobs," said letter signatory Gernot Wagner, an economist at Columbia Business School, whose research, teaching, and writing focus on climate risks and climate policy.

"2117 would roll back important environmental protections for clean air and clean water. It would gut critical funding for wildfire funding, salmon restoration, energy efficiency, transit, sidewalks, ferries and more," added Dr. Sharon Shewmake, State Senator, Washington State, and Associate Professor, Department of Economics, Western Washington University.

"This is important validation that the approach Washington is taking to address climate change is grounded in sound economics," said Michael Mann, Executive Director of Clean & Prosperous Washington. "2117 would remove the most cost effective tool we have to solve this problem."

Nearly 600 organizations and Tribal Nations - including small business, large employers, and business advocacy organizations - oppose I-2117 and have endorsed the No on 2117 campaign.

"Ultimately, from an economic perspective," the letter concludes, "the question boils down to whether Washingtonians wish to achieve their state's climate targets at the lowest economic cost."

In September, a study by the Greenline Institute found that if passed, Initiative 2117 would cost Washingtonians an estimated 45,000 high-wage jobs. The report also found that I-2117 would cost Washington state approximately $9.1 billion in economic output over eight years. You can read the full study here.

FULL TEXT OF LETTER OPPOSING I-2117 AND SIGNATORIES CAN BE FOUND HERE.

SOURCE Clean & Prosperous Washington