Coal Wars: How Voters are Shaping their Leaders’ Decisions

By Floyd McKay
of Crosscut.com

(Note: This is the conclusion of a three-part series)

“Elections have consequences.” — Numerous politicians

November 6, 2012 is an important — perhaps critical — date in the effort to build the nation’s largest coal-export terminal at Cherry Point north of Bellingham. A final decision is still years away, but the 2012 election figures to play a huge role in how federal and state agencies approach their review of SSA Marine’s Gateway Pacific Terminal.

Nationally, voters rejected Republican Mitt Romney’s pro-coal campaign while Washington voters elected Gov. Jay Inslee, who made his congressional reputation as a climate-change expert. Those elections have consequences — one is climate change.

President Barack Obama and Govs. Inslee and John Kitzhaber of Oregon form a green line confronting backers of Northwest coal exports. Letters from federal and state agencies regarding the scope of environmental reviews for coal export plans indicate the officials got the memo; several agencies posted strong reservations about the project and others muted previous support.

Despite protestations of independence, public-agency regulators are attuned to the views of elected executives. The 2012 elections were not good news for those who trade in coal.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) urged area-wide study of regional export terminals last year and its 2013 scoping comments suggested, “The (study) would appropriately include increases in regional train traffic and related air quality effects on human health, and the potential for effects to human health and the environment from increases in the long-range transportation of air pollution, including greenhouse gas emissions.”

To read the full article, go to crosscut.com/2013/coal-port-elections-council-legislature