Tag Archives: carbon tax

E-Newsletter: My visit with Governor Ferguson takes an agricultural turn

June 26, 2026

Dear Neighbors,

When Governor Ferguson’s office phoned early this month to ask if I could meet him in Kennewick on June 11, I said sure. His assistant didn’t volunteer why, but I figured the governor had a good enough reason, so we simply agreed on a time and place.

On June 9 the governor announced that he and our state’s superintendent of public instruction want to see a ban on cellphones in our K-12 classrooms. Well, that was a clue. I’ve served on the Senate Early Learning and K-12 Committee since day one as a senator, and any policy proposal involving classrooms statewide would likely need to clear our committee first.

Keep reading for more about how that played out. To me, the real value of the meeting was that it allowed me to have a candid conversation with the governor about several concerns facing Washington’s agricultural sector.

I started by pointing out how, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (as reported in The Capital Press), the returns to Washington farmers sank from plus-$2.8 billion in 2021 to an estimated minus-$396 million just three years later. This put us dead last in the nation while farmers in Oregon, Idaho and California continued to prosper.

The issues I brought to the governor’s attention included the overtime policy that is unpopular with both farmers and workers, and how the inflated fuel prices in our state are especially hard on agriculture.

While the governor listened cordially, the way he pushed back on my fuel-cost argument tells me the Department of Ecology and the climate activists have likely painted a very different picture for him about what the Climate Commitment Act is costing both families and farmers.

I also know he has blamed the Iran conflict — and by extension the Trump administration — for the recent climb in fuel prices. But Washington’s prices were much higher than the national average before that conflict began, and they’ll be much higher than the national average when it’s over.

Since our meeting I’ve sent the governor the results of Ecology’s May 13 auction of carbon “allowances” so he can see for himself why I say the CCA is responsible for adding 55 cents to the price of gasoline in our state and 66 cents to the cost of diesel.

This hidden gas tax is why Washington is consistently ranked #2 or #3 in the nation for highest gas prices — a dubious distinction I would rather not have. One day recently I went from seeing diesel for $4.40 per gallon in Idaho to $5.99 in Colfax, $6.99 in Dayton and $6.29 in Waitsburg.

This is why the CCA is bad for agriculture, and why Republicans have asked the governor to suspend the law. I hope he gives it new consideration in light of the information and views I shared since our meeting in Kennewick.

The average price of unleaded in our state, according to aaa.com, is $5.27 per gallon. It’s $6.16 for diesel. The state gas tax will go up 2% on July 1 — and every July 1 thereafter — because of legislation passed by majority Democrats in 2025. That was on top of a 6-cent hike in the gas tax and 9-cent jump in the tax on diesel, which took effect a year ago.

Governor is two years late in wanting cellphones out of classrooms

As I figured, the invitation to meet with Governor Ferguson in Kennewick early this month had to do with his interest in banning cellphones in classrooms.

Although the governor is free to come up with a policy proposal, the executive branch isn’t allowed to file legislation. That right belongs only to senators and representatives, and to the people through their power of initiative.

It shouldn’t be a problem for the governor to find someone to put a cellphone-ban bill in the hopper on his behalf (such measures are called “request legislation”). My question is, where was he the past two years?

I was a co-sponsor of bipartisan legislation that would restrict mobile phone usage by public school students. It was on the table in both chambers for the 2025 and 2026 legislative sessions, as House Bill 1122 and Senate Bill 5346.

The bills were referred to the respective K-12 committees — but didn’t move an inch after that, in either session. One of my Republican colleagues on the House committee did his best to convince the chairwoman to at least hold a hearing on the bill, to no avail.

One of the frustrating things about Olympia is how potentially meaningful policy discussions get sidelined for no apparent reason. Is a cellphone ban going to be more acceptable in 2027 than it would have been either of the past two years?

I’m curious to see whether and how the content of the governor’s request legislation differs from the bill I sponsored, and whether the committee chairs will give it the consideration our bill didn’t receive.

Sen. Judy Warnick of Moses Lake has decided not to seek re-election after serving the neighboring 13th Legislative District as a representative, then senator, for 20 years. She’s been a wonderful colleague who shares my concern for how high fuel prices are affecting agriculture; read her recent statement on the issue here.

