Washington State - Following California's Lead with the Same Results
- Rex Ballard
- Jan 11
- 8 min read
Opinion Piece - Washington's Climate Commitment Act: A Tale of False Promises, Negligible Benefits, and Economic Devastation
A recent Emerson College poll determined that 56% of California residents are considering leaving the state. If you're one of the fed up residents who are considering taking the next step -- maybe considering a move to the beautiful Pacific Northwest -- maybe Washington state, you better read this article and hold off putting that deposit down on a place.
As of January 2026, Washington's Climate Commitment Act (CCA), enacted in 2021, stands as one of the most ambitious—and controversial—environmental policies in the United States. Designed as a cap-and-invest program, it auctions carbon allowances to large emitters, aiming to reduce greenhouse gas emissions while generating revenue for clean energy projects, habitat restoration, and community resilience initiatives. Proponents, including former Governor Jay Inslee, hailed it as a model for combating climate change, promising substantial emissions cuts, economic benefits, and protections against environmental threats like flooding—all at minimal cost to consumers.
However, five years in, the CCA has become a symbol of government overreach and inefficiency. Recent revelations, including a staggering data error in the state's 2025 investments report, have exposed inflated claims of success. Billions in revenue have been collected, but verifiable benefits remain elusive, while the economic toll on residents and businesses mounts. This article examines the CCA's false promises, its delivery of negligible environmental gains, and the cascading economic fallout, drawing on official reports, audits, lawsuits, and public discourse. It also highlights how Washington followed California's lead in adopting progressive climate regulations, only to suffer a similar disastrous fate marked by high costs, questionable effectiveness, and population exodus.
Following California's Lead: A Disaster Movie We've Already Seen
Washington's CCA is not an isolated experiment; it was explicitly modeled after California's cap-and-trade program, which has been in place since 2013 and serves as a blueprint for market-based emissions reduction. State officials, including those from the Department of Ecology, have pursued linkage with California's system (and Québec's) to align markets and share allowances, emphasizing the CCA's roots in proven frameworks. Yet, this emulation has replicated California's pitfalls: soaring energy costs passed onto consumers, affordability crises, and negligible global climate impact amid rising out-migration.
California's program, while praised for generating revenue (over $20 billion since inception), has faced sharp criticism for driving up fuel prices—adding upward pressure through carbon allowance costs that emitters pass directly to residents. Affordability concerns have dominated renewal debates, with climate-fueled cost increases injecting political tension and threatening the program's extension beyond 2030. Recent revenue shortfalls of $1.8 billion highlight market volatility, while falling carbon prices (from $40s to lower levels) undermine incentives for deep reductions. Environmental justice advocates argue it perpetuates risks to front line communities, allowing polluters to offset emissions without local improvements. These issues mirror Washington's experience, where high gas prices (third-highest nationally) and data inflation scandals erode trust.
Beyond cap-and-trade, Washington has followed California's progressive playbook in other areas, yielding similar negative outcomes. For instance, both states have adopted stringent vehicle emissions standards, with Washington mirroring California's 2035 ban on new gas-powered car sales in 2022. This has contributed to California's grid strain and rolling blackouts from over-reliance on renewables, foreshadowing potential energy reliability issues in Washington amid rising EV mandates and insufficient infrastructure. Progressive policies on homelessness, drug decriminalization, and crime have also backfired in both: California's leniency has exacerbated urban decay, overdoses, and disorder, trends echoed in Washington's rising crime and homelessness despite increased spending. High minimum wages and labor regulations, pioneered in California, have led to business closures and job losses there, with Washington experiencing parallel inflationary pressures and outmigration. As one analysis notes, these "progressive" approaches have threatened a new era of urban dysfunction, with California serving as a cautionary tale that Washington has ignored at its peril.
False Promises: Overhyped Benefits and Underestimated Costs
From its inception, the CCA was marketed with bold assurances that have largely unraveled. Proponents claimed it would deliver transformative environmental progress without burdening everyday Washingtonians. Yet, evidence shows a pattern of exaggeration and unfulfilled commitments.
One core promise was affordability. Inslee and supporters asserted the program would add mere "pennies" to consumer costs, with potential reductions in energy prices through efficiency incentives. In reality, the CCA has driven up gasoline prices by 40-57 cents per gallon, making Washington the third-highest in the nation. Natural gas and utility rates have also risen, with customers facing monthly increases of $1.35 to $5.45 from compliance charges. Critics, including the Washington Policy Center (WPC), argue this constitutes a regressive "hidden tax" that disproportionately hits low-income households.
