Massive wildfires burn across Washington and blanket communities in smoke every summer. And, as the Washington Policy Center’s Todd Myers, points out environmental activists and Democrat politicians are fighting a federal proposal that could give foresters more flexibility to reduce dangerous wildfire fuels.

The U.S. Forest Service is considering rescinding the Roadless Rule, which restricts road construction and forest-management activities across large portions of federal forests. Myers notes the USDA says greater flexibility is needed to address wildfire danger, insect and disease damage, and threats to nearby communities.

Predictably, environmental groups like the Sierra Club are sounding the alarm, while Democrat Rep. Kim Schrier claims removing the rule could increase human-caused wildfires. Gov. Bob Ferguson (D) has similarly argued that most wildfires start near areas with road access.

But Myers points out that where a fire starts isn’t the same as what makes it catastrophic. The roughly 136,000-acre Little Giant Fire is currently affecting two roadless areas containing heavy amounts of dead and downed fuel—the exact conditions that can turn a wildfire into a massive inferno.

Myers also argues that rescinding the rule isn’t about opening federal wilderness to widespread logging. Treating remote forests is expensive, and the Forest Service already has a huge backlog of unhealthy forests needing attention. Instead, the change would give foresters more flexibility to selectively remove dangerous fuels where treatment is most needed.

After another summer of wildfires and smoke, maintaining rigid restrictions isn’t protecting forests if those forests are ultimately allowed to burn. Yet Democrats and environmental activists seem more interested in protecting the Roadless Rule than giving foresters additional tools to protect the forests themselves. Read more at the Washington Policy Center.

Olympia Democrats already passed Washington’s new 9.9% income tax. Now the state is discovering the small problem of figuring out exactly who has to pay it.

As The Center Square reports. the Department of Revenue’s new income tax advisory group is wrestling with how Washington will determine whether someone is actually a state resident for tax purposes if voters reject Initiative 645, which would repeal the tax. DOR Senior Assistant Director Tim Jennrich called implementing the tax a “significant lift,”citing numerous unresolved issues and a tight timeline.

One of the biggest headaches is defining residency. Tax experts told the workgroup that determining someone’s domicile can involve everything from where they own homes and spend their time to their remaining ties to Washington. One expert said the “gold standard” for proving someone has left Washington could mean cutting virtually all ties to the state—including charitable contributions.

That could get especially messy considering the tax targets people earning more than $1 million, many of whom may own homes in multiple states and don’t necessarily spend six months anywhere.

So Democrats passed a massive new tax before the state had adequately figured out how to determine who actually owes it. The advisory group now has until December to send lawmakers recommendations for cleaning up the details.

Of course, Washington voters could make all that bureaucratic soul-searching unnecessary by passing I-645 in November. Read more at The Center Square.

Washington’s Attorney General’s Office apparently has plenty of time to sue President Donald Trump—but not enough to explain why it is hiding records about an anti-Trump legal effort that began months before the 2024 election.

According to The Center Square, the AGO released a heavily redacted July 2024 memo connected to the “Project for Federal Accountability,” a coordinated effort involving nearly two dozen state attorneys general preparing for litigation against a potential Trump administration. Even after an appeal, the memo’s subject and most of its contents remain hidden.

The Center Square repeatedly asked the AGO to explain how its claimed legal exemptions apply—something Washington’s Public Records Act requires agencies to provide. George Erb of the Washington Coalition for Open Government called that requirement “pretty straightforward.” The AGO still hasn’t provided the requested explanation.

Considering Democratic attorneys general have sued the Trump administration nearly 100 times since January 2025, Washingtonians might reasonably want to know what their government was planning before Trump even returned to office. Read more at The Center Square.

Please consider making a contribution to ensure Shift continues to provide daily updates on the shenanigans of the liberal establishment. If you’d rather mail a check, you can send it to: Shift WA | PO Box 956 | Cle Elum, WA 98922

Forward this to a friend.  It helps us grow our community and serve you better.

You can also follow SHIFTWA on social media by liking us on Facebook and following us on Twitter.

If you feel we missed something that should be covered, email us at [email protected].