Letters to the Editor

THE CARBON TAX QUESTION
Many thanks to Leslie Helm for taking a stand on the need to put a price on carbon in Washington state [Editors Note, September 2014]. While I was serving as director of the states Department of Commerce, we updated Washingtons Energy Strategy in 2012 for the first time in 17 years. The objective was to balance three goals: meet our greenhouse gas emissions targets, maintain competitive energy prices, and create jobs and economic opportunity. The most important policy recommendation that came out of that work was the need to put a price on carbon. No other single policy can do as much to unleash the creativity and innovation we need to accomplish those three important goals.
Rogers Weed
Seattle

Thank you for your common-sense support of a revenue-neutral carbon tax to address climate change in the September issue. The best way to promote both old-fashioned energy efficiency and newfangled clean technology is to put a price on carbon, and the best way to put a price on carbon is to follow the lead of British Columbia by imposing a straightforward carbon tax and using the revenues to reduce existing taxes on households and businesses. Keep it simple, make it transparent and let the market work.
Craig E. Kinzer
Founder & CEO, Kinzer Real Estate Services
Seattle

While the premise that somehow carbon is the cause of climate change remains a flawed argument, the fact that people continue to repeat the same mantra does not make it true. Setting that aside, the claim that a new carbon tax will create a reduction in sales tax and a reduction in B&O tax is simply delusional. I have yet to find any government, especially the state of Washingtons, that will reduce taxes without a major Tim Eyman-style public referendum. The reality is there will be a new governmental agency that will be in charge of overseeing the carbon tax collection and the Working Families Rebate you reference. The other B&O and sales tax revenue will continue to be funneled into the wasteful state government black hole of spending. It will be presented to gullible folks like yourself, but, when implemented, the state will still need the revenue for one project, cause or another. A business magazine supporting such a process is irresponsible, as it in no way reflects the wishes of the business community.
Scott Ingebretson
Edmonds

Because Seattle Business Editor Leslie Helm believes the hype about global warming does not mean that virtually everyone agrees that global warming is a problem. There are a lot of us out here who recognize the political aspect of this.
Gerald B. Myers
Bonney Lake

Making the carbon price revenue neutral means it has a chance of being bipartisan essential in a highly politicized Legislature! This is a plan that even lower-income folks can support. Thank you, Seattle Business magazine, for your opinion and suggestion.
Lee James
Coupeville

Lets call it a fee and dividend, since thats more accurate than tax, and convince our legislators!
Gwen Hanson
Bellevue

KEEPING AN EYE ON THE RED DOT
Thank you for publishing my letter and the article on Red Dot and ESOPs in the September issue. This is one of the rare times when Ive read an article about our company that is as accurate and complete in its perspective. The concise communication of dates, facts and figures is quite astonishing. Excellent work!
Randy Gardiner
President & CEO, Red Dot Corporation
Tukwila