we feel very comfortable that we are making a downpayment on our fair share of solving the climate problems

laughable platitude when the topic is that said down-payment is clearly insufficient.

Due to the importance of fossil fuels in our current life style and the lack of clean energy infracstucture, a carbon tax has to be strongly progressive to be revenue neutral.

"which they say [I-732] doesn't do enough to invest in communities that climate is already impacting the most."

This is pure double-speak. For communities that are most impacted by climate change, the most urgent priority is to stop the damage, which I-732 would do. Investment would be great, but an initiative doesn't have to solve all the State's problems at once.

And a cut in regressive taxes plus a low-income rebate, which I-732 has, would be a pretty good investment in low-income communities.

"a carbon tax has to be strongly progressive to be revenue neutral."

FYI are you aware you're using "revenue neutral" in a weird personal way? It *could* be regressive and be revenue neutral, that works just be bad and unfair.

You could say "has to be progressive to take the same % of each person's income" if you'd like.

A revenue-neutral carbon tax and a revenue-neutral progressive income tax would be a huge improvement over the current situation.