Washington state’s Initiative 2066 has stirred a heated debate over the future of natural gas, environmental policies, and individual energy choices.
The measure seeks to counteract the state’s 2050 fossil fuel phase-out goal, which involves disincentivizing gas use in new construction, and would also roll back a 2024 law mandating long-term plans for utilities to transition from gas to electricity.
Proponents argue that 2066 defends energy choice by allowing continued access to natural gas, claiming that consumers shouldn’t face government-mandated electrification. They warn of potential utility rate hikes without natural gas as an option.
However, ads from both sides have been called out for exaggerating cost implications, with supporters’ Vote Yes, Pay Less and opponents’ $150 a month cost increase claims both misleadingly portraying speculative future expenses.
Critics, including climate groups and low-income advocates, argue that natural gas’s methane emissions severely impact climate and health.
They warn that 2066 could compromise programs for energy efficiency and low-income assistance, as the broadly worded initiative might limit funding for efficient appliances and undermine emission reduction targets.
The initiative could face legal challenges, as Washington’s constitution requires that each ballot measure cover a single subject, a rule designed to prevent logrolling, or the bundling of disparate issues.
Opponents of 2066 assert that the 22-page initiative likely fails this requirement, blending immediate and long-term regulatory changes.
The outcome of this vote could define Washington’s climate and energy policies, either preserving the state’s path toward lower emissions or upholding access to gas amid rising concerns about its environmental impact.