From the interim calendar: budget, education, water, ag

Anyone involved in farming or ranching knows the list of chores never really ends. But neither do the duties of a state legislator. Even though we’re not in session at the state Capitol, I’m still engaged during these “interim” months on issues that matter to our legislative district and this part of the state.

The second of state government’s quarterly revenue forecasts for 2026 was released earlier today. As a member of the Senate Ways and Means Committee I was particularly interested in what it means for the state’s financial picture, and whether the budget that takes effect July 1 will remain in balance for the foreseeable future. Read the assessment from our Senate Republican budget leader here. The governor’s budget office recently warned state agencies to prepare for spending reductions, as it anticipates a third budget shortfall in as many years.

Speaking of that budget — it contains the cost-of-living allowance for retired teachers and other public employees who receive their pensions through Plan 1. This was approved unanimously through my Senate Bill 5862.

I received a nice letter from Marilyn with the Walla Walla-Columbia School Retirees Association, which mentioned the COLA and my role — but what stood out was her report that WWC Unit 31 members have volunteered a total of 5,688 hours in our community during this past 2025-2026 school year!

My visits around our region recently include:

Attending and speaking at the Prescott 8th Grade Promotion on the afternoon of June 12. Many years ago I was one of those Prescott 8th-graders, so this was a very enjoyable and uplifting experience.
Meeting at the Port of Walla Walla with two representatives from the Department of Ecology to discuss water issues related to the Walla Walla Water 2050 water management plan. I’ll go into more detail about this another time, but there’s been a serious disconnect between what local Ecology officials have told me compared to what I’m hearing from the agency headquarters in Olympia.
Speaking at the Washington Association of Maintenance and Operations Administrators (WAMOA) conference June 17 in Othello. As a farmer and a licensed commercial pilot I appreciate the importance of maintaining facilities, and was glad to share that with the attendees, along with information about funding for school infrastructure.
Visiting Monday evening with members of the Washington Potato and Onion Association who were in Walla Walla for their annual conference.
Participating in a Wednesday discussion about higher education with members of the Tri-City Regional Chamber of Commerce. We heard from the chancellor and presidents of WSU, Columbia Basin College and Heritage University.

Traveling around our district and visiting with the people I serve is one of the most productive things I get to do as a senator. I learn how government is or isn’t working for them, and how it can do better. If you’d like to get on my calendar this interim, contact me using the information below and let’s see what can be arranged!

What the sales-tax increase means for you

I’m grateful that my fellow legislators have repeatedly backed our 16th District delegation’s requests for millions of dollars in capital-budget funding to help transform the old Kennewick General Hospital into the Columbia Valley Center for Recovery. This project is one of the good things happening in our area; hopefully it will continue on schedule, and the center will open about the time I’m coming home from our 2026 session at the Capitol. In the meantime it’s exciting to see all the local financial support coming in; I was recently honored to join Nancy Roach, secretary of the Benton Franklin Recovery Coalition, and others who spoke at an event where a local family’s $1.1 million donation was announced! More details are in this Tri-City Herald report.

Dear Neighbors,

We have just about reached the middle of what legislators call the “interim” between our annual sessions at the state Capitol. In a matter of days we’ll be closer to the start of the 2026 session, which will fall on Jan. 12, than to the end of this year’s session, which was back on April 27.

That’s why I am already working with the experts on the Senate Republican policy staff to sift through a list of ideas — some of which have come from constituents this month — and decide which may make sense as legislation, versus things that are better handled through direct contact with a state agency.

After we identify the viable candidates, the next step is to do the research and draft the language, and as you can imagine, complex pieces of legislation require more time. So even though it’s still summer, it also isn’t too soon for me to be thinking about the 2026 session!

Huge expansion of sales tax
is coming, but details still aren’t known

The sales-tax expansion approved by our state’s majority Democrats in April reminds me of the famous remark made back in 2010 when the Affordable Care Act, or “Obamacare,” was making its way through Congress. You may remember it — the line about how the bill would need to be passed so people could find out what was in it.

As this column from Senate Republican Leader John Braun points out, we should expect the sales-tax increase will mean higher prices for things like cable/streaming channels, and driver’s-education courses.

