Seattle and King County Democrats are suddenly clutching their pearls over the very homelessness bureaucracy they created, funded, and protected for years. After dumping more than $260 million into the King County Regional Homelessness Authority, officials are now floating the idea of scrapping it altogether—apparently after discovering that throwing money at a broken system doesn’t magically fix it.

A new audit found that at least $8 million in homelessness funds can’t be tracked, while the agency racked up a staggering $44.7 million negative cash position and millions more in deficits and unrecoverable costs. But don’t worry—agency leadership insists there was no “misuse of funds,” just good old-fashioned “poor financial management.” Comforting.

Now, with a mysterious $13 million under scrutiny and a May 2 deadline looming, even top Democrats like Councilwoman Maritza Rivera and Councilman Rob Dembowski are calling this the “last straw.” Translation: the headlines finally got too bad to ignore.

The real kicker? This isn’t new. The agency has been flagged for mismanagement before, while homelessness across Seattle and King County continues to worsen—raising the obvious question: what exactly were taxpayers funding?

Some Democrats still aren’t ready to pull the plug, clinging instead to their favorite solution—more “progressive revenue”—while sidestepping the uncomfortable reality that the problem isn’t a lack of money, it’s how it’s being spent.

In the end, this is what happens when ideology outruns accountability: hundreds of millions spent, results getting worse, and the same officials now pretending they just discovered the problem. Read more at Center Square.

With five seats up for grabs, Washington’s 2026 Supreme Court election is shaping up to be less about justice—and more about whether Democrats can finally get a court willing to greenlight their long-coveted income tax. After voters rejected income taxes ten times and the court struck them down repeatedly, Democrats aren’t hiding the play anymore—emails show lawmakers explicitly crafted the new 9.9% tax to force the court to revisit (and overturn) longstanding precedent. 

The problem? The court is already stacked with reliably liberal justices, and most candidates running to replace outgoing members come from the same political orbit—endorsed by Democrat insiders, backed by the same donors, and tied to the same agenda. Incumbents and appointees linked to the Attorney General’s office are raking in establishment support, while conservative or reform-minded candidates struggle to gain traction.

Meanwhile, this same court has already shown a willingness to bend the rules—upholding a capital gains tax critics argue is essentially an income tax, striking down voter-backed initiatives, and issuing rulings that have cost taxpayers millions. Now, with the income tax question looming, the stakes couldn’t be clearer.

Even some legal observers admit the ideological makeup of the court likely won’t change much—meaning the outcome may already be baked in. And if the court does overturn its 1933 ruling that income is property, it opens the door for Democrats to expand income taxes far beyond “the rich.”

In other words: after failing to convince voters for decades, Democrats are betting they can get the result they want from a court filled with their allies. Because why bother winning the argument when you can just change the referee? Read more at Center Square.

Former Gov. Jay Inslee is taking heat after responding to the attempted assassination of Donald Trump with what critics are calling a tone-deaf, partisan jab—because apparently even a moment of national shock wasn’t enough to pause the political reflex.

Instead of sticking to the bipartisan script—condemn violence, support law enforcement—Inslee veered straight into attacking Trump, dredging up past grievances tied to policing and January 6. The reaction online was swift and brutal, with critics blasting the post as out of touch and emblematic of the same divisive politics voters are increasingly fed up with.

Meanwhile, the actual incident was anything but political theater. Authorities say 31-year-old Cole Tomas Allen crossed the country armed with multiple weapons before storming a security checkpoint near the White House Correspondents’ Dinner, triggering a gunfire exchange with law enforcement. A Secret Service agent was hit but protected by a vest—one of the few bright spots in an otherwise chilling situation.

Other Washington leaders—like Bob Ferguson, Maria Cantwell, and Adam Smith—managed to do the bare minimum: condemn the violence and thank first responders without turning it into a political sideshow.

But Inslee’s response stands out for all the wrong reasons—less about leadership, more about scoring points. And it underscores a bigger problem: when everything becomes political fodder, even an attempted assassination gets reduced to just another opportunity for partisan cheap shots. Read more at MyNorthwest.com.