Another key pledge was significant, verifiable emissions reductions. The 2025 CCA Investments Report initially touted nearly 9 million metric tons of cuts from $1.5 billion in spending—equivalent to removing 40% of the state's vehicles from roads for a year. However, this was debunked as a "data entry error" by the Department of Commerce, overstating reductions by a factor of 96x (9,500%). The corrected figure for eight key programs dropped from 7.5 million tons to just 78,000 tons, affecting 86% of the report's total claims. WPC's Todd Myers flagged the issue within hours of the report's release, calling it "nonsense" and evidence of systemic sloppiness.
Proponents also vowed robust protections against climate-amplified disasters like flooding. Yet, only 0.5% ($7.1 million) of the $1.5 billion spent went to flood prevention—mostly on staffing and planning, not infrastructure. This pales against $16 million allocated to "bicycle education" programs with no claimed emissions impact. Recent floods, which damaged homes and highways, underscore the gap: communities remain vulnerable despite billions collected.
Sector-specific exemptions, such as for agriculture, were promised but never materialized, leading groups like the Washington Farm Bureau to advocate for repeal. Overall, the CCA's transparency has been undermined by lawsuits over omitted emissions data for 2022-2023, violating public records laws and fueling distrust.
Public sentiment on platforms like X reflects frustration, with users labeling the CCA a "scam" and "unaccountable slush fund." One post highlighted questionable grants, like $175,000 for a "living wage" in a poverty tract, suggesting misuse.
Negligible Benefits: Billions Spent, Minimal Impact
Despite raising over $4 billion since 2023, the CCA's environmental returns are underwhelming. The corrected 2025 report shows total reductions at around 1.2 million tons—14% of initial claims—with costs per ton soaring to $395, far exceeding the $70.86 carbon tax rate and the federal social cost of carbon ($99). Only 23% of projects claim any emissions cuts, and 70% focus on unquantifiable "co-benefits" like community health or equity.
Statewide emissions tracking remains opaque. The Department of Ecology faced lawsuits for delaying reports and omitting data, with critics arguing this hides whether emissions are actually declining amid rising costs. Globally, Washington's efforts are dwarfed: China's daily emissions offset the state's annual reductions in under a week.
Audits reveal further inefficiencies, such as non-compliance in grant funding and outdated performance dashboards. Proponents point to investments in clean energy and air quality, but as one X user noted, "The ROI has been impossible to quantify, deliberately so." The program's defenders, like the Environmental Defense Fund, emphasize long-term potential, but current data suggests minimal progress toward net-zero by 2050.
Economic Fallout: Hidden Taxes, Outmigration, and Deficits
The CCA's costs extend far beyond the pump, creating a ripple effect that exacerbates Washington's affordability crisis and drives out-migration—much like California's experience under similar regulations.
Direct impacts include $4 billion+ in "hidden taxes," equating to about $650 per household annually. Gasoline prices have surged, adding $700 per driver since inception. Secondary effects amplify this: With 70-80% of food and goods imported, higher fuel costs for trucking (20-35% of operations) inflate groceries by 1-4%, adding $200-500 yearly per household. Agriculture faces 5-10% input hikes, further raising local produce prices by 2-5%.
Utilities and manufacturing costs have risen 1-3% annually, adding $100-300 to household bills and $200-500 to consumer goods. Transportation beyond personal vehicles—public transit, ride-sharing—could see 5-10% fare increases by 2026. Overall, these contribute to $2-4 billion in economic drag statewide, with potential job losses of 10,000-30,000 in carbon-intensive sectors.
Out-migration is a stark symptom, paralleling California's exodus driven by high taxes and regulations. Washington ranks 43rd nationally in net taxpayer retention, losing one every 30 minutes. Since the 2021 capital gains tax (compounded by CCA burdens), over 13,300 high-income households ($200,000+ Average Gross Income) have fled, draining $3.9 billion in AGI in 2022 alone. Businesses are following: 16,000 have left in five years, with giants like Amazon, Costco, and Microsoft warning of further exodus amid new tax proposals. The state tumbled to 45th in the 2026 Tax Competitiveness Index, fueling deficits projected at $10-14 billion— a reversal from $19 billion surpluses pre-CCA.
