Campaign News

Hello carbon tax friends: Terrific news this week!

* Endorsement of CarbonWA from Seattle Business magazine: We can’t say it any better than Seattle Business magazine editor Leslie Helm in the September issue: “A carbon tax works ­— and the state should implement one.” I strongly encourage everyone to read the entire piece, to be generous in printing copies for friends and sharing the link online, and to stay tuned for a link to another article about carbon pricing in the same issue. It’s not yet online, so while you’re waiting how about taking advantage of their offer of a free subscription to the magazine? (Capitalism is amazing, isn’t it? Perhaps they make money from advertising; you can ask them on Twitter and Facebook… but mostly you should give them some love for their strong endorsement of revenue-neutral carbon taxes and CarbonWA.)

* Campaign social recap: We had a terrific event Wednesday night at the Vermillion Art Gallery and Bar and will be doing follow-up in the week ahead. Keep an eye out for photos on our on Facebook page and Twitter feed!

* How you can help #1: You can pledge to collect signatures in March-Dec 2015 so we can get on the ballot in November 2016!

* How you can help #2: You can donate to the campaign, especially now that we’ve set it up so that you can donate a given amount every month. (Thanks to Will and Joanne for encouraging us to do this!) Donate $100 or more and I’ll send you a free copy of The Cartoon Introduction to Climate Change. (I’m also giving my royalties for this year to the campaign, and sorry I ran out of copies on Wednesday night!)

* How you can help #3: You can provide feedback on the comments section of this blog and follow us on Facebook and Twitter. We are approaching our summer goals for Facebook friends and Twitter followers, but we’re not there yet…

* How you can help #4: You can link to and print out the Seattle Business magazine editorial endorsing CarbonWA (or sign up for a free subscription and then rip out the page) and share copies with everyone you know in person and online!

 

Happy weekend,

yoram

 

Comments ( 5 )

  • Gwen Hanson says:

    I liked it/subscribed/commented etc. Great stuff.
    One issue: CCL’s website reflects that one reason Australia’s carbon tax was repealed is that some of the $ raised by the tax went right back to the polluters to “ease their transition.” Is oil and gas supporting your plan for a similar reason? CCL renewed their determination to return 100% of money raised to individuals to assure the fee and dividend’s popularity and transparency. I don’t want one more penny of my income going to oil and gas.

  • jack schwager says:

    I totally share your enthusiasm for the carbon tax being the optimal solution, but the name is terrible for reason pointed out in Seattle Business editorial as to why cap and trade bill might have better chance even though less efficient solution. Semantics is why most people favor an “estate tax” but oppose “death tax” or why many of the same people that favor the ACA oppose Obamacare. By using the terminology “carbon tax,” the supporters of this idea are doing themselves a disservice. We need to take a lesson from the right about how to use labels that help, not hurt, our cause. We need to get “tax” label out of name or neutralized. Below are some possible alternative labels to “carbon tax”:
    *Tax neutral carbon reduction (better than equivalent “revenue neutral carbon tax,” which itself is much better than “carbon tax”)
    *Carbon tax transfer
    *Carbon funded tax reduction
    *Carbon tax funded tax reduction (accurate but too long)
    Maybe none of these are perfect but anything is better than labeling the plan a “tax.” “Carbon tax transfer” is only one word longer and might be short enough to catch on, although “tax neutral carbon reduction” might be better name. Maybe someone else can come up with better alternative than any of the ones above. My objective is simply to get carbon tax supporters to start using using a semantically more supportive (or at least less deleterious name). Such an name change could easily be the difference between success and failure in getting the desired bill on ballot and approved.

    • Yoram Bauman says:

      Happy to consider alternatives, but remember that we don’t write the ballot language: the secretary of state’s office does. We also don’t get to dictate how the media or advertising will talk about it, and I’m pretty sure they’ll call it a carbon tax.

      The good news is that the polling I’ve seen suggests that “carbon tax” is not the death knell you think it is. And our mission is to convince people that it’s good value of money.

    • Gwen Hanson says:

      “Carbon fee and dividend” is the term Citizens Climate Lobby uses. If Carbon WA adopts the same terminology then we can jointly benefit from publicity around that term.

      And regarding the B&O reductions going to oil and gas, I just don’t want to repeat the publicly fueled repeal they suffered in Australia.

Leave A Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *