The environment and economy suffer when public officials hide from accountability
Key Findings
- Subsidies and regulation assume politicians and bureaucrats know what approaches will cut pollution. There are several problems with this.
- Regulations add hidden costs, thus protecting politicians from accountability.
- Officials promise lofty environmental goals, then consistently miss their own targets.
- Public policy can use markets to efficiently show people the true cost of using resources.
- Research shows people are price-sensitive and adjust their behavior to reduce environmental impact.
- A truly market-based approach respects individual freedom, and moves away from regulations and subsidies, replacing them with policies that give consumers more power.
Introduction
There is a climate consensus growing in Olympia, and both Republicans and Democrats seem to agree.
Senator Reuven Carlyle, new chair of the Energy, Environment and Technology committee, argues the state must subsidize a wide range of government projects and create regulation to force CO2 emission reductions. He told The Seattle Times that increasing a price on pollution doesn’t work, claiming the previous revenue-neutral carbon tax proposal, Initiative 732, “relied on the price signal…and myself and many others don’t’ believe that works. What works is how you deploy those dollars.”
Senate Republicans seemed to agree that using price signals doesn’t work. They tweeted out:
“If Dems want to reduce carbon for the sake of the planet, regulation reform would be the way to go. Energy tax SB6203, would just drive companies out of WA to less-regulated areas with a friendlier tax structure. Reform to reduce carbon. Don’t tax.”