Article Response
Dear Editor: RE: ‘‘Wash. State Sued for Tougher Climate Policy” on Feb. 16, 2018.
The absence of Congressional and state legislation to curb fossil fuel emissions has generated international efforts to use judicial systems to force climate action to decrease global warming. Fossil fuel combustion yields carbon dioxide, which has increased from about 280 parts per million (ppm) in the preindustrial era to over 400 ppm. We are already suffering ocean acidification, severe weather, and arctic melting, with only one degree Centigrade warming of the earth.
Our Children’s Trust is a non-profit organization supporting suits by minors against the federal government and several states, now including Washington. The child plaintiffs point out that completely eliminating fossil fuels for energy by 2050 is necessary to bring the carbon dioxide level down to 350 ppm by 2100. This action for climate stability is necessary to protect their constitutional rights to life, liberty, pursuit of happiness, and equal protection (as minors) under the law. The legal basis is the governmental obligation to fulfill the public trust in protecting common resources now and in the future. The plaintiffs argue that the executive and legislative branches of government have increased carbon dioxide emissions while acknowledging for decades the climate harm of fossil fuel use. Examples are subsidizing the fossil fuel industry, allowing fossil fuel extraction on public lands, and not regulating emissions to the extent required. The plaintiffs argue that judicial action is the only check against the executive and legislative branches of government in our democracy.
Government lawyers argue that these suits should be dismissed for many reasons, one of which is the constitutional upset that judicial authority poses to the other branches of government. Certainly, the urgency of action needed to avoid catastrophic increases in global temperature threatens how our government has worked, as well as our beliefs about the fairness of our socio-economic system.
Whereas state-by-state lawsuits may force localized action, a national legislative solution would be more efficient. Adding a progressively increasing fee to fossil fuels is projected to significantly reduce CO2 production through market shifts to non-polluting renewable energy sources. To gain bipartisan support, the carbon fee cannot be a tax that grows government, but instead a fee that will be distributed as a dividend to all households, thereby protecting most of us from increased prices of carbon-intensive goods. Such legislation also must include a border tariff on goods from countries that do not have carbon pricing. The tariff will stimulate most countries to adopt carbon pricing, resulting in global efforts to minimize fossil fuel use. This is the 3-fold proposal of Citizens Climate Lobby, which is working to build political will in our House of Representatives and Senate to enact bipartisan legislation.
The lawsuit approach is instructive and the legal suit is compelling in laying out current and future effects of climate change on our children and grandchildren if we don’t act urgently. (https://www.ourchildrenstrust.org;https://static1.squarespace.com/static/571d109b04426270152febe0/t/5a870db69140b70db78e78d3/1518800312335/Complaint.FILED.2.16.18.pdf.) Promoting national legislation helps meet this urgent need more efficiently. Write Lisa Murkowski, Dan Sullivan, and Don Young, asking them to support such carbon fee and dividend legislation. If you are concerned about climate change, let our Mayor and Assembly know that you support expressing our political will with a resolution urging our congressional representatives to support this climate action.
Kay Kreiss, M.D., Sitka
