Editor's note: This is the 10th installment of Platforms 2018, a series on the policy positions and records of Oregon's two leading gubernatorial candidates.

Don't Edit

Ted Sickinger | The Oregonian/OregonLive

In most polls, the environment is not at the top of most voters’ lists of important issues. Global warming usually doesn’t even make the list, which may explain why it’s gotten so little airtime in Oregon’s gubernatorial race.

But the issue may take a leading role in the 2019 legislative session as Democratic lawmakers again try to push through climate change legislation. And there is plenty to differentiate the candidates on this front.

For starters, though, Kate Brown and Knute Buehler both agree that manmade global warming is a genuine problem.

Brown, the Democratic incumbent, is certainly the more passionate on this issue. She says the effects of climate change are already evident in Oregon, be it hit-or-miss snowpack, reduced summer stream flows, more wildfires or record temperatures.

Brown flew to Bonn, Germany, last November to speak about the states’ roles in combating climate change. She joined fellow West Coast governors in a collaborative effort to push back on the Trump administration’s rollback of climate change policies and its rejection of the Paris climate accords. Her administration also established a Carbon Policy Office to study how a cap-and-trade program would affect the state’s economy and jobs.

Brown’s advocacy has earned her the backing of environmental groups throughout the state. The Oregon League of Conservation Voters presented her with its top award, “Environmental Champion of the Year,” in 2017.

Buehler, meanwhile, has a failing grade on the environment from the same organization, which ranks state politicians based on their voting record on environmental policies. Buehler also has the financial backing of a collection of companies and lobbying groups that have opposed or weakened environmental regulation, records show.

Yet Buehler has bucked Republican orthodoxy on climate change and has been running television commercials with a straightforward message: “Global warming is real, and we have a responsibility to do something about it.”

The difference between Buehler and Brown, then, comes down to just what that something should be.

The following is a discussion of the major climate change legislation and policies in Oregon and the candidates’ positions on them:

Don't Edit

Steven Nehl | The Oregonian/OregonLive/file

Greenhouse gas emissions from power plants such as Portland General Electric's Clatskanie facility would be regulated under Oregon's cap and invest bills.

Don't Edit

CLEAN ENERGY JOBS BILL

This was the name attached to a major piece of climate change legislation in Salem last year. And the legislative session before. In fact, versions of it have been around for some time but never gained traction.

Democratic leaders. including Brown, are intent on passing a so-called “cap and invest” program in the 2019 session, similar to the one adopted in California. The legislation would place a hard and gradually declining cap on greenhouse gas emissions within the state and require any industrial facility, utility or importer of transportation fuels emitting more than 25,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents to either reduce their emissions or purchase emissions allowances in a state auction to buy their way down to the declining cap. Previous version of the bill used allowance revenue to reduce the law’s rate impact on utility ratepayers, and invest in green energy, job training and climate change adaptation.

That’s the basic plan and one Brown wholeheartedly supports, though she was not particularly vocal about it during this spring’s legislative session. She says the bill was still a work in progress and that her office is now working with Legislature’s Joint Interim Committee on Carbon Reduction and various stakeholder groups to come up with a proposal that will attract enough support to pass.

“I’ve been very clear with the business community stakeholders and the legislature that it’s my expectation that we move forward on some iteration of Clean Energy Jobs in the 2019 session,” Brown said.

Buehler, meanwhile, derides this legislation as a “honeypot for special interests,” referring to the $1.4 billion it was originally projected to raise every two years through allowance auctions, and the environmental and social justice advocates who were lining up to get a piece of the action. “Probably a better way to describe it is a $1.4 billion sales tax on energy,” Buehler said in a recent debate.

Don't Edit

Handout photos

Though Rep. Knute Buehler and Gov. Kate Brown agree that global warming is both real and manmade, they have different ideas on what should be done about it.

Don't Edit

Don't Edit

Buehler says the bill concentrates the responsibility for reducing emissions on the manufacturing sector, making it less competitive and encouraging those companies to migrate elsewhere. He’s also concerned that much of the money raised would flow through the Department of Environmental Quality.

“I have problems with the capabilities of the state to administer very complex energy schemes,” he said. “Here we go again. It’s not a very transparent process they’ve outlined, and it’s not going into the general fund where it could be used to help out flailing school districts. Instead, it will go out into the ether of the green energy economy.”

