I didn't mean to imply that I'm opposed to taxes on pollution and that pay for climate mitigation. That should be a good thing. What I find ridiculous is using that money to fund projects unrelated to pollution and climate mitigation and that the grants don't require applicants to demonstrate how their project mitigates climate change and by how much. The lack of nexus and metrics is irresponsible, and oh so Inslee-like IMO.

Those suggesting we only need to vote for an R governor instead demonstrate a lack of awareness. C'man is right; only a socially liberal, fiscally conservative R can win a statewide election (Dan Evans style essentially). But the Rs consistently nominate candidates who are anti-abortion and anti-gay and queer and whatever, and those are deal breakers in consistently socially liberal WA. So Ds like Inslee and Fergie, no matter how whack-a-doodle they are, get elected. And BTW, neither candidates give a damn about fish and wildlife. Inslee has shown that he cares about the environment so long as it generates more taxes, but he has demonstrated that he's all too willing to spend that tax revenue on projects that don't mitigate the pollution that the tax is for. And that pisses me off.