Unfortunately, the state Department of Revenue is still working to come up with guidance for the 95,000-odd businesses required to collect the tax starting Oct. 1 Therefore, no one can say for sure what it means for Washington consumers.

This is not an increase in the tax rate employers will pay, it’s an increase in the number of “business activities” that will be considered taxable retail sales in the eyes of the state. But whether you call it an increase or an expansion, it’s expected to bring in another $4 billion over the next four years. That’s money you and I will pay, as these service providers are forced to pass down the increased costs of doing business in Washington.

I voted against this and every other tax and fee increase approved by the majority this year. The “$ave Washington” operating budget proposed by Senate Republicans was balanced without any increases and also wouldn’t have cut anyone off of essential services; unfortunately, the majority exaggerated the size of the budget shortfall (caused by its own overspending) and used that as an excuse for passing the largest package of tax hikes in state history.

For those in agriculture, loss of farms is no mystery

From what I’m hearing, wheat growers in our area are through with harvest. I was happy with the yields at my farm, but the prices we’re seeing are terrible, especially compared to just a few years ago.

I’m always having to explain to legislators from urban and suburban districts how farmers are price takers, not price makers. While our operating costs go up — and fuel costs are a prime example — we can’t just raise our prices accordingly, the way other business sectors can.

For that reason I already knew the answer to the question posed in a headline in The Seattle Times recently: 3,700 WA farms shut down in 5 years. Why?

That 5-year period ran through 2022, and many more farms in our state have gone under since then. Still, I appreciate how the report under that headline calls attention to the variety of pressures faced by people in the agricultural sector, and efforts from within the farming community to increase access to mental-health supports.

While I was also glad to see details about economic factors that affect Washington farmers, like labor costs that run 462% higher than the national average, the word “fuel” appears just once in the newspaper report, in the same sentence as fertilizer, seed and farm chemicals.

There’s no mention of how the state Department of Ecology stuck it to agriculture for years by failing to honor the fuel-surcharge exemption promised in the state’s cap-and-tax law (the “Climate Commitment Act”). I was among the leaders of repeated efforts to hold Ecology accountable, but only this year did we finally make some headway against the Olympia Democrats’ resistance.

Speaking of fuel, the average price of diesel in Washington as of a couple days ago was $5.03 per gallon. In Oregon it was $4.47, or about where our state was a year ago. It’s an average of $3.85 per gallon in Idaho.

Farmers and families in our corner of the state are fortunate to have alternatives to the crazy Washington fuel prices. I feel for the growers farther from the Oregon and Idaho borders, like the Wenatchee area or the Skagit area north of Seattle.

And although it’s good for Washingtonians to be aware of what goes into growing their food, no report on the state of farming can be complete without more detail about the effect of government policies.

Childcare is an important issue for legislators, and while we may have differences of opinion about how to increase access and control costs, I have to believe any of us would be impressed with what Maria and Veronica are doing at The Children’s Center in Walla Walla. I was particularly taken by how flexible they are in serving families, as that’s a gift for those with unusual work schedules. We need more resources like this, and I appreciate that they invited Rep. Klicker and me to visit!

***

I am working to make living in our state more affordable, make our communities safer, uphold our paramount duty to provide for schools, and hold state government accountable. I’ll work with anyone who shares those goals and wants to find solutions.

Please reach out to my office with your thoughts, ideas and concerns on matters of importance to you. I am here to serve and look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,

Perry Dozier
State Senator
16th Legislative District

EMAIL: Perry.Dozier@leg.wa.gov
OLYMPIA PHONE: (360) 786-7630
OLYMPIA OFFICE: 342 Irving R. Newhouse Building
MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 40416, Olympia, WA 98504

Republican senators question timing, purpose of proposed payments to farm-fuel users

Sen. Perry Dozier

OLYMPIA… The two state senators who farm in eastern Washington say they’re not sure what to make of a proposed offer of money for farm-fuel users who got stuck paying a surcharge on their fuel purchases because of the state’s cap-and-trade law.

The payments, which could amount to no more than pennies per gallon for many farming operations, are offered in the state Senate’s supplemental operating-budget proposal.