Instead of a cap-and-invest program, Buehler says, the state should adopt a “revenue-neutral carbon tax” on greenhouse gas emissions and direct the proceeds into the state general fund.

“I’m certainly open to a revenue-neutral carbon approach, meaning there are offsets to the income tax to stop any increase in net taxes,” he said. “The first thing we need to do is get our spending under control. … It’s kind of a three-step process. Get our structural costs under control, continue to foster the growth of the economy, and then we start looking at the revenue system.”

Brown says Buehler’s proposal won’t work. British Columbia’s carbon tax, similar to the one he supports, has not reduced carbon emissions, she said.

BC’s program has had little impact. But that may be due to the province’s unwillingness to raise carbon taxes to the point where they have a meaningful effect on pricing and influence behavior.

Don't Edit

Faith Cathcart | The Oregonian/OregonLive/2012

Power lines dominate the horizon outside Boardman, a town of roughly 3,30 residents situated near Portland General Electric's coal power plant.

Don't Edit

‘COAL TO CLEAN’

This was the biggest piece of climate legislation in 2016, and one that Brown counts among her biggest accomplishments. The bill was a compromise by the state’s large utilities and environmental groups to head off a ballot measure, but passed by only one vote in the Senate. Backers credit the governor for rallying support. She certainly stifled opposition, including from the state’s three public utility commissioners, who were excluded from the initial conversations and believed the main provision in the legislation would be ineffectual.

The law attempts to rid Oregon of electricity from coal-fired power plants. The state has no control over the operation of out-of-state coal plants, and it’s impossible to discriminate against coal-fired electrons at the border when the energy is purchased in the wholesale market. But, by prohibiting Oregon utilities from including costs for such plants in their rates by 2035, the measure could make the economics of some of the coal plants that currently serve Oregon utilities less attractive, forcing their closure.

The law also supersized Oregon’s renewable portfolio standard, one of its most potent carbon reduction policies to date. The law doubled the standard, so utilities will be forced to serve half their customers demand from renewable sources by 2040.

Buehler voted for this bill, one of the few members of his caucus to do so. This is the most consequential piece of climate legislation he has backed, and he said he specifically helped write in requirements that utilities acquire more energy from small, community-scale biomass projects.

Buehler said the new, higher renewable energy mandate makes sense, but he’s not a supporter of seeing the state increase it again to 100 percent renewable. California has done so, and many environmentalists would like to see Oregon follow suit. The City of Portland and Multnomah County have already set this goal.

“I think what we have is an appropriate goal at this point,” Buehler said. “It makes Oregon a world leader in terms of the standard, and rural Oregon is uniquely positioned to play a role.”

Don't Edit

Oregon Department of Environmental Quality

Don't Edit

TRANSPORTATION PACKAGE

The passage of a $5.3 billion transportation package was Democrats’ signature accomplishment of the 2017 session. In addition to new road dollars, House Bill 2017 included hundreds of millions in new funding over the next decade for public transit, bike, and pedestrian investments, and established a program to provide rebates for certain types of electric vehicles.

Brown was a major cheerleader. This was one of her top priorities in the session, and when it was signed, she planned a victory lap around the state.

Buehler voted against it, saying it wasn’t big, accountable or transparent enough.

“I believe Oregon is long overdue to improve our transportation infrastructure, but this plan is the wrong way to do it," he said in a statement at the time. "I'm strongly opposed to a new 'Tesla Tax' to subsidize the purchase of electric cars for a privileged few."

Don't Edit

Don't Edit

Beth Nakamura | The Oregonian/OregonLive

Transportation fuels are the biggest source of Oregon's greenhouse gas emissions.

Don't Edit

CLEAN FUELS PROGRAM

Transportation fuels are the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in the state -- and still growing. The Clean Fuels Program, passed in 2009 and extended by Brown in 2015, is designed to reduce the carbon intensity of transportation fuels sold in Oregon by 10 percent by 2025. Fuel providers can reach that mandate by providing lower-carbon ethanol and biodiesel, or purchasing credits from clean fuel producers, who will generate credits under the program.

