Washington Supreme Court Doesn’t “Get It”

The Sept 18th Seattle Time  article “State’s high court kills natural gas initiative”, I-2066, exemplifies the state Supreme Court’s appeasing those concerned with the state’s global warming.  While several states and municipalities have passed rules prohibiting local bans on natural gas, the Climate Lab, the paper’s project that “explores the effects of climate change in the Pacific Northwest and beyond,” heralded the result.

The article claims the industry proposal to reject the initiative was “deceptively engineered with special interest dollars”.  Yet the Supreme Court “killed the initiative” not because it was “deceptive” but  because six of the nine judges ruled that it violated the state’s single-subject rule, which is intended to protect against “logrolling,” or when a law combines several different proposals to garner support — although a voter may not individually approve of all changes. 

 

 I-2066 included the following:

 Every gas company or large combination utility shall provide natural gas to all persons and corporations in their service area even if other energy sources may be available

 

A "yes" I-2066 vote  supported the following:

Prohibiting state and local governments from restricting access to natural gas;

Prohibiting the state building code council from discouraging or penalizing the use of natural gas in any building;

Requiring gas companies and utility companies, or any cities or towns that provide natural gas, to provide natural gas to any person or corporation even if other energy services or energy sources may be available; 

Prohibiting the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission from approving any multiyear rate plan requiring or incentivizing a natural gas company or utility company to terminate natural gas service or implementing requirements that would make access to natural gas service cost-prohibitive.

A "no" I-2066 vote opposed prohibiting laws and policies that would prohibit, restrict, or discourage natural gas usage.

 

One wonders what the six judges thought which part of I-2066 was “log rolling”. Those doing so weren’t named in the paper.  Recent Seattle Times front page articles have warned of the need for additional energy and PSE’s plan to use natural gas to fill a major part of that need.  The article announcing the high court’s decision only merited a A10 page article. Seattle voters who apparently rejected I-2066, approved Prop 1 and ST3 in 2016 are still waiting for light rail extensions currently scheduled for 2036. 

 

The bottom line is the Washington Supreme Court’s decision to kill I-2066 demonstrates their failure to understand the world we live in and will hopefully be quickly reversed.