Renewed reporting is shining more light on allegations of fraud in Washington’s taxpayer-funded childcare subsidy system, including claims that providers and parents worked together to collect subsidies for childcare that allegedly never happened.

Documents obtained by The Center Square through a public records request describe allegations that children weren’t actually being brought to daycare while parents still signed them in so providers could collect taxpayer-funded payments. In one case, investigators alleged a provider gave parents a cut of the money while keeping the rest.

Naturally, the state’s response is that fraud is bad and people should report it.

Attorney General Nick Brown’s office says its fraud unit can address certain cases, but DSHS—not the AG—is the primary agency responsible for investigating and enforcing childcare fraud. DSHS’s Office of Accountability investigates potential criminal cases, refers them to local prosecutors when there’s evidence of fraud, and pursues repayment when improper payments are identified.

DCYF also insists it takes allegations seriously. Providers convicted of criminal fraud involving childcare benefits can receive a lifetime ban from the Working Connections Child Care subsidy program.

That’s all well and good, but there’s a fairly obvious question: How much taxpayer money has already walked out the door before anyone actually catches the people allegedly gaming the system?

Republican Rep. Travis Couture, who has repeatedly criticized DCYF over childcare fraud, isn’t buying the idea that Washington should simply assume these schemes aren’t happening here.

And the controversy gets even more interesting. While journalists and independent investigators continue digging into potential fraud, state employee union advocates have reportedly asked lawmakers to crack down on efforts to investigate and expose it.

Because apparently the worst thing about potential taxpayer-funded daycare fraud isn’t the possibility that taxpayers are being ripped off. It’s that someone might actually look into it.

Washington officials say they want fraud reported. Now taxpayers get to see whether the state is equally interested in finding it, prosecuting it and getting their money back. Read more at Center Square.

Democrats are once again taking a victory lap for something that isn’t actually happening.

The account Democrats Deliver claimed this weekend that “ICE agents are now banned from wearing masks in Washington,” complete with a siren emoji. The only problem? Gov. Bob Ferguson signed Senate Bill 5855 six months ago, and masked ICE agents are still making arrests across Washington.

The law, sponsored by Sen. Javier Valdez, passed the Legislature and took effect immediately after Ferguson signed it March 19. But here’s the kicker: it has never been enforced.

That’s partly because the law doesn’t actually criminalize wearing a mask. Instead, it gives people detained by masked officers the ability to sue for damages. So enforcement effectively depends on the very people being detained filing lawsuits.

So far, there doesn’t appear to be a single publicly reported lawsuit against an ICE agent under the law.

The Attorney General’s Office has also acknowledged that the law doesn’t give it enforcement authority, while local police have made clear they aren’t going to enforce a state law against federal officers.

And there’s an even bigger problem for Democrats hoping their law will survive: federal supremacy.

Federal officials warned lawmakers about the constitutional problem before the bill passed. Then, in April, the Ninth Circuit blocked a similar California law, ruling that states cannot directly regulate the conduct of the federal government. Washington falls under the same Ninth Circuit.

The Justice Department has also made state mask bans involving federal immigration enforcement a litigation priority.

In other words, Democrats passed a law, federal officials warned them it had serious legal problems, nobody has enforced it, and ICE agents are still wearing masks.

Yet six months later, Democrats Deliver apparently discovered it and decided it was time for a victory lap.

Olympia’s latest accomplishment: passing a law that exists mostly on paper—and then pretending it’s breaking news. Read more at Seattle Red.

Washington voters approved Initiative 2066 with 51.7% of the vote in 2024, carrying 34 of the state’s 39 counties. Less than two years later, the state Supreme Court tossed it out in a 6-3 ruling.

The reason? The justices said the initiative violated Washington’s constitutional single-subject rule, arguing it actually contained four different subjects.

Translation: Washington voters apparently managed to approve too much at once.

Republican Party Chair Jim Walsh says the timing of the ruling is especially interesting. He told KIRO’s John Curley that sources close to the court told him the opinion had been finished for months but wasn’t released until Sept. 17—just weeks before the Nov. 3 election.

And what happens to be on that ballot? Five of the court’s nine seats.

Walsh admits he can’t prove the court intentionally held the decision for political reasons. But he argues the timing is hard to ignore, particularly because the ruling came as voters are preparing to decide the futures of multiple justices.

The court’s majority, led by Chief Justice Debra Stephens, said I-2066 violated the single-subject requirement. Justice Sal Mungia disagreed, arguing the initiative’s provisions all revolved around one basic issue: protecting the option to use natural gas.

Walsh also points to what he sees as an inconvenient inconsistency. The court upheld Initiative 2081, the Parents’ Bill of Rights, despite that measure containing multiple provisions concerning parental rights. In his view, the single-subject rule seems to get a lot more flexible depending on the initiative in front of the court.

And if Initiative 645, which would repeal Washington’s state income tax, passes in November? Walsh expects opponents to haul out the same legal argument and challenge it under the single-subject rule.

So here we are: Washington voters approve an initiative, the Supreme Court strikes it down, five Supreme Court seats appear on the ballot, and everyone is supposed to pretend the September timing isn’t at least worth asking about.

Walsh says the ruling could backfire by motivating voters who aren’t thrilled about seeing a voter-approved initiative tossed out by the state’s highest court.

At minimum, November voters will have plenty to think about when deciding what role they want the Supreme Court to play when it comes to laws approved directly by the people. Read more at MyNorthwest.com.

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].