The following is presented as part of The Columbian’s Opinion content, which offers a point of view in order to provoke thought and debate of civic issues. Opinions represent the viewpoint of the author. Unsigned editorials represent the consensus opinion of The Columbian’s editorial board, which operates independently of the news department.
Years ago, when my daughter was in elementary school, there was an election for student council or something, and one of the candidates promised longer recess if he were elected.
Naturally, he won, proving that “longer recess” is the childhood equivalent of “Mexico will pay for it.” When it comes to elections, some voters will hear what they want to hear, even if deep down they know you are lying or exaggerating or being a delusional dotard.
All of which plays a role in the 2020 presidential election, which has more candidates than a WWE battle royale. So as we look ahead to 2020 and as the candidates present their fanciful proposals, it is never too early to delineate between what is realistic and what is the political equivalent of unicorns and stardust.
From the Washington standpoint, that means starting with Jay Inslee. You might have heard of him; you twice elected him (or maybe your neighbors did) to be your governor. And while national polls show Inslee lagging in terms of name recognition amid the battalion of Democratic candidates, columnist Jennifer Rubin of The Washington Post brings up an interesting point: “Although he’s running primarily on climate change, one of the best-kept secrets of the race is that other than former Vice President Joe Biden, Inslee has more executive experience and more accomplishments (from minimum wage to green investment) than just about anyone in the race.”
Inslee is in the middle of his second term as governor. Before that, he spent 15 years in the House of Representatives. That might not match being a failed casino owner in terms of presidential training, but on the other hand it might.
As Inslee makes the rounds of the national media trying to drum up support, the first question is whether or not he has any shot of winning the Democratic nomination. Well, the first question is whether he can be an effective governor while running for president. But as to the next question, we point out that neither Jimmy Carter nor Bill Clinton had a national profile when they launched presidential campaigns from a governor’s office before landing in the White House. So why not Inslee?
In that quest, Inslee is focusing on climate change as his signature issue. A recent survey by The Washington Post examined candidates’ social media posts and determined that 81 percent of Inslee’s focus has been on climate change. It is a single-minded strategy and a politically wise one; even if Inslee does not overcome the odds and win the nomination, he is forcing the discussion and is positioning himself as a national voice on the issue.
Most important, Inslee’s focus demonstrates leadership. The Trump administration’s own climate assessment says: “Human migration is another potential national security issue. Extreme weather events can in some cases result in population displacement.” In other words, the president’s own policies and climate change denial will only increase the flow of migrants that he fears so much. Inslee effectively pointed that out during a recent town hall on CNN: “The only way he believes America can succeed is if another country somehow is subjugated or loses some treaty right. … That’s a dangerous policy.”
Changes at home
And yet it brings up questions about what is realistic. For all of his well-intended and visionary talk about climate change, Inslee has been unable to play Pied Piper in his own state, which likes to believe it is an environmental utopia. Voters have rejected two statewide carbon initiatives; the Legislature has been reluctant to pick up the mantle. There has been strong investment in green energy, but not a necessary sea change in energy policy.
That might be changing. On Thursday, the state House passed a bill requiring 100 percent clean energy in Washington by 2045. The Senate already passed a similar bill and now will vote on changes made in the House.
If it passes, Inslee can use the victory to grab the attention of voters. Either that or promise longer recess.
Morning Briefing Newsletter
Get a rundown of the latest local and regional news every Mon-Fri morning.
