When our state’s lieutenant governor, a Democrat, refers to a Democrat-sponsored bill as a “hot mess” — saying it for all to hear, while presiding in the Senate chamber — it gets your attention.
While that isn't a term we normally use when describing a policy proposal in public, it accurately described House Bill 1589. But as this legislation was part of the far-left crusade against natural gas, its supporters weren't deterred by criticism from the second-highest ranking Democrat in state government.
Republicans were outraged well before the lieutenant governor spoke up. We saw how HB 1589 was designed to ultimately force natural-gas customers in Lewis County and many other counties into all-electric homes, in a way that could eventually spread across Washington.
In fact, it was our analysis that uncovered the unconstitutional aspects of the bill and led the lieutenant governor to slap it with the “hot mess” label.
Senate Democrats rejected each of the nearly two-dozen amendments we offered to address the mess, then paused the debate. They came back the next day, replaced all the language in the bill and rammed it through on a partisan vote, with less than two weeks to go in the 2024 session.
Amazingly, that version still had serious constitutional issues, and Republicans told the majority Democrats as much. It didn’t matter. As passed by the House and signed by Gov. Jay Inslee, the anti-natural gas law remains a hot mess. The trouble is, challenging its constitutionality in court would take years.
If you'll pardon the pun, this shameless effort to clear the path for a natural-gas ban in our state really lit a fire under Washington voters. In just a handful of weeks, over 546,000 of them signed petitions to put Initiative 2066 on the general-election ballot.
There it joins the citizen initiatives to repeal the cap-and-tax law, the capital-gains income tax and the long-term care payroll tax.
Washington voters should pass all four, because each measure is a money-saver — but I-2066 is different. It has the added benefit of protecting those who use or prefer natural gas for heating and cooking from the extremists who want to inflict their hatred of gas on everyone else.
Supporters of the new law deny it has anything to do with banning natural gas in Washington. In the state voters’ guide, they also argue the initiative is “confusing.”
That’s nonsense. The choice presented by I-2066 is clear for families worried about how to afford gas for the car, food for the table and heat for the home, especially with summer behind us.
They can see this measure would protect them the same way as Initiative 2117, which would repeal the state’s cap-and-tax law — formally called the Climate Commitment Act (CCA). The CCA has made Washington’s gas prices among the highest in the nation, and much worse than the prices in Oregon and Idaho.
In fact, the bill targeting natural gas likely would never have existed if it wasn’t for the cap-and-tax law. They are cut from the same cloth.
For that reason, the passage of both I-2117 and I-2066 would give Washington lawmakers incentive to think more about household budgets and less about appeasing special interests and billionaire donors when considering future carbon-related policies.
No one should fall for the opponents' argument — again, quoting from the state voters guide — that the law guarantees people “can have natural gas if they want it.”
If no one would be banned from using gas, why did anyone bother to calculate that the statewide cost of being forced to convert from gas to electricity is estimated at $7.3 billion to $10.5 billion? That fact, which emerged during the legislative debate, refers just to the residential customers who would pay the bill. It gets worse when you add in commercial users.
Specifically, the Building Industry Association of Washington estimated the cost to electrify a single home will range from $30,700 to $74,400, depending on what all needs to be replaced. The older the home, the higher the cost.
Considering the yearly income in the legislative district I serve ranges from $65,500 to $82,800, depending on the county, that could cripple a family's finances. Most homeowners also wouldn't be eligible for financial assistance to help defray the cost.
It's fair to also question whether our power grid can handle the demand of forced electrification. Gas appliances can be lifesavers when it's cold and the power goes out.
Unless I-2066 is passed, the day will come when the phase-out of local gas service can happen one neighborhood or community at a time, with the state Utilities and Transportation Commission doing the rubber-stamping.
If you can't imagine the commission doing such a thing, let's recall how in 2023 it prohibited the state’s largest utility from adding a line item to customers' bills that would disclose the added cost of complying with the cap-and-tax law. That muzzling was blessed by none other than Attorney General Bob Ferguson’s office.
The arguments Republicans made when the anti-natural gas bill was being debated still hold true. They include how Democrats have turned the idea of utility regulation upside down.
Ideally, state regulation of utilities promotes efficiency while protecting customers from excessive costs. That's why utilities must submit their proposed rate increases to the UTC, for example.
Under the law that would be repealed by I-2066, the UTC could effectively put the excessive costs of complying with the cap-and-tax law on customers, protecting the utilities instead.
The best ad for I-2066 may be a mid-January post on X. It was from Democratic state Sen. Emily Randall, who is seeking a promotion to Congress this fall from Kitsap County.
The post shows stocking feet warming in front of what is obviously a gas fireplace. The caption explains how a power outage caused her furnace to quit on a cold day, and expresses her gratitude for gas fireplaces.
Several weeks later, she helped pass the anti-natural gas bill. So much for being grateful.
People should be able to keep their gas fireplaces and any other gas appliances, if they choose. This law represents the worst kind of special-interest, anti-consumer policy. Democrats went way too far with it, but the voters can and should set things right.
Vote yes on I-2066. Pay less.
•••
Sen. John Braun of Centralia serves the 20th Legislative District, which spans parts of four counties from Yelm to Vancouver. He became Senate Republican leader in 2020.
