‘Snail’ campaign ad exaggerates traffic clogs from repealing WA carbon fees

Defenders of Washington state’s carbon fees have filled television with ads saying that Initiative 2117, to repeal the Climate Commitment Act, would make traffic congestion worse — despite the fact carbon-fee money doesn’t go toward state highways.

The 30-second spots display the newspaper headline “Traffic slowed a whole lot in 2023,” along with traffic snarls, a bus and a couple of snails. The punchline? If I-2117 passes, travelers might be jealous of a snail.

“Desperate fearmongering,” is how state GOP Chair Jim Walsh describes the ads.

Are those fears true? Are claims of road and freeway cutbacks a fact, a forecast, or bluster?

State Sen. Marko Liias, D-Edmonds, who chairs the Senate Transportation Committee, says the commercials are correct, because I-2117 would blow such a huge hole in overall transportation funds that inevitably, road spending would take a hit.

Two years ago, when legislators crafted a 16-year, $16.8 billion transportation plan, they reached consensus by promising not only road money, but $5.4 billion in walk, bike, vehicle electrification and transit grants paid from CCA income.

If one-third of new transportation income vanishes, Liias said, “It would require the whole package to be renegotiated, because legislators want that balance.”

It’s a somewhat circular rationale, since Liias himself wields substantial power over future spending choices.

“That’s a threat that’s made,” Brian Heywood, the professional investor who bankrolled the tax-reducing initiative, told The Seattle Times editorial board. “Marko Liias has been out there several times, saying if you vote yes on 2117, there goes your bridge, if you pass 2117, your roads go to crap.”

A “yes” result on the initiative would cancel — each year from mid-2025 to mid-2029 — $72 million in revenues for carbon reduction including vehicle electrification, $201 million for transit, and $86 million for “active transportation” such as walk-bike routes, the Office of Financial Management projected.

Though essential for some travelers, these are generally not the kinds of mobility projects that affect freeway congestion.

For that to occur, other dominoes must fall, in the form of tough legislative trade-offs, since I-2117 doesn’t directly eliminate road money.

The No on 2117 campaign, which wants to keep the CCA in place, has spent “six figures” buying airtime for the “snail” ads, spokesperson Mark Prentice said. As a snapshot, KING 5 billed the campaign $138,600 for 122 half-minute spots in the week ending Sept. 16, the costliest of which was $6,000 during the presidential debate, according to a list posted by the Federal Communications Commission.

Between now and Election Day on Nov. 5, a variety of ads will appear, Prentice said, including one with remarks by Bill Nye the Science Guy, about health risks of atmospheric pollution, and funding risks to transit and trails. Top funders include former Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer, Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates, Tableau co-founder Chris Stolte, the League of Conservation Voters, and the Puyallup Tribe of Indians.

Heywood’s Let’s Go Washington campaign, which is promoting four ballot initiatives, reports $7.1 million in contributions, led by the Building Industry Association of Washington, retired IT-security entrepreneur Lawrence Hughes of Medina, retired trucking-company principal Steve Gordon of Lake Tapps, Bellevue-based Kemper Holdings, and Heywood.

In 2021 the Democratic-controlled Legislature passed the Climate Commitment Act, a “cap-and-invest” program similar to those in California and Quebec. Polluters bid for state allowances to emit carbon dioxide, and auction revenues go toward environmentally friendly projects, from home weatherization to tree planting, along with non-fossil-fueled transportation. The state has already collected $2.15 billion.

Gov. Jay Inslee predicted it would cost Washingtonians “pennies on the dollar,” but the initial price shock was near 50 cents a gallon — which has settled to 26 cents a gallon passed to consumers by fossil-fuel companies, according to the nonpartisan Oil Price Information Service.

Fossil-fuel emissions and other human activities have heated Earth’s atmosphere 2.5 degrees above preindustrial levels, according to NASA.

Let’s examine statements in the “snail” ad:

• “With Initiative 2117, things will get even slower. That’s because 2117 would cut billions from transportation. Less funding to fix roads and bridges…”

By state law, the carbon money isn’t spent on road capacity and maintenance. Those expenses are paid by the state’s 49.4-cent gasoline tax, along with a slew of licensing and vehicle fees. Washington’s constitution dedicates gas tax to “highway purposes” including city streets, traffic signals and ferries.

Even if I-2117 causes a cash crunch in 2025, freeway-building would likely keep going gangbusters for a while, because of jobs already under contract, such as $1.5 billion worth of toll and exit-lane additions along I-405 in Bothell and Renton, the $1.4 billion Portage Bay segment of Highway 520, and most of the $2.7 billion Puget Sound Gateway (to build a 4-mile Highway 509 extension in SeaTac, and a 6-mile Highway 167 extension from Puyallup to the Port of Tacoma).

