Gov. Jay Inslee signs SB 1050, one of three climate priority bills, including SB 5126 and HB 1091, at Shoreline Community College, May 17, with supporters surrounding him. The triple-bill signing lays out the state’s strategy for combating carbon emissions. (Steve Ringman / The Seattle Times via Associated Press)

Gov. Jay Inslee signs SB 1050, one of three climate priority bills, including SB 5126 and HB 1091, at Shoreline Community College, May 17, with supporters surrounding him. The triple-bill signing lays out the state’s strategy for combating carbon emissions. (Steve Ringman / The Seattle Times via Associated Press)

Editorial: Inslee’s partial vetoes threat to lawmakers’ work

The governor’s desire for due speed on climate issues is laudable; his executive overreach is not.

By The Herald Editorial Board

Gov. Jay Inslee’s recent signing of legislation should ensure major advances toward lowering carbon emissions and limiting the march of climate change — achievement of a signature issue for him — but his partial vetoes of subjects and provisions in three bills aren’t clearing the air between him and state lawmakers, even those from his own party.

And that could smog the future for not only the climate legislation but for other priorities that will follow in coming sessions.

This week and last Inslee signed a raft of climate and environmental policy and law, legislation that was either requested or supported by the governor’s office. Among the bills signed into law:

Senate Bill 5126, intended to reduce carbon dioxide to net zero emissions by 2050, institutes a cap-and-invest program that will require major polluters, particularly oil refineries, to buy credits for each ton of carbon dioxide they release. The number of credits issued each year would decline over time, resulting in higher prices for the credits and more revenue and encouraging reductions in emissions and an eventual phase-out of the use of fossil fuels for transportation.

House Bill 1091 directly limits carbon emissions through a low-carbon fuel standard, similar to programs already in place in California, Oregon and British Columbia. The program would establish a trading system where deficits for carbon-intensive petroleum fuels could be offset by a range of less-polluting fuels such as ethanol and bio-diesel; hydrogen for fuel cells; and the promotion of electric vehicles and development of the roadside charging stations to power them.

House Bill 1287 addressing electric vehicles, requires the state Department of Commerce to develop and maintain a map of publicly available electric charging stations while forecasting future needs; requires private and public electric utilities to plan for increased demand as the number of electric vehicles on the road grows; and would have set a goal to require that all new cars and light-duty trucks sold in the state as of 2030 be electric or zero-emission.

Each of those was signed into law, but with some significant deletions, partial vetoes that Inslee said were necessary to remove potential obstacles that could have delayed or prevented their adoption.

Both the cap-and-trade and low-carbon fuel standard had been — during consideration in the Legislature — tied to a provision sought by lawmakers, including Sen. Steve Hobbs, D-Lake Stevens, chairman of the Senate Transportation Committee. Hobbs, for three years running, has sought the adoption of a major transportation package that most recently included up to $17.8 billion in spending and also outlined new taxes, fees and bonding.

While Hobbs’ package proposed a nearly 10-cent a gallon increase to the gas tax, the provision agreed to by majorities in the House and Senate — the one that was tied to the two bills — required passage of a transportation package and a gas tax increase of at least five cents a gallon by the bills’ effective date of 2023.

Inslee removed that provision, clearing both cap-and-trade and the fuels standard to take effect in 2023, regardless of whether a transportation package and a gas tax increase were approved.

In the same fashion, Inslee struck a section in the electric vehicle legislation that removed the goal for electric vehicle sales, because it would have required that — by 2030 — 75 percent of vehicles licensed in the state be assessed a per-mile road-usage charge, seen as an alternative to the state’s gas tax. Again Inslee’s office said the transition to electric vehicles was too important to link to the Legislature’s uncertain passage of a new transportation revenue source.

But the partial vetoes — at least for the cap-and-trade and fuel standard bills — drew loud objections from leaders in the House and Senate, particularly Democrats, citing what they saw as executive overreach by the governor.

Inslee, constitutionally, can veto bills outright and can even veto sections of bills, as he did with the electric vehicle legislation; what he can’t do, legislators stressed, is eliminate individual provisions, essentially a line-item veto.

Inslee’s use of a line-item veto is already being challenged; he lost last year in Thurston County Superior Court over his vetoes of separate sentences in transportation legislation from 2019; the state Supreme Court is expected to hear arguments in that case in June.

Now the governor faces new threats of lawsuit by legislators, many of whom are on the same page as he is environmentally in supporting the climate legislation but are rightfully choking on Inslee’s attempts to scuttle crafted compromise and rewrite legislation.

In clearing the way for the legislation Inslee sought, he could complicate the state’s legislative process on these and other priorities, as is clear from lawmakers’ reactions:

“The Legislature is responsible for drafting laws and the executive branch is responsible for implementing them. … The governor’s partial veto today of … the clean fuel standard bill, reaches beyond his constitutional powers,” said House Majority Leader Laurie Jinkins, D-Tacoma.

“Whatever the reason, his subsection veto today is illegal. That alone says a lot about why our political system has checks and balances on one-person rule,” said Senate Minority Leader John Braun, R-Centralia.

“This sets a chilling precedent and poisons the well for all future negotiations on virtually any tough issue,” state Sen. Mark Mullet, D-Issaquah, said in a statement. “When it comes to the governor’s top priorities in the future, he should expect a more hostile Legislature if this is the path he wishes to take.”

That the Washington state Legislature often has taken its sweet time on statewide priorities is well understood; it took 11 years and a mandate from the state Supreme Court to get the Legislature to meet its constitutional duty to amply fund public education.

But the deadlines the Legislature essentially set for itself in all three bills were not unrealistic. A transportation package had significant support this session. And eight years would allow time to begin phasing in a road-usage charge, especially starting with electric vehicles themselves, which currently pay only a flat rate that in many cases may not fairly assess their share of infrastructure costs.

Inslee’s desire for all due speed on climate solutions is understandable; laudable even. But in attempting to use a tool he does not possess Inslee is jeopardizing legislation now and in the future, not only for climate but for transportation and all state priorities.

The governor does have one option that could more quickly reach resolution on these issues, one that he considered as recently as last month and one that could be key to federal funding: Call the Legislature into special session to adopt a transportation package. Doing that is in his constitutional toolbox.

Talk to us

More in Opinion

Editorial cartoons for Sunday, Aug. 14

A sketchy look at the news of the day.… Continue reading

The COVID-19 ward at Providence Regional Medical Center Everett in May 2020. (Andy Bronson / Herald file) 20200519
Editorial: Nurses and hospitals need our care, support now

The pandemic has taken a toll on Providence and its nurses. Changes are needed to restore all.

Armed Secret Service agents stand outside an entrance to former President Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate, late Monday, Aug. 8, 2022, in Palm Beach, Fla. Trump said in a lengthy statement that the FBI was conducting a search of his Mar-a-Lago estate and asserted that agents had broken open a safe. (AP Photo/Terry Renna)
Viewpoints: The struggle over Trump’s White House records

The U.S. public is owed a full accounting of presidential history; missing records steal from that history.

Comment: WGU marks 25-year tradition of breaking traditions

The online higher-ed degree program counts more than 265,000 alumni who have reached their goals.

State’s red-flag law needs greater visibility among public

The article on the use of Washington state’s extreme risk protection order,… Continue reading

Mural’s creativity should have been preserved

Regarding the mural that was painted over: (“Everett building owner asks graffiti… Continue reading

Base your vote on democracy and climate solutions

The election coming up this November is crucial. There are many significant… Continue reading

August 14, 2022: Closing In
Editorial cartoons for Saturday, Aug. 13

A sketchy look at the news of the day.… Continue reading

Melinda Parke sits inside her Days Inn motel room as her son, Elijah, sleeps on his chair behind her Wednesday, April 20, 2022, in Everett, Washington. (Ryan Berry / The Herald)
Editorial: Purchase of hotel as shelter can be effective tool

The county’s investment of federal aid will serve those who need shelter and supportive services.

Most Read