Rural and working-class residents are hit hardest, with higher costs forcing trade-offs in essentials. As one X post lamented, "They lied about the CCA... and there is nothing to show for it except rich politicians and decaying infrastructure."
Public Backlash and Calls for Reform
Reactions from experts and citizens are damning. Media outlets like MyNorthwest and the Seattle Times have spotlighted the errors, with op-eds calling for audits. On X, terms like "fraud" and "grift" dominate, with users decrying 40 years of one-party rule leading to un-affordability and mismanagement.
Conclusion: A Cautionary Tale for Climate Policy
The CCA exemplifies how well-intentioned policies can falter under poor execution and lack of accountability—especially when blindly following California's troubled path. False promises have eroded trust, negligible benefits have squandered billions, and economic fallout threatens Washington's prosperity. With incoming Governor Bob Ferguson proposing re-allocations, now is the time for independent audits, transparent tracking, and potential reforms—or repeal. Without change, the CCA risks becoming a blueprint for failure, where ideology trumps results, and citizens pay the price.
Sources:
Articles and Reports
A 7.5-million-ton mistake about the benefits of the Climate Commitment Act (KIRO 7, January 7, 2026) - Details the recent data error overstating emissions reductions. Link
Welch: State's climate act failing to deliver on promises (HeraldNet, December 24, 2025) - Opinion piece on the CCA's shortcomings under Gov. Inslee. Link
WA Policy Center uncovers massive error in CCA report (MyNorthwest, January 7, 2026) - Coverage of the 7.5-million-ton error and its implications. Link
Washington state officials vastly overstated emission reductions from climate law (The Spokesman-Review, January 7, 2026) - Report on the data entry error and overstated benefits. Link
WA overestimates climate law's emission reductions by a long shot (The Seattle Times, January 7, 2026) - Analysis of the CCA as a potential "slush fund" with ineffective results. Link
Data entry error 'significantly inflated' impact of Climate Commitment Act (KNKX, January 8, 2026) - Discussion of reduced effectiveness due to the error. Link
Legislature Falls Short on Community Climate Commitments in 2023-2025 Budget (Front and Centered, September 21, 2023) - Critique of unfulfilled promises in climate investments. Link
WA Dept. of Commerce corrects climate report data after error vastly overstated emission cuts (KING 5, January 6, 2026) - Official response to the emissions overstatement. Link
Regressive Burden: WA's Climate Act Taxes the Working Class (Post Alley, October 5, 2024) - Economic critique of the CCA's regressive impacts. Link
New report details $1.5 billion in Climate Commitment Act investments (Washington Department of Ecology, November 26, 2025) - Official report on spending (pre-error correction). Link
State CO2 report shows 86% of Washington's claimed climate benefits are probably fake (Washington Policy Center, January 6, 2026) - In-depth analysis of the data flaws. Link
Economic impacts (Washington Department of Ecology) - Official estimates of the CCA's economic effects (1-3% overall impact). Link
New report shows massive economic impact of CCA (Clean & Prosperous Washington, September 18, 2024) - Pro-CCA view on job creation (45,000 jobs projected). Link
New modeling shows the power and potential of cap-and-invest in Washington State (Environmental Defense Fund, October 15, 2024) - Supportive modeling of economic and environmental gains. Link
Jobs and Economic Benefits in Washington State (Greenline Insights) - Analysis projecting $9.1 billion in economic output. Link
State's Climate Act Isn't Worth Price We're Paying (Discovery Institute, August 12, 2023) - Critique of economic hardships from higher energy prices. Link
Mapping Washington's Climate Commitments: Home (Clean & Prosperous Institute, May 30, 2024) - Overview of the CCA's structure and goals. Link
Lawmakers sue WA agencies over failure to release climate data (Washington Examiner, October 2, 2025) - Lawsuit over transparency issues in emissions data. Link
Following Defeat in California, Wood Pellet Industry Eyes Pacific Northwest (Earth Island Journal) - Discussion of failed policies migrating from CA to WA. Link
YouTube Videos (Relevant Critiques)
Washington state admits its carbon reduction data was off by 9500% (unDivided with Brandi Kruse, January 8, 2026) - The original video analyzing the data inflation scandal. Link
Errors were found in Washington's CO2 report (KIRO Seattle, January 8, 2026) - News segment on the CO2 reporting errors. Link
Washington and California drivers should brace for runaway gas prices (unDivided with Brandi Kruse, November 13, 2024) - Critique linking WA and CA gas price hikes due to climate policies. Link
