logo
This Seattle Democrat doesn't know all that's best for our side of WA

This Seattle Democrat doesn't know all that's best for our side of WA

Yahoo18-05-2025

Washington Senate Majority Leader Jamie Pedersen, D-Seattle, blocked a bill that would have helped the Tri-Cities secure billions in economic investment and more than 1,000 jobs. A Seattle-based state leader thinks he knows what is best for this side of the Cascade Mountains.
House Bill 1210, sponsored by Rep. Stephanie Barnard, R-Pasco, was close to passage. It had already passed the House with bipartisan support and was heading toward a floor vote in the Senate in the waning days of the legislative session.
The bill would have modified the rules for Targeted Urban Areas. TUAs are areas that local governments create to lure manufacturing and industrial development with temporary property tax breaks. Businesses commit to investing in improvements and creating living wage jobs.
Richland was the first city to create a TUA. It includes the Northwest Advanced Clean Energy Park, the Horn Rapids Industrial Park and the Richland Airport.
Richland's Targeted Urban Area attracted several projects, among them proposals by Framatome Inc. and Washington Energy LLC. The two companies operate in the nuclear power industry. Framatome already has facilities in the area and planned to spend $375 million expanding its nuclear fuel plant. Washington Energy, meanwhile, is considering building a $3 billion nuclear fuel plant.
These companies are poised to play a significant role in the future of nuclear fuel production, a sector where the Tri-Cities possess expertise and infrastructure thanks to its history with the Hanford site and the presence of the Columbia Generating Station.
The hitch is that state law sets a timeline for businesses in a TUA to deliver their projects and the accompanying jobs. The tax breaks last for a decade, but only on projects completed in five years or less. That's fine for a lot of businesses, but nuclear fuel companies face a lengthy federal approval process from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which can take years.
Barnard introduced HB 1210 to address that regulatory reality. It would have granted nuclear projects in Targeted Urban Areas up to an additional four years to receive their certification, build and hire workers.
Pedersen wasn't having it. As majority leader, he has the power to reroute a bill from a floor vote, effectively killing it, and he did just that.
Pedersen cited budget shortfalls as one reason to block the bill, but HB 1210 would not have affected state revenue. The only taxes involved are local. Richland is gambling on these companies delivering what they promise, not the state. Hopefully local leaders have done their homework and carefully thought it through.
Pedersen also expressed concern about the lack of a national nuclear waste storage facility. That view caters to nuclear-phobia among his liberal base in the Puget Sound area.
The Tri-Cities is already home to a nuclear power plant that responsibly manages its spent fuel. Moreover, Framatome, a company with a long-standing presence in Richland, demonstrated its commitment to safe operations during a recent dustup with federal regulators over nuclear materials.
To suggest that a lack of a permanent federal repository to hold nuclear waste should halt all progress in nuclear energy and manufacturing ignores the current safe storage practices.
Adding to the urgency is the need for more energy to power electric cars and digital industries as well as to replace energy generation capacity that could be lost due to dam removals. Nuclear power offers a reliable, carbon-free alternative that can produce energy 24 hours a day, unlike wind and solar.
Blocking HB 1210 was not just a setback for the Tri-Cities; it was a missed opportunity for all of Washington to embrace clean energy.
It's hard to imagine Pedersen's predecessor, Sen. Andy Billig from Spokane, pulling this same sort of aggressive legislative maneuvering on a bill that would help this side of the state.
We urge Pedersen to reconsider his stance and invite him to visit the Tri-Cities.
Firsthand engagement with this community might cultivate a deeper understanding of the nuclear expertise here and a clearer view of the economic opportunities at stake. Then, if a similar bill is introduced next year, he might at least let senators vote on it.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Senator Markey announces plans to file amendment on AI regulation
Senator Markey announces plans to file amendment on AI regulation

Yahoo

time20 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Senator Markey announces plans to file amendment on AI regulation

BOSTON (WWLP) – State Senator Ed Markey (D-Mass.) has announced that he intends to file an amendment on AI regulation. Senator Markey said he plans to file an amendment to the Senate reconciliation bill to block Republicans' attempt to prevent states from regulating AI in the next ten years. Senators in both parties have expressed an interest in regulating artificial intelligence. Car dealership aids relief at Baystate Children's Hospital 'Despite the overwhelming opposition to their plan to block states from regulating artificial intelligence for the next decade, Republicans are refusing to back down on this irresponsible and short-sighted provision,' said Senator Markey. Last Tuesday, the senator delivered remarks on the Senate floor opposing the reconciliation bill passed in the House. He also took part in a virtual roundtable last week with advocates to discuss the ban's impact on communities throughout the United States. 'I plan to file an amendment to strip this dangerous provision from Republicans' 'Big Beautiful Bill,'' Markey said. 'Republicans should be prepared to vote on this outrageous policy and explain to their constituents why they are preventing their state leaders from responding to the harms caused by this new and evolving technology.' WWLP-22News, an NBC affiliate, began broadcasting in March 1953 to provide local news, network, syndicated, and local programming to western Massachusetts. Watch the 22News Digital Edition weekdays at 4 p.m. on Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Schumer says 16 Republicans have ‘discomfort' with green tax credit rollbacks
Schumer says 16 Republicans have ‘discomfort' with green tax credit rollbacks

