WA HB1084 Will Ban Natural Gas/Propane in New Home Construction

In Washington state, House Bill 1084 would “eliminate on-site fossil fuel combustion for space heating and water heating” in new construction in order to reduce climate impacts. Lawmakers are seeking to replace other gas appliances as well.

OPB reports in Goodbye, gas heat? Proposals in Washington state seek to phase out fossil fuel heating in buildings

A long goodbye to natural gas furnaces and water heating — and possibly other gas appliances — could begin with action by the Washington Legislature this winter. Separately, the Seattle City Council this week begins consideration of a similar proposal to eliminate fossil fuel-based heating in new commercial buildings.

“Buildings are one of our state’s most significant and fastest growing sources of carbon pollution. We must do better — and we can do better,” testified Michael Furze, head of the state energy office, on behalf of Democratic Gov. Jay Inslee.

Natural gas utilities and major business associations spoke against the state legislative proposal during an initial public hearing on Friday. The opponents said they want to preserve consumer choice and questioned whether the Pacific Northwest electric grid could handle a big increase in winter heating load.

In December, Inslee unveiled a package of measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, including this proposal to phase out natural gas for space and water heating. As initially conceived, Washington state would have forbidden use of fossil fuels for heating and hot water in new buildings by 2030. The plan sought to convert existing buildings to electric heat by 2050.

The scope of the measure was revised earlier this month when Inslee’s allies in the state legislature introduced identical proposals in the House and Senate to amend the state energy code. The 2030 date to ban heating with fossil fuels in new construction remains. There is no mandate to convert existing buildings from gas to electric heat, but an expectation that utilities will offer incentives for conversions.

Buildings account for the second biggest share of carbon pollution in Washington, after transportation, largely due to gas furnaces and water heaters such as these.
Buildings account for the second biggest share of carbon pollution in Washington, after transportation, largely due to gas furnaces and water heaters such as these.

Tom Banse / NW News Network

“If we don’t start with clean new buildings, we’re going to be bailing water out of a boat while we’re still drilling holes in the bottom of it,” said state Rep. Alex Ramel (D-Bellingham), the prime sponsor in the House. “That’s why we need to accelerate and strengthen our state’s energy code.”

The legislation is silent about use of natural gas for cooking and clothes dryers. In an interview, Ramel said lawmakers want to transition those appliances to clean energy as well. However, the details may be worked out later between natural gas utilities and regulators at the state utilities commission.

During the well-attended virtual public hearing before the state House Environment and Energy Committee, Cascade Natural Gas, Puget Sound Energy and the utility trade group Northwest Gas Association raised objections.

“[This bill] would jeopardize energy reliability, drive up costs to customers and put gas industry employees across Washington out of work,” said Alyn Spector, energy efficiency policy manager for Cascade Natural Gas. “This is not the time to eliminate good paying jobs.”

Business lobbying groups, including the influential Association of Washington Business and the home builders’ Building Industry Association of Washington, also voiced their opposition.

“As we saw this summer in California, we cannot take a healthy grid for granted and losses from even short-lived interruption of power supply can run into the billions,” said Peter Godlewski with AWB. “Shifting consumers and businesses away from natural gas to electricity puts severe pressure on the electric grid as a time when we’re retiring more generating capacity than ever.”

At this juncture it is hard to gauge the prospects for the gas heat phaseout proposal. Inslee, who made combating climate change a central plank of his brief run for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2020, has the benefit of large, supportive Democratic majorities in both chambers of the state legislature. But the capacity of lawmakers to get much done beyond the basics of passing new state budgets and dealing with the coronavirus pandemic while conducting most business virtually remains to be seen.

Meanwhile, an assortment of West Coast cities are tackling carbon pollution from buildings independently. Around 40 climate-conscious California cities and counties have already passed laws or codes to require new buildings to be all-electric.

Later this week, the Seattle City Council begins consideration of an ordinance to ban the use of fossil fuels for heating in new commercial and large apartment buildings. The proposed policy change does not apply to single family homes and duplexes because the city’s energy code that is open for amendment pertains only to commercial buildings. The effective date of Jan. 1, 2022, is much sooner than the state legislature’s proposal in the same vein.

“In Seattle, 35 percent of carbon emissions are from the building sector and they are rising,” Seattle Office of Sustainability and Environment Director Jessica Finn Coven told state legislators in testimony Friday. “Constructing homes and buildings right the first time reduces the likelihood of costly retrofits in the future.”

The Bellingham City Council has also teed up electrification of buildings as part of a broader climate action package. In an email, Bellingham City Council member Michael Lilliquist said the pandemic had slowed down the work, but it is proceeding. He said city staff were running all of the proposed climate measures through a rigorous, multi-step evaluation process.

“We are not yet at the stage to offer specifics that can be incorporated into an ordinance or program,” Lilliquist said.

Washington Policy Center: U-Haul’s yearly move-out report shows surge of people leaving Washington state

According to the Washington Policy Center U-Haul’s yearly move-out report shows surge of people leaving Washington state.

British historian Thomas Macaulay famously said, “The best government is one that desires to make the people happy, and knows how to make  them happy.”

That standard is clearly not what people are experiencing in Washington state.  For years leaders in state government have been increasing the tax burden and imposing ever-tighter regulations that limit personal opportunity, lower household incomes, and fall hardest on working people, middle-class families and small business owners.  On top of that statewide trend, Washington recently experienced deadly political violence in its largest city, accompanied by rising crime, public camping and drug use, and similar signs of widespread lawlessness.

We all know that bad government makes people want to leave, but how does one measure that exactly?  One method is to use U.S. Census estimates.  Another is to track income tax filings with the IRS.  For independent researchers, however, these government sources include flaws and are often out of date.

There is one data source, though, showing where people are moving that is highly accurate and reported in near-real time; U-Haul rentals.  Because rented trucks, trailers and moving vans have to be returned locally after use, U-Haul knows exactly where its customers are moving to, and just as importantly, from what states they are fleeing.

And because it is the largest do-it-yourself mover, this private company is in the best position to reflect current national trends.  To preserve the privacy of its customers, U-Haul only reports anonymous aggregate data, never personal information.

The latest annual report from U-Haul on some two million, one-way household moves in 2020 shows Washington dropping precipitously from the coveted number five spot as most desired place to live all the way down to number 36.  That position of unpopularity is not as bad as California’s, at number 50, but it is a long way from top-ranked Tennessee, Texas and Florida as the most-sought destinations for one-way U-Haul movers.

The three most popular states on the list have one good policy factor in common; none of them impose a tax on personal income.  Washington state has the same advantage, which is likely the single greatest reason our state hasn’t seen even more people move away.

Still, to fall 31 places in one year is no compliment and reflects the fact that, in a year that was tough on everyone, people in Washington had it tougher than most.  The governor’s emergency executive orders, issued in March, remain firmly in place, with little sign of wider economic opening, easing of social restrictions or a return to normal public school operations (although most private schools have managed to open and operate under social-distancing restrictions).

The result is an economic and emotional strain that feels worse every passing week.  While other states and even whole countries are progressively opening their economies with health guidelines, Washington, California and others remain in a limited lock-down.

When health conditions improve and COVID restrictions are over things will undoubtedly improve, but our underlying high-tax, high-regulation governing policies will remain.  The health crisis is temporary, but with the structural burden of poor governance Washington is likely to continue to fall down the list, until one day we may earn the unhappy distinction of becoming the number one place people want to leave.

Of course our elected leaders hopefully will choose a better path, building on our having no income tax, the natural beauty of our region and our friendly communities to add more good reasons for people to move to, instead of away from, the Evergreen State.

CSG: Washington State Constitution Level 200 – Introduction | January 26, 2021

Washington State Constitution Level 200 – Introduction | January 26, 2021


Washington State Constitution – Level 200

In C200, you will discover the distribution of your legislative power, the structure of your legislative branch or department, who has control of your legislative power, what controls your legislators have, and how your legislative branch functions.

Instructor Mark Herr
Materials Needed Pencil, Paper, Enthusiasm, Sweater/jacket as facility temperatures can be unpredictable
Location ONLINE
Date January 26, 2021
Time 6:00 pm – 8:00 pm PST
Type Of Training LIVE-ONLINE

Click here for registration information.

KREM2: Spokane Valley Reps introduce bill to create ‘Liberty State’ in Eastern Washington

This article comes from KREM2 – Spokane Valley Reps introduce bill to create ‘Liberty State’ in Eastern Washington

Two Representatives to the State legislature out of Spokane Valley introduced a bill on Monday to create “Liberty State,” which would separate Eastern and Western Washington.

Liberty State’s western border would be along the “crest of the Cascade mountains and the western 8 borders of Okanogan, Chelan, Kittitas, Yakima, and Klickitat counties,” according to the bill. The eastern, northern and southern borders would remain the same.

The bill also outlines transition committees that would aid in the new state’s creation and set up representation for the new government.

Representatives Bob McCaslin and Rob Chase wrote the bill…

Both the Washington State Legislature and Congress would have to approve of the creation of the new state.


From libertystate.org:

The Liberty State Movement is an effort to create a new state from Washington State based upon political and geographic lines. Since the formation of Washington State in 1889, people of the eastern and rural parts of Washington State have felt separate from the western capitol in Olympia. As our economies and beliefs grew in separate directions, the chasm has deepened and left Western Washington holding all of the political representation, with little regard or accountability to eastern residents. The current proposal to create Liberty State would draw the boundary down the Cascade Crest. Those counties to the west would remain Washington State, and those counties to the east would be a new state…

Recently, the state legislature has shown a willingness to operate without regard for the powers given, or rights protected in, the Washington State or United States Constitution. The east side is predominantly rural and the west is predominantly urban, with vastly different cultures. There is nothing wrong with either. However, this population disparity has allowed the urban majority to determine nearly every vote. Thus, the rural side of the state is failing to be represented on every major issue in the last thirty years. On the other side, legislation dear to the urban majority has been hampered to the consternation of many in Seattle. Tax limitations have been passed, also hampering mass transit and raising the ire of many in the urban core. The Founders believed that the best representation was closest to the people. Indeed, with a new state, both east and west would be better represented.

King 5: Gov. Inslee Bans Indoor Gatherings and Further COVID Restrictions

From King 5 News on Nov. 15, 2020 – Governor Inslee announces closures of indoor dining, other restrictions to curb COVID-19

Gov. Jay Inslee has announced new statewide restrictions to help curb the spread of the coronavirus, which includes closing indoor service for restaurants and bars and prohibiting indoor social gatherings.

These rules will mostly go into effect on Monday at 11:59 p.m. and will remain in effect until Dec. 14.

The announcement comes following days of increasing COVID-19 cases.

The impacted industries/areas are:

  • The biggest impact will be the closure of indoor dining at restaurants and bars. Outdoor dining and to-go service is permitted. Outdoor dining must follow the outdoor dining restriction. Table size limited to 5 for outdoor dining. These restaurant restrictions go into effect at 12:01 a.m. Wednesday, Nov. 18.
  • In-store retail limited to 25% indoor occupancy and must close any common/congregate non-food-related seating areas. Food court indoor seating is closed.
  • Indoor social gatherings from people outside your household are prohibited and outdoor social gatherings should be limited to 5 people outside your household.
  • Fitness facilities and gyms are closed for indoor operations. Outdoor fitness classes may still occur but they are limited by the outdoor gathering restriction listed above.
  • Wedding and funerals receptions are prohibited. Ceremonies are limited to no more than 30 people.
  • All retail activities and business meetings are prohibited. Only professional training and testing that cannot be performed remotely is allowed. Occupancy in each meeting room is limited to 25% or 100 people, whichever is fewer.
  • Movie theaters are closed for indoor service. Drive-in movie theaters are still permitted and must follow the current drive-in movie theater guidance.
  • Religious services limited to 25% indoor occupancy no more than 200 people, whichever is fewer. No choir, band, or ensemble shall perform during the service.
  • Museums/Zoos/Aquariums are closed for indoor service.

During an 11 a.m. press conference, Inslee announced $50 million for aid to businesses who have been impacted.

Watch the press conference below or by clicking here.

NRA: WA Committee Public Hearings on Anti-gun Bills, Jan 29 & 31

From the NRA-ILA:

January 29th, 2020, the House Civil Rights and Judiciary Committee will be holding a public hearing on several anti-gun bills. Additionally, on Friday, January 31st, the committee is scheduled to vote on two gun control bills that were heard last week.

Please contact members of the House Civil Rights and Judiciary Committee and ask them to oppose these bills!

Today, the committee will hold a public hearing on the following bills:

January 29th, 8:00AM
John L. O’Brien Building, House Hearing Rm A
504 15th Ave SW
Olympia, WA 98501

House Bill 2305 imposes a mandatory firearm prohibition for respondents of a Vulnerable Adult Protective Order. This order, which removes someone’s Second Amendment rights for up to 5 years, requires no criminal convictions or even charges. Due process limits restrictions on constitutional rights to only serious convictions and adjudications that provide procedural protections to the accused, which results in more reliable proceedings. The Right to Keep and Bear Arms should not be treated as a second-class right and should only be restricted when sufficient protections are in place.

House Bill 2622 modifies Washington’s existing firearm surrender provisions for individuals subject to a court order. This bill compels a respondent to appear and testify, under oath, on how and to what extent they complied with the surrender order. This is a serious encroachment on the right against compelled self-incrimination in any criminal, civil, or other government proceedings. Failure to appear would result in the individual being in contempt of court, thereby putting the individual in a no-win situation.

House Bill 2623 prohibits an individual from possessing firearms if they are convicted of the misdemeanor crimes of unlawful aiming or discharge of a firearm. This poorly conceived legislation even applies to airguns and slingshots, and has no exceptions for an individual aiming or discharging a firearm for self-defense purposes in location that would have otherwise not be authorized.

On Friday, the committee is scheduled to vote on the following bills:

House Bill 2240 bans the manufacture, possession, sale, transfer, etc. of magazines that hold more than ten rounds of ammunition. This measure is strongly supported by the Governor and the Attorney General.

House Bill 1315 requires onerous government red tape and further training to obtain a Concealed Pistol License.

Again, please use the “Take Action” button above to contact committee members to voice your opposition.

WA Constitutional Amendment on Ballot for Continuity of Government

An amendment to the Washington State constitution will be on the ballot this November to expand government powers in the case of catastrophic incidents. Voters will have the opportunity to either approve or reject the proposed amendment. The measure was passed because of concerns with the effects of a Cascadian Subduction Zone (CSZ) large earthquake and the ability of the government to legally respond. The text of the amendment is as follows, modifying Section 42, Article II (Underlined text is added in the amendment. Strikethrough text is deleted.):

The legislature, in order to insure continuity of state and local governmental operations in periods of emergency resulting from a catastrophic incident or enemy attack, shall have the power and the duty, immediately upon and after adoption of this amendment, to enact legislation providing for prompt and temporary succession to the powers and duties of public offices of whatever nature and whether filled by election or appointment, the incumbents and legal successors of which may become unavailable for carrying on the powers and duties of such offices; the legislature shall likewise enact such other measures as may be necessary and proper for insuring the continuity of governmental operations during such emergencies. Legislation enacted under the powers conferred by this amendment shall in all respects conform to the remainder of the Constitution: Provided, That if, in the judgment of the legislature at the time of ((disaster)) the emergency, conformance to the provisions of the Constitution would be impracticable or would admit of undue delay, such legislation may depart during the period of emergency caused by a catastrophic incident or enemy attack only, from the following sections of the Constitution:

-Article 14, Sections 1 and 2, Seat of Government;
-Article 2, Sections 8, 15 (Amendments 13 and 32), and 22, Membership, Quorum of Legislature and Passage of Bills;
-Article 3, Section 10 (Amendment 6), Succession to Governorship: Provided, That the legislature shall not depart from Section 10, Article III, as amended by Amendment 6, of the state Constitution relating to the Governor’s office so long as any successor therein named is available and capable of assuming the powers and duties of such office as therein prescribed;
-Article 3, Section 13, Vacancies in State Offices;
-Article 11, Section 6, Vacancies in County Offices;
-Article 11, Section 2, Seat of County Government;
-Article 3, Section 24, State Records.

From the Spokesman-Review:

Washington voters worried about “The Big One” – a massive earthquake and tsunami triggered by a geologic fault off the Pacific Coast – might have a special reason to mark their ballot in the November election.

A constitutional amendment was proposed with just such a catastrophe in mind. But opponents say the powers the amendment would give the Legislature are too broad, and the definition of a catastrophic incident that could allow such changes is too vague.

Senate Joint Resolution 8200 sailed through the Legislature as a 21st-century update to a constitutional amendment enacted during the Cold War.

As currently written, that section of the constitution provides for “continuity of governmental operations in periods of emergency resulting from enemy attack.” If a simple majority of voters approve Resolution 8200 on Nov. 5, the section will be broadened so that continuity is ensured not only in case of attack but also in case of “catastrophic incidents.”

Under the existing law, which voters approved in 1962, the Legislature would have the power to move the state capital or a county seat, make changes to the requirements to elect or appoint legislators, pass bills and fill vacancies in state or county offices in the aftermath of an attack. The Legislature could also fill an open governor’s seat if all people in the line of succession set out in the state constitution are unavailable.

In the 2019 session, legislators were more worried about shaking earth and crushing waves than falling bombs, prompting them to add the “catastrophic incidents” clause.

“The catastrophic incident we anticipate will be the big earthquake that will do such damage that we will need to have procedures in place to have government continue operating,” Rep. Roger Goodman, D-Kirkland, said in introducing the bill to the House last April.

“It’s about The Big One, the earthquake,” Rep. Bill Jenkin, R-Prosser, said. “We know this will be the next disaster.”

The Cascadia Subduction Zone, a major geologic fault line off the Pacific Coast that stretches from Vancouver Island to northern California, has the potential for creating a massive earthquake that could decimate Western Washington and generate a tsunami that would inundate coastal communities.

The quakes occur on an average of 300 to 500 years, with the last one recorded in 1700. The Washington National Guard and the state Emergency Management Division have already mapped out and practiced for responding to a massive quake.

But the amendment doesn’t limit the expanded powers of the Legislature to a quake-induced disaster, nor does it define “catastrophic incident” or how extensive it would have to be, opponents say.

“You would have to trust government to make these decisions with or without your input,” warns the argument against the amendment, co-authored by Rep. Bob McCaslin, R-Spokane Valley. “We should demand a better proposal with clear definitions.”

State statutes do define “catastrophic incident.” It can cover any natural or human-caused event– including terrorism and an enemy attack – with mass casualties, high levels of damage or disruption.

At the same time the Legislature passed the proposed amendment, it also approved a bill that clarifies a governor’s power to suspend certain laws and regulations in a declared emergency for as long 30 days – or more if the Legislature is in session and agrees. If the Legislature is out of session, its leaders can extend that time limit until lawmakers return to session.

Sen. Bob Hasegawa, D-Seattle, argued that was still too broad, and with the potential for problems.

“It could be used by an unscrupulous governor – not saying that we have one,” Hasegawa said. “We have to be careful.”

Update 11/5/2019: The amendment passed.

Gov. Candidate Loren Culp Speaks in Richland on Sept. 28, 2019

EVENT: Public Meeting
WHEN: Saturday, September 28th, 2019
TIME: Starting at 6:00 p.m.
WHERE: Island View Worship Center
LOCATION: 1520 Fowler St, Richland, Washington
Loren Culp, who is running for governor in 2020, will be in speaking on September 28th.
Clint Didier will also be in attendance with Loren.

Click here to download a pdf flyer for the event.

Loren Culp has been married to his high school sweetheart Barbara for 41 years. He is the father of two and grandfather of seven. Loren is a lifelong resident of Washington State. He attended school in Chimacum (Jefferson County) and Republic (Ferry County).

He is a U.S. Army Veteran, a member of the American Legion and a life member of the Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW). He is currently the Police Chief of Republic, WA and the author of the #1 best selling book “American Cop”.

America needs warriors now more than ever and Loren Culp is a shining example of how our Founding Fathers hoped all Americans would be.”
~ Ted Nugent

Washington Strikes Back Event, Feb. 19, 2019 -Yakima

From the Washington Strikes Back Facebook page:

Do you believe in the constitutional right to keep and bear arms? Do you stand with Yakima County Sheriff Bob Udell’s position that I-1639 is unconstitutional? Do you believe that WA Attorney General Bob Ferguson’s endorsement and support of I-1639 was wrong, a violation of his oath, a violation of the US and WA Constitution(s), and that he overstepped the authority of his office?

If you wish to take action, join fellow patriotic Washington citizens, Tuesday, Feb. 19, at 6:30 pm, for our concerned citizens’ event. (Yakima Convention Center)

MAKE a stand and hear how you can make a difference.

LEARN how you can stand with our constitutions.

HOLD AG Ferguson accountable.

Free admission. Coffee and water provided.

Tuesday, February 19, 2019 at 6:30 PM – 8:30 PM PST

Yakima Convention Center

10 N 8th St, Yakima, Washington 98901

WA Gun Owners Action League Update, Mar. 9th, 2018

From the Washington Gun Owners Action League:

Legislative Update from Olympia 9 March 2018




2519, 5553 AND 6298 TO GOV






It’s over!The fat lady has done her part and has waddled off the stage,
and our legislators are packing up and heading home from Olympia.At this
point there is no talk of the need for a special session, unlike the
three special sessions we had last year..

The 2017-2018 biennium set a record for the number of gun related bills
filed: 48, 25 anti-, 20 pro- and three neutral.But as foretold in the
Book of Matthew, “Many are called but few are chosen.”Only four of the
48 managed to make it to the governor’s desk:None of the pro-gun bills
made the cut in the Democrat-dominated legislature, surprise,
surprise.HB 2519 and SBs 5553, 5992 and 6248 were the chosen few.SB
6620, the last minute “assault weapon” bill, failed to get a vote on the
last day of the session (given the time allowed, it was unlikely to pass
the House anyway).

