Michael Rosen

I support Washington’s growing AI economy, but growth must not come at the expense of ratepayers, our water, or a reliable transition to cleaner energy. Four priorities:

Growth should pay for new power. New hyperscale data centers should fund enough new clean generation to serve their electricity demand rather than simply relying on existing hydropower and increasing pressure for new fossil generation.

No cross-subsidization. Large AI loads belong in a dedicated rate class bearing the full cost of the generation, transmission, and water infrastructure they require, backed by take-or-pay contracts. PSE rates are already up roughly 45% in two years. Households should never subsidize hyperscale demand.

Transparency. Data centers should publicly report facility-level energy and water use annually. You cannot manage what you do not measure.

End remaining subsidies. The Legislature repealed the sales-tax exemption for replacement server equipment but left the exemption for new construction. I would finish the job. Good Jobs First has documented that these programs cost states hundreds of millions annually while often delivering weak returns.

Sources: JLARC tax preference reviews, UTC rate filings, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory’s U.S. Data Center Energy Usage Reports, Good Jobs First subsidy research, and ProPublica’s reporting on Washington’s data center subsidies.

KEYWORDS: Ratepayer Protection, Transparency, Accountability

Environmental stewardship requires more than spending money—it requires measuring results. My funding priorities are accountability-driven.

First, make Climate Commitment Act dollars deliver measurable outcomes. Washington has invested billions through the Climate Commitment Act, yet recent emissions reductions remain well below the pace needed to meet our statutory goals. Funding should prioritize projects with the greatest verified emissions reductions per dollar, require independent performance reviews, and redirect money from programs that cannot demonstrate results.

Second, remove the barriers to clean energy deployment. An investigation by ProPublica and Oregon Public Broadcasting found our state ranked dead last in renewable energy growth. Transmission, interconnection, and permitting have failed to keep pace, so I would prioritize funding for transmission upgrades, interconnection reform, and permitting capacity so clean-energy projects can actually be built.

Third, protect Puget Sound. Fund stormwater projects targeting 6PPD-quinone—the tire-wear chemical University of Washington researchers found is highly toxic to coho salmon—along with culvert replacement, habitat restoration, and microplastics research. I also support strengthening, fully implementing, and enforcing Washington’s Recycling Reform Act.

Across every program, I would require transparent, public reporting of measurable outcomes. Good stewardship means knowing what every environmental dollar actually accomplished.

KEYWORDS: Accountability, Puget Sound, Measurable Results

Science literacy is not just knowing scientific facts—it is understanding how scientific knowledge is built, tested, and challenged. In an age of AI, social media, and misinformation, students need to know how to evaluate evidence, recognize uncertainty, and distinguish high-quality research from opinion. Right now, too many graduates leave school without those tools.

Washington should continue strengthening STEM education while placing greater emphasis on the scientific method, statistics, data literacy, and critical thinking across K–12. Students should learn how to read graphs, interpret risk, identify common biases, evaluate sources, and understand why replication and peer review matter. Classroom learning should include more hands-on experiments and partnerships with Washington’s universities, research institutions, technology industries, and local watershed and salmon-recovery projects, so students experience science as a process of discovery rather than memorization—and build a relationship with science in their own community.

As a Washington-licensed nutritionist and attorney, I’ve seen how poor scientific reasoning can lead to costly mistakes in both health and public policy. My goal is not to teach students what to think, but how to evaluate evidence and reach sound conclusions. That is the foundation of both good science and a healthy democracy.

KEYWORDS: Evidence evaluation, Critical thinking, Hands-on science

Wildfire policy should focus on prevention, preparedness, and measurable results—not simply larger emergency budgets after fires begin.

First, fund prevention consistently. In 2021 the Legislature unanimously committed $500 million over eight years to forest health and wildfire preparedness (HB 1168)—and it worked, measurably reducing damage where fuels were treated. Yet in 2025 lawmakers cut that funding roughly in half—the year Bear Gulch burned—then restored it under public pressure, and only through mid-2027. Independent analysis shows prevention returns roughly $8 per $1 spent. That commitment should be protected, not an annual political fight.

Second, expand science-based forest management: strategic thinning, prescribed burning where appropriate, and fuel reduction near communities—guided by local ecological conditions and the best available science.

Third, prepare Western Washington, where roughly 40% of last year’s fires started: early-detection networks, defensible space, home-hardening, and evacuation planning.

Fourth, treat smoke as a public health emergency: clean-air shelters, school filtration, and forecasting—smoke harms far more people than flames.

Every program should report acres treated, risk reduced, and cost-effectiveness. My approach is informed by the U.S. Forest Service, National Interagency Fire Center, and Washington DNR.

KEYWORDS: Prevention, Forest Management, Accountability

Washington’s fisheries policy should be guided by science and adapt as conditions change while protecting ecosystems and the communities that depend on them.

First, invest in continuous scientific monitoring. Our shellfish industry adapted to ocean acidification because monitoring detected corrosive water early enough for hatcheries to respond—proof that monitoring pays. Expand measurement of ocean temperature, acidity, dissolved oxygen, stream flows, and species abundance. Make the data public and provide practical forecasts for fisheries, tribes, and shellfish growers.

Second, restore habitat with measurable biological benefits—and finish what we’ve started. Washington is under a federal treaty-rights injunction to replace salmon-blocking culverts by 2030, has invested billions, and remains behind schedule. Prioritize the highest-benefit projects, alongside estuary restoration and stormwater treatment that reduces 6PPD-quinone, the tire-derived chemical shown to kill coho salmon.

Third, manage adaptively. Harvest decisions should respond quickly to changing populations using the best available science and co-management with tribal nations, protecting long-term fisheries while avoiding restrictions unsupported by current data.

Finally, help communities adapt through port infrastructure, selective fishing technology, workforce retraining, and aquaculture research.

Washington has world-class scientific institutions. Our challenge is turning their research into faster decisions, measurable recovery, and better outcomes for fishing communities.

KEYWORDS: Scientific monitoring, Salmon recovery, Adaptive management