Sen. Mark Schoesler

“I don’t know anyone in the agricultural sector who would view this as a solution to the fuel-surcharge issue we’ve been fighting more than a year, since cap-and-trade was fully implemented,” said Sen. Perry Dozier, R-Waitsburg.

“These payments wouldn’t come close to making up for what farm-fuel users have been forced to pay because the executive branch of state government failed to uphold the promise made in the cap-and-trade law – that farm diesel and fuel used by the maritime industry would be exempt from the surcharge this new program would create,” said Sen. Mark Schoesler, R-Ritzville.

Schoesler serves on the Senate Ways and Means Committee, which held a public hearing yesterday on the proposed supplemental operating budget. The budget appropriation doesn’t refer to the payments as rebates or reimbursements, and routes them through the state Department of Licensing – not the Department of Ecology, which is responsible for implementing the cap-and-trade law.

“Are these payments a way for the state to ease its guilty conscience for failing so badly on upholding the promised fuel-surcharge exemption? Does the timing have anything to do with the certification of the initiative to repeal the cap-and-trade law? Are the supporters of cap-and-trade just looking to throw a bone to agriculture? No one who buys farm fuel by the truckload would come up with this,” said Dozier.

Dozier and Schoesler are the sponsors of Senate Bill 5728, introduced in 2023. It would basically force Ecology to develop a process for implementing the promised exemptions. The bill has been ignored, and a task force set up by Ecology during the summer failed to completely resolve industry concerns.

Given that background, the senators were surprised to see a $30 million appropriation, buried on page 564 of the new Senate budget proposal, “solely for payments to support farm fuel users and transporters who have purchased fuel for agricultural purposes that is exempt from the requirements of the Climate Commitment Act… but paid a surcharge or an additional fee.”

The payments would be made by the Department of Licensing to “noncorporate farms” first – a term not defined in the budget bill – depending on annual farm-fuel consumption. The first tier, those using less than 1,000 gallons annually, would receive $600; the second tier, between 1,000 and 4,000 gallons consumed, would get $2,300; and those using 4,000 gallons or more a year would receive $3,400.

“It’s a lame proposal because most farms of any size operate as a corporation,” said Schoesler. “On top of that these tiers make no sense, except they’re consistent with the whole premise of cap-and-trade – or ‘cap-and-tax,’ as it should really be called. This law is about punishing people who use fossil fuel. It’s as though they think there are electric combines down at the farm-equipment dealer.”

Dozier agrees the tiered approach is not realistic. “One tractor pulling a heavy load can go through 25 gallons of fuel an hour. At that rate just one week of 10-hour workdays will blow past the 1,000-gallon threshold.

“It’s not difficult for a farm to go through 30,000 gallons of diesel in a year. Under this proposal, that’s 11 cents per gallon. Adding more tiers based on 10,000-gallon increments would be a slight improvement, but if the intent is to honestly compensate users who have been paying the surcharge, the payments to them should really be gallon for gallon, with no tiers at all.”

The Senate budget proposal also includes $35 million to provide low-income households with energy utility bill assistance. Like the payments proposed for farm-fuel users, those subsidies would be funded with proceeds from the cap-and-trade law, which has enabled state government to rake in about $1.8 billion in the past year from auctioning “carbon allowances.”

“In December the governor proposed using cap-and-trade money to subsidize low-income households. It wasn’t a surprise to also see it in the Senate budget. But this money to pay farm-fuel users feels like something thrown in at the last minute by people who don’t understand agriculture,” said Schoesler.

“This is a pretty responsible budget proposal overall, and I appreciate that Republicans had a fair amount of input about the priorities,” said Dozier, “but it needs some work to be a budget that truly respects the needs of agriculture.”

Senator says Ecology must be open about program driving up fuel prices

OLYMPIA… While raking in more than $1 billion from the carbon-pricing program that is behind Washington’s crushingly high fuel prices, the state Department of Ecology isn’t being fully open about who is buying and holding the carbon credits. A state senator says that has to change.

The state’s Climate Commitment Act requires Ecology to post information about carbon-allowance holding accounts on a searchable public website. In a Sept. 26 letter to agency director Laura Watson, Sen. Perry Dozier points out how what is believed to be the first post fails to include names of account holders, making it “useless” to the public and lawmakers.

