BY THE OPTIMIST DAILY EDITORIAL TEAM
On November 5, Washington voters made an important decision for the future of climate action by deciding to uphold the state’s Climate Commitment Act (CCA), one of the nation’s most ambitious climate laws. This vote marked a huge loss for Republican efforts to dismantle the act, which Governor Jay Inslee signed into law in 2021. With 61.7 percent voting against the repeal, Washingtonians demonstrated their support for a state-led approach to reducing greenhouse gas emissions and increasing climate resilience.
The Climate Commitment Act established a cap-and-invest program to control carbon emissions from corporations while also providing a revenue stream for environmental conservation. In this system, corporations must acquire emission permits in a controlled auction, establishing a financial and legal incentive to lessen their environmental effect. The program’s early success has attracted attention, both for its financial successes and for its potential as a model for other states to follow.
How the Washington cap-and-invest program works
Washington’s cap-and-invest scheme uses a sealed-bid auction in which firms bid for carbon permits. Each allowance grants authority to emit one metric ton of greenhouse gas. According to the Washington State Department of Ecology, corporations can bid on a block of allowances at their requested price. Bids are ranked from highest to lowest, and once all allowances have been given, the price of the lowest winning bid is paid by all successful bidders. Businesses that don’t win the auction must buy allowances from others, resulting in a competitive market for emissions permits.
Over time, the quantity of available allowances will decrease, lowering emissions in line with Washington’s climate goals for 2030, 2040, and 2050. The state has set lofty goals to reduce emissions by 45 percent below 1990 levels by 2030, 70 percent by 2040, and 95 percent by 2050.
Financial success and environmental investments
Since the program’s inception, the Climate Commitment Act has raised significant cash for Washington’s environmental aims. In 2023, the initiative raised $1.82 billion for climate resilience and environmental restoration. The first auction in 2024 raised an additional $136 million, with further auctions planned. This support is critical for continuing programs aimed at adapting to climate change, conserving biodiversity, and protecting populations vulnerable to its effects.
However, not everyone considers the CCA a success. Supporters of the repeal said that the law imposed a “hidden gas tax” and raised energy prices without providing significant environmental advantages. According to data from The Associated Press, the average price of gasoline in Washington reached $5.54 per gallon in February 2023, prompting claims that the law was financially oppressive.
Voters reject repeal, support climate funding
Critics of the repeal pointed out that eliminating the CCA would not necessarily cut gas prices and would instead eliminate a major source of money for climate adaptation. Despite the unsuccessful repeal, the program remains intact, supporting initiatives that improve environmental protection and build Washington’s climate resilience. Washington’s commitment to climate action now sits alongside similar initiatives in California and Quebec, both of which created connected cap-and-investment programs in 2014. The three nations are now discussing future coordination to achieve their common climate goals.
Future of climate action in Washington
Washington’s vote comes at a critical time for climate action in the United States. Following Donald Trump’s recent election to a second term as President, many analysts anticipate minimal federal support for climate policy. According to Alice Hill, a senior scholar at the Council on Foreign Relations, “Trump’s victory presents a real obstacle in the global fight against climate change.” She noted that under Trump’s leadership, the federal government is likely to curtail measures to reduce emissions while increasing fossil fuel production.
Despite this national outlook, Hill expressed optimism in state-led efforts like Washington’s, stating, “The power of state-level action should not be undermined, with significant progress made at sub-national level in some states. Local political and regulatory intervention will be critical in the fight for a healthier planet — with or without support from the Trump administration.” Washington’s commitment to its climate program serves as a reminder that states can take the lead in lowering emissions and creating a sustainable future even in the absence of federal action.
As the Climate Commitment Act continues to succeed on both environmental and financial fronts, Washington’s example may inspire other states to pursue similar programs, strengthening US climate action from the ground up.