Liias offered a political-science lesson: If voters do pass I-2117, it’s not the only time they’ll express their will on transportation matters. They’ll also elect or reelect legislators who will insist on keeping CCA-funded projects. Beyond that, the state owes “safe ways to move around” to the 30% of Washingtonians who can’t or don’t drive, he said.

Sen. Rebecca Saldaña, D-Seattle, is one of those lawmakers who wouldn’t jettison walk-bike-transit projects for the sake of keeping road money intact. “Doing just highways? No, that’s not the way it’s going to work out,” she said.

Saldaña said court-ordered salmon culvert replacement, that’s doubled to $8 billion, will further reduce the Legislature’s flexibility to sustain road plans. “If we end up losing at the ballot, what we’re going to [still] have is a mandated obligation to pay for culverts, and that’s all we’re going to be doing,” she predicted.

But GOP Chair Walsh, a House member from Aberdeen, says it’s not a foregone conclusion highway funds would get the ax.

“I think there will be a robust debate around prioritizing projects, in the next budget,” Walsh said. He suggests the Legislature shift sales taxes paid within highway projects to spending on roads, instead of the state general fund.

Said Senate Minority Leader John Braun, R-Centralia: “You take CCA away, now you can have a discussion about a gas tax.” By adding less than 10 cents a gallon, Braun said the state could address congestion by improving road capacity and maintenance, for less than the broader climate act costs.

That scenario seems implausible to House Majority Leader Joe Fitzgibbon, D-West Seattle. “I don’t think there will be a political appetite to increase the tax on fuel, in the aftermath of a vote predicated on lower gas prices,” he said.

• “And 2117 would gut public transit, meaning more cars and even more traffic.”

This language exaggerates the impact of I-2117 on transit and congestion.

A huge corridor like the new $3 billion Northgate-Lynnwood light rail extension can reduce pressure on adjacent Interstate 5, but Sound Transit gets little state money.

The new CCA revenues are spread across the state — and its transit subsidies make up only 4% of Washington transit agencies’ total $5.1 billion annual spending. They rely predominantly on local and federal tax revenues.

The weak connection between I-2117 and highway congestion boils down to a matter of scale.

Six million drivers travel 160 million miles a day in Washington state, filling highways with a quarter-million cars in several hot spots. Within the Seattle-Everett-Tacoma-Bremerton area, people take more than 15 million trips a day by all modes, mostly vehicles. Statewide transit serves only 620,000 daily riders postpandemic, and only a fraction are substituting transit for congested freeway drives.

I-2117 means fewer dollars for certain transit services and nondriving options. State budgets show $400 million in 2023-25 CCA money already earmarked to transit, for special-needs travelers, underserved communities and tribal service, including $188 million operating aid to bus agencies. The act underwrites Washington state’s free transit for youth ages 18 and under, who took 16.6 million free rides last year.

If voters repeal the climate act, Community Transit in Snohomish County predicts a $199 million loss through 2038. Paratransit service, “our most vulnerable customers,” would get $32 million less, and electric bus grants would shrink, officials say.

Also, CCA money is earmarked to pay the electrification portion, or one-fourth, of five future ferries, Liias said. Therefore, I-2117 defunds 1 1/4 vessels, he said.

Given that the 49.4-cent gas tax is constitutionally tied to roads, why wouldn’t highway capacity stay intact, regardless of I-2117?

The answer is a future tug-of-war over the state’s “multimodal” fund, stocked by car-tab taxes along with revenues from driver and vehicle licenses, money that may legally go toward either roads or nondriving transportation. Right now, the multimodal account provides $342.5 million this biennium toward highway construction, ferry operations, and the State Patrol — purposes that are also eligible for gas taxes, Fitzgibbon said. Repeal of CCA would spark proposals to fully shift multimodal dollars out of roads and into green-transportation projects, he said.

Ultimately, there would be fewer dollars for road preservation, leading to potholes, more-disruptive repairs, and congestion, Fitzgibbon said.

• “None of these are good. None of the options make it easier or safer to get around.”

Mark Hallenbeck, director emeritus of the Washington State Transportation Center, agrees. “Anything that generates funding for transit or maintenance, and even roadway expansion, is good for congestion relief. Anything that lowers spending on those areas is bad, and increases congestion, especially in the long term,” he said. “The only question is, ‘how much worse will it get?’”