Yahoo

time20 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Schumer says 16 Republicans have ‘discomfort' with green tax credit rollbacks

Democrats are working to convince some 16 of their Republican colleagues to oppose the GOP's policy bill because of its rollbacks to climate-friendly tax credits, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said Thursday. 'We have a group … of seven or eight Democrats who are talking to their Republican colleagues … and we're getting some vibes that people realize this bill went too far, and we're hoping they can all go together to John Thune and to Crapo and say, 'Change it. We can't be for it the way it is,'' Schumer told reporters Wednesday, referring to Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) and Finance Committee Chair Mike Crapo (R-Idaho). 'We have a list of 16 Republican senators who have shown some discomfort with this, and that's the main group we're focused on,' he added. The version of the 'big, beautiful bill' passed by House Republicans makes major cuts to tax credits for climate-friendly energy sources, making it so that any project that is not already under construction within 60 days of the law's enactment is ineligible for the tax credits. This provision, among others, is expected to bar many projects from eligibility and could ultimately lead to less low-carbon energy development. At least some Republicans have publicly expressed skepticism of a rapid end to the credits, with Sens. Lisa Murkowski (Alaska), Thom Tillis (N.C.), John Curtis (Utah) and Jerry Moran (Kan.) warning against a full repeal. However, House Republicans who have championed the cuts are pushing for them to stay in their current form, with members of the Freedom Caucus board recently saying it will 'not accept' changes that water down the cuts. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Ohio Senate, House each passed their ideal budget; What's next?
Ohio Senate, House each passed their ideal budget; What's next?

Yahoo

time20 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Ohio Senate, House each passed their ideal budget; What's next?

Jun. 11—An Ohio Senate vote this week finalized its two-year state spending plan that would, among many other things, create a flat 2.75% income tax; push funds to higher performing school districts; and use Ohioans' unclaimed funds to partially fund a new Cleveland Browns stadium. The 23-to-10 Senate vote Wednesday and the subsequent 84-to-1 House vote not to concur with the Senate's changes set up a so-called conference committee — a negotiation between hand-picked members of each chamber that caps off nearly every operating budget process. "This is tradition with budgets with limited exceptions," Senate President Rob McColley, R-Napoleon, told this outlet. "It's usually just the standard process of getting together, working out the differences and figuring out where we're going to end up for the final version." Whatever compromise the GOP-dominated House and Senate chambers agree on then has to be sent to Ohio's Republican governor, who wields line-item veto power and can cross out provisions he doesn't like. Most of the negotiation happens behind closed doors and out of public view, but the major points of contention heading into this conference committee are fairly obvious. Highlights from the Senate's now-confirmed plan compared to the House's plan include: — Creating a flat, 2.75% income tax rate for all Ohioans who earn more than $26,050 annually. The proposal eliminates Ohio's highest tax bracket for earners pulling over $100,000 per year, eliminating over a billion dollars in state tax revenue over a two-year period. — Expanding access to Ohio's "homestead exemption" property tax relief program by increasing the income threshold from $40,000 to $42,000 and allowing slightly more of a qualifying participants' home value to be tax exempt. — Granting county budget commissions the authority to reduce property tax millage "if the commission finds it reasonably necessary or prudent to avoid unnecessary, excessive, or unneeded property tax collections." — Eliminating replacement and substitute property tax levies. — Capping a school district's financial reserves at 50% of the prior year's operating expenses, as opposed to the House-proposed 30% carryover cap. General funds in excess of that 50% cap would then be portioned back out to the property taxpayers of that district. — Directing $600 million of the state's $3.7 billion in unclaimed funds to the Cleveland Browns' new stadium project instead of issuing public bonds as the House proposed. — Requiring school boards to obtain a 2/3 vote from members before putting a property tax levy on the ballot. — Adding $633.9 million more to the state's K-12 public schools than the current biennium, phased in largely through new "performance-based" incentives that will reward high-performing and improving districts with more cash. — Establishing a $100 million set-aside to potentially withhold from state universities that do not come under compliance of the newly-passed Senate Bill 1, which eliminates university-sanctioned diversity, equity and inclusion programs on public campuses. Ohio House Speaker Matt Huffman, R-Lima, told reporters Wednesday that the Senate's school funding plan and flat tax rate will likely be central points of internal discussion as his caucus prepares for negotiations. "We'll have the next two-plus weeks to deal with it," Huffman said. "Our staff and some of the leadership and other folks are set to spend the weekend reviewing these items, so I think there's already discussions going on among a variety of people in different areas about what we may do." But, Huffman said he overall believes that the House and the Senate aren't too far apart on the big stuff — he likes the idea of a flat tax, he's framed the Senate's idea on using unclaimed funds to help the Browns as clever — but pointed to "a lot of very basic policy differences" within the disparate proposals. When asked about his non-negotiables, McColley said he didn't want to reveal too much. "But we're firm believers in some of the big items. The flat tax is something that we feel pretty strongly about," McColley said. "That would be something we're pretty committed to, hopefully we don't get a lot of push back. But other than that, we'll let the process play out." Asked about his non-negotiables, Huffman told reporters, "I'd like to tell you that there is nothing that's non-negotiable, even if somebody says it's non-negotiable."

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store