Gathering Popular Backing for Government Climate Initiatives in the Era of Trump 2.0

Administrator -

The incoming Trump-led administration aims to dismANTLE federal climate policies like the Inflation Reduction Act. In response, California's Governor Newsom declared that the state is prepared to challenge federal deregulation, focusing on matters such as electric vehicle incentives. Financial constraints and potential public backlash to expensive new regulations could hinder state-level climate action. However, robust public support for state climate measures will emerge if citizens perceive these policies addressing their day-to-day issues and creating local benefits.

Enter carbon pricing, either through a carbon tax or cap-and-trade systems. Despite the U.S. lacking federal climate pricing, certain states have enacted cap-and-trade regulations, like Washington's 2021 Climate Commitment Act (CCA). Initially, Washington residents rejected carbon taxes in 2016 (Initiative 732) and 2018 (Initiative 1631). Surprisingly, after the CCA implementation, opponents attempted to repeal it in 2024 through a ballot initiative.

Attempts to Nullify the CCA

During recent elections, Let's Go Washington, spearheaded by Brian Heyworth, successfully proposed Initiative 2117 to abolish the CCA and dismANTLE carbon pricing. This group criticized the CCA for Washington's skyrocketing gas prices, among the highest nationwide. CCA supporters, however, emphasized the substantial revenues generated by the CCA (approximately $1 billion annually) trustfully funding local public goods, including a significant portion of the state's transportation budget.

Counterintuitive, Washington voters approved carbon pricing (rejecting I-2117) by an overwhelming 62-38% margin. This marked a dramatic shift from 2018, when voters rejected carbon pricing (I-1631) by a close 56-43% margin.

Gas prices pose challenges in rural areas (counties with less than 100 inhabitants per square mile) due to heavy dependence on personal vehicles. Did gas price concerns impact support for carbon pricing (boosting support for CCA's repeal) in rural areas?

Support for Carbon Pricing in Rural and Urban Regions

With the aid of Center for Environmental Politics Undergraduate Fellow Remi Vrilakas, we gathered county-level voting data (available here). We plot the vote shares for carbon pricing (“No” for I-2117 but “Yes” for I-1631) against both initiatives. The 45-degree line represents equal support for carbon pricing across both years. If support for carbon pricing was higher in 2024, the dots would be above the 45-degree line. Support for carbon pricing escalated in both rural (green dots) and urban (black dots) areas.

The graph below showcases the increase in support for carbon pricing by county (percentage vote against I-2117 – percentage vote for I-1631). Urban counties are depicted on the left, while rural counties are on the right. On average, there was an 19.8% point rise in urban counties and a 19.6% point surge in rural counties between 2018 and 2024.

What transpired? While in 2018, carbon pricing advocates highlighted the future benefits of carbon tax revenues, in 2024, they focused on existing local benefits from the “cap-and-invest” revenues, such as investments in transportation. Recall how the Affordable Care Act gained public favor after it was implemented, and citizens experienced its advantages. Similarly, the recognition of existing local benefits from the “cap-and-invest” revenues likely boosted support for carbon pricing in both urban and rural regions (leading to I-2117's defeat).

However, Why Did Initiative 2066 Succeed?

Let's Go Washington filed another anti-climate initiative, Initiative 2066, aiming to prevent state and local governments from limiting access to natural gas in buildings and homes. While Washington voters rejected I-2117 by a strong 62-38% margin, they supported I-2066 by a close 52-48% margin.

If voters solely focused on climate issues during the 2024 elections, the voting patterns on I-2117 and I-2066 would emerge similarly. However, they didn't. A portion of voters opposed to repealing the CCA (“No” on I-2117) endorsed I-2066 (sustained access to natural gas). This likely stemmed from a lack of perception of advantages from gas restrictions in terms of reduced household energy bills or diminished air pollution, as claimed by I-2066 opponents.

The graph below illustrates the disparity in pro-climate votes (percentage of voters who voted “No” on I-2117 – percentage who voted “No” on I-2066) across counties. On average, the difference between “No I-2117” and “No I-2066” is 12.4% points in urban counties and 9.2% points in rural counties. Hence, I-2066 received more support in both regions compared to I-2117.

The divided votes on these initiatives present a potent learning opportunity for climate communication. Rural voters are not inherently anti-climate. Like urban voters, they weigh policies based on local benefits and costs, with the advantage of the experienced ones versus the anticipated ones.

  1. Governor Newsom's climate strategy in California includes focusing on electric vehicle incentives, which is a direct response to the Trump administration's aims to dismantle federal climate policies like the Inflation Reduction Act.
  2. Despite the failure of carbon taxes in Washington in 2016 and 2018, the state implemented the Climate Commitment Act (CCA) in 2021, which aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
  3. California Governor Newsom's climate policy, often referred to as 'cap and invest' or 'cap and trade', has shown substantial success in generating revenue, which has been channeled towards funding local public goods and transportation projects.
  4. Contrary to expectations, efforts to repeal the Climate Commitment Act (CCA) through Initiative 2117 were met with resistance, as Washington voters approved carbon pricing by an overwhelming 62-38% margin.
  5. The Trump administration's stance on dismantling federal climate policies like the Inflation Reduction Act has prompted states like California to explore alternative climate policies, such as the 'i-2066' and 'i-2117' initiatives, to address climate change at the state level.

Read also: