Roughly 1000 Oregonians from across the state gather at the Capitol to express support for SB 1530.
A revised version of the highly contentious climate change policy, Cap and Trade, is currently in the Oregon Legislature’s Joint Committee on Ways and Means, as SB 1530. The bill died in 2019 due to a walkout of Republican Senators, that garnered nationwide attention.
The bill is based off of California’s Cap and Trade program. The goal of the Legislature’s Democrats is to pass it in the 2020 short legislative session which began February 3 and lasts 35 days. It is still facing significant opposition from Republicans and some environmentalists due to a myriad of reasons.
SB 1530, also known as the Clean Energy Jobs bill or Cap and Trade, would implement a carbon cap and trade program in Oregon. It would require greenhouse gas emitters to bid on permits for each ton of greenhouse gas they emit in state-sanctioned auctions.
The bill died in 2019 because of the lack of support, especially by Republicans, who staged a nine-day walkout to prevent the Senate from achieving a quorum, preventing a vote. Another walkout is possible in this short legislative session.
“I’m still having conversations, but nothing is off the table,”
Senate Minority Leader Herman Baertschiger Jr. told reporters
Theoretically, this bill will combat climate change and meet the state’s goals of lowering carbon emissions 45% below 1990 levels by 2035. It will do this by creating a system which forces greenhouse gas emitting companies to switch to cleaner and more environmentally friendly alternatives for energy. They will switch to these alternatives, such as electric or wind power, because the cost of fossil fuel reliance will rise significantly.
Governor Brown gives her State of the State address and lists climate change as her legislative priority.
However, the opponents of this bill say that if the bill passes, it could hurt local industries and those in rural and impoverished areas of Oregon. They say it will raise basic living costs and gas prices for those who need to drive farther and use fuel for farming vehicles and equipment.
According to Justin Brecht, a policy analyst for the Senate Republican legislative office, the program is calculated to cost at least $650 for a family of four per year. On the contrary, the Oregon Environmental Council calculates that climate change could cost Oregon families an additional $1,931 each year if nothing is done to reduce pollution by 2020.
“I represent a poor rural District whose citizens earn half as much as rich urban areas like the Pearl District in Portland…The average commute to work round trip is 44 miles so every gas tax or carbon tax increase is food off the table and one step closer to homelessness.” Senator Brian Boquist (R- Dallas), who opposes the bill, said, “My constituents do not have ten bucks to spare let alone $100 or $700 … no matter what the cause.”
It’s not just the Republicans and groups of rural Oregonians who oppose the bill. Some environmentalist activists are speaking out against the bill. They believe that the policy is not strong enough, and more strict policies are needed to address the climate crisis. Most recently, the group Sunrise PDX, released a statement sharing their opposition to the bill. They stated that the legislation is not “radical” enough.
“The discussion around Clean Energy Jobs is a complicated one, and there is significant division in the community.” Chris Palmer for 350pdx, the Portland chapter of the international environmental justice organization 350, said.
In a blog post on the 350pdx’s website, who has positioned itself as neutral on the issue due to the varying perspectives of its members, Khanh Pham with OPAL Environmental Justice Oregon and Adam Brunelle with 350pdx, writes: “We must not let our sense of urgency turn to desperation to accept anything- especially not ineffective, false solutions. HB2020 allows polluters to continue polluting by gaming the system. California’s carbon trading law, already 6 years old, has not done much at all to reduce emissions. Replicating California’s harmful failure would be irresponsible.”
Some remain hopeful about the bill, but are still concerned about the power of the bill.
“I do think the bill will help, but there will still be a need for more policies at local, state, national and international levels to really stabilize the climate,” Laurie Dougherty, a member of 350salem, said, “The effects of climate change are happening faster than expected. And it will only get worse unless we act.”
Oregonians rally in support of climate policy.
Two versions of the bill are currently in committee in both the Oregon House and the Senate. It is still up in the air if the legislation will pass this legislative session. With groups on both sides of the aisle loudly expressing their approval and disapproval, this legislation will likely remain a highly contentious topic.