“To be clear, the very information that the Legislature intended to make available when it enacted the CCA is being withheld by the department as it enforces the CCA,” wrote Dozier, R-Waitsburg.

While Dozier is not a member of the Senate Environment, Energy and Technology Committee, he notes the CCA is the lone topic on the agenda for the committee’s Monday meeting and expects concerns about the agency’s inadequate reporting will also be raised then. Ecology’s lack of openness is particularly troubling to Dozier because the agency has already broken the promise that farm diesel and fuel used by Washington’s maritime industry would be exempt from the CCA fuel surcharge.

Dozier’s request comes as Gov. Jay Inslee clings to a claim that his long-desired cap-and-trade policy is not the reason Washington motorists continue to pay more than $5 for a gallon of gasoline or diesel while prices are far less in neighboring Oregon or Idaho.

Carbon allowances function like permits to emit carbon, and may be bought, sold, traded, or transferred to another registered entity. Under the CCA, the allowances are held in accounts, and information about the contents of each holding account is to be public.

By providing the public with what his letter calls “the bare minimum” of information about those accounts, Dozier says, Ecology is adding to the controversy that has hung over the CCA since Democrat lawmakers pushed it through during the pandemic-lockdown 2021 legislative session. The distrust has increased as Washington gas prices began to soar this year.

“Unfortunately, the department’s holdings report is not searchable, does not allow the public to follow along, and provides no insight into the participation of various entities in the program, including general market participants… In the presence of incessantly high gas prices, public perception of the CCA going forward will heavily depend on the program’s transparency,” Dozier’s letter continues.

In 2022 policy analysts outside the Inslee administration predicted the CCA would cause a significant increase in gas prices once the auctions of carbon allowances began this year. Inslee responded with the now-infamous claim that the new law would add “pennies” per gallon and might even lead to lower gas prices – yet the cost associated with the CCA is now estimated at 51 cents per gallon, as fuel suppliers continue adjusting their prices to recoup the growing cost of the allowances they purchase.

Dozier explained his request to Ecology is driven by a general interest in government transparency and holding state agencies accountable, plus his particular concern for how the CCA is being implemented.

“This is not about outing the private companies and public institutions that have been put over a barrel by the CCA and given no real choice except to pay up,” Dozier said. “At a fundamental level it’s about ensuring public access to the details of transactions involving government, the same way we should be able to see who holds any government-issued permit. These aren’t Swiss bank accounts, but Ecology is treating them that way.

“The CCA deserves special attention because it’s causing more pain at the pump and adding to the affordability crisis in our state while becoming a golden goose for state government. Turning carbon emissions into a commodity has enriched the state by over a billion dollars in a matter of months, with more sales to come this year. When a new line of business becomes that lucrative so quickly, it’s even more important to see the details so the public can keep a close eye on who is doing what.

“Instead of pushing for legislation to force a closer look at the oil industry’s finances, the governor should be more concerned that his own agency is flouting the law he wanted by failing to fully open its own books.”

Dozier noted the mandate for transparency was added to the CCA when it first came before the Senate, through a Republican amendment that was publicly endorsed by the bill’s Democratic prime sponsor.

“The senators who spoke in favor of this reporting requirement wisely said we need to follow this very confusing and cumbersome system to understand its full implications. Ecology is obstructing the public’s view. It needs to do better by following both the letter and the spirit of the law,” he said.

Dozier’s letter concludes by encouraging the agency director to reevaluate the holding-accounts report and upgrade the next version. While he did not ask for a direct response, the 16th District lawmaker said it’s disconcerting that more than a week has already passed without Ecology offering any meaningful response to his request, considering the agency is already in hot water over the fuel-surcharge issue and the public outrage over how the CCA is driving up fuel prices.

“I’m not expecting a thank-you note from Ecology for pointing out where it’s falling short. But seeing how the agency keeps fighting us on the fuel-surcharge promise, despite my proposing a bill, I hope my letter is enough to fix this new issue. There’s something very wrong when you keep needing more legislation just to get the executive branch to follow the law.”

Perry Dozier