"I strongly support [Senate Bill] 324's goal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions,” Brown said after signing the contentious legislation extending the program. “It is difficult to deny that we are seeing the effects of a warming planet…With California, Washington and British Columbia moving forward with their own clean fuels programs, which will shape the West Coast market, it is imperative not only that Oregon does its part to reduce greenhouse gas emissions but also that we build a program that meets the needs of Oregonians.”

The Clean Fuels Program has been the subject of intense and ongoing debate among lawmakers, with Republicans and rural-area Democrats objecting to the program's potential effect on fuel prices and agricultural interests. It has withstood legal challenge by the petroleum and trucking industries. But to attract support for last year’s transportation package, the legislature agreed to cap the prices of credits in the program and make it more transparent.

Buehler voted against SB 324. If he could scrap one piece of legislation, Buehler said during a recent debate, it would be the Clean Fuels Program.

“I opposed it because it will be at least a 19 cents gallon increase in the cost of gas. People in Oregon are already being hammered by the high cost of living here, not only the high costs of fuel, but health care, child care and housing,” he said. “I think there’s a limited capacity for lower income Oregonians to continue taking on these increased costs when their wages aren’t growing or keeping up with this cost structure we’ve set up.”

Buehler also questions the underlying impact. Some environmentalists, he said, believe ethanol-based fuel is harmful to the environment. Moreover, implementing the program requires another complex administrative structure to measure carbon intensity and manage the credits, and he’s skeptical states agencies will manage that well.

Don't Edit

Rick Bowmer | The Associated Press/2013

Gov. Kate Brown signed an executive order in 2017 to triple the number of electric vehicles, such as this Nissan Leaf recharging in Portland, in the state by 2020.

Don't Edit

EXECUTIVE ORDERS

Brown also points to executive orders she signed in November 2017 to impose green energy mandates on new construction and help triple the number of electric vehicles in the state by 2020 -- orders she signed before heading to Germany to attend the United Nations climate talks.

The first order requires new homes built after September 2020 to be equipped for solar panel installation and for commercial buildings to meet that standard by October 2022. It also requires all parking structures for new homes and commercial buildings to be wired for electric vehicle charging. Moreover, by Oct 2023, the Building Codes Division is to require all new homes to be "zero-energy ready."

The second order set a goal of at least 50,000 registered electric vehicles in the state by 2020, and mandated that the state grow its electric vehicle fleet and install more charging stations on government property.

–Ted Sickinger

503-221-8505; @tedsickinger

Don't Edit

Jamie Hale | The Oregonian/OregonLive

Gov. Kate Brown (with Hillsboro fourth-grader Brigette Harrington) lists the passage of the $5.3 billion transportation bill among her signature accomplishments.

Don't Edit

Don't Edit

BROWN: 5 KEY POSITIONS ON CLIMATE CHANGE

Here's a recap of Democratic Gov. Kate Brown's record and views on climate change:

Supports implementing a proposed carbon cap and invest plan known as the Clean Energy Jobs bill.

Backed and rallied support for the 2016 "coal to clean" bill.

Backed the $5.3 billion transportation package in 2017, which includes new funds for public transit, bike lanes, pedestrian infrastructure and electric vehicle rebates.

Backed Senate Bill 324 in 2015, extending the state's Clean Fuels Program.

Issued executive orders mandating climate actions by builders and state agencies.

Don't Edit

Rep. Knute Buehler was among the few members of his caucus to get behind coal to clean legislation, and he specifically helped push through a mandate that utilities acquire more energy from small, community-scale biomass projects.

Don't Edit

BUEHLER: 4 KEY POSITIONS ON CLIMATE CHANGE

Here's a recap of Republican Rep. Knute Buehler’s record and views on health care:

Opposes carbon cap and invest program but supports a "revenue-neutral" carbon tax.

Voted for the "coal to clean" bill in 2016.

Voted against the state's Clean Fuels Program in 2015.

Voted against the 2017 transportation package.

Don't Edit

Dave Killen | The Oregonian/OregonLive

Here are highlights from Rep. Knute Buehler and Gov. Kate Brown's final debate.

Don't Edit

ABOUT THIS SERIES

Platforms 2018 will run on Mondays through October. Check back if you want to learn more about the main two gubernatorial candidates' stances on:

• Gun regulation

• Abortion/reproductive rights

• State spending

• Taxes

• Homelessness

• Education

• Housing

• Health care

• Public Employees Retirement System

• Climate change

• Transparency

Don't Edit