On Tuesday, 7 March, Governor Inslee signed SB 5992, the “bump stock”
ban.In its final version, it only applied specifically to bump stocks
and not to other “trigger devices,” and allows for a one-year buy-back
period to be set up by the Washington State Patrol.Your reward for
complying with the law is $150.(As far as I can tell, nothing prevents
you from shipping or selling them out of state, as long as the
transaction occurs out-of-state).

HB 2519and SBs 5553 and 6298 sit on the governor’s desk awaiting his
action.He has three options: sign the bill(s) as is, section veto
portions he doesn’t like allowing the remainder to become law, or let it
sit without his signature, at which point it will become law.Unlike the
president, Washington has no provision for a “pocket veto” (no
signature) to kill a bill.I expect the governor to sign all three bills,
as he did SB 5992.

As I reported earlier, HB 2519 was amended in the House to allow issue
of CPLs to current and former military members aged 18-20.That amendment
was pulled by the Senate Law & Justice committee.The conference
committee also amended the final version of the bill added language that
allows the issuing authority to require a photograph be submitted with
the application, and that photograph to be embossed on the license.This
was discussed by the Department of Licensing more than ten years ago but
never implemented.It is solely up to the issuing authority to require
it.Some states have photo CPLs, other do not.

It appears in my rush to head for Las Vegas in January for the annual
Shooting, Hunting, Outdoor Trades show, I missed an anti-gun bill
filed.HB 2805 (Rep. Pollet, D-46) would ban the sale of exposed lead
projectile ammunition to those 18-20 years old.Concerns about lead
poisoning among the young, according to the bill language.Maybe Chicago
should consider such a bill.

Given the fact that for the first time in several years Democrats
control both the House and Senate as well as the governor’s mansion, why
so few anti-gun bills passed?One or two pro-gun Democrats in each
chamber helped us, and 2018 is mid-term election year.Had they passed a
slew of anti-gun bills, they likely would have lost perhaps several
rural-area legislative seats in November.Expect them to come back in
January, 2019 with blood in their eyes for gun owners.

By failing to address the “assault weapon” issue, it opens the door for
an initiative later this year that is likely to go well beyond simple
registration and/or age limits.And as we’ve been hearing from Florida
over the past week, where the Republican-majority legislature just
raised the age to buy long guns to 21 AND imposed a three-day waiting
period because of the Parkland school shooting, there are far too many
gun owners out there who don’t like “black rifles.”Or as we call them,
Elmer Fudds, “As long as they don’t come after my wabbit gun, I don’t
care what they do about other guns.”

Continue reading “WA Gun Owners Action League Update, Mar. 9th, 2018”

Inslee Vows to Fight Offshore Oil Drilling

From Washington State Wire, Inslee vows to create hostile environment for potential oil drilling businesses:

…At the beginning of January, Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke announced a five-year plan to expand offshore oil and gas drilling in the Pacific, Atlantic, and Arctic oceans. The plan would open over 90 percent of the outer continental shelf (OCS) to leasing, which surrounds all coastal areas of the continental United States and Alaska.

During a press conference on Monday, AG Ferguson announced that if the Trump Administration moves forward with this plan to drill off Washington’s coast, he will file a lawsuit…

The primary rationale for a lawsuit relates to Zinke’s decision to remove Florida from the list of states that are under consideration for new oil and gas drilling. In a lengthy letter released today, Ferguson says that every reason given to exclude Florida also applies to Washington…

Governor Inslee agreed, pointing to Florida’s Republican governor as the only difference between the two states that both rely on healthy coasts to fuel their economies.

“the only thing [Florida and Washington] have differently is they have a Republican governor, who is running for the US Senate, who has a friend in the white house of his party, and who had a phone call made and got his state protected. Our state has had a phone call made and we’re still not protected.”

Click here to continue reading.

All tourism and recreation of any sort in Washington State’s coastal counties amounted to $3.4 billion (of a $425 billion state GDP, or less than 1%) in 2014.  In Florida, the economic impact of beach tourism alone accounted for $50 billion (of a $764 billion GDP, or 6.5%) in 2012. But the “only difference,” according to Inslee, between the two states is Florida’s Republican governor. Regardless of how one feels about offshore oil drilling, Inslee’s assertion is a bit hard to swallow.