Newly uncovered records show Washington Democrats weren’t just passing an income tax—they were actively working with the Attorney General’s office to engineer a legal strategy to overturn nearly a century of constitutional precedent standing in their way. 

The target? The long-standing ruling that income is considered property under Washington’s constitution—meaning it can’t be taxed progressively without violating uniformity rules. Instead of respecting that, internal emails reveal lawmakers openly discussing how to “force” the state Supreme Court to revisit and overturn the decision.

In other words: pass the tax first, then pressure the courts to make it legal later.

Even more revealing, legal advisors suggested designing the tax specifically as a test case—not to comply with the constitution, but to challenge it. One attorney even warned against trying to disguise it as something else, advising lawmakers to be upfront about their goal: get the court to overturn precedent. 

And because voters might have had a problem with all of this, Democrats were also coached to include an “emergency clause”—a procedural trick to block a public referendum and keep the people from weighing in.

So let’s review: a 9.9% income tax pushed through, legal strategy coordinated behind the scenes, constitutional limits treated like inconveniences, and voter input deliberately sidelined.

All while being sold to the public as a modest, targeted tax on “the wealthy.”

Even critics of the tax say this raises serious red flags—not just about the policy itself, but about the process. Because when the Attorney General’s office is helping lawmakers figure out how to sidestep the constitution instead of defend it, that’s not just aggressive policymaking—it’s a whole new level of political maneuvering.

But sure, trust the process. After all, what could go wrong when the people writing the law are also trying to rewrite the rules? Read more at Center Square.

In his latest op-ed, GOP State Senate Minority Leader and congressional candidate (3^rd CD) John Braun calls out former governor Jay Inslee for trying to pin Washington’s sky-high fuel costs on global conflicts, while ignoring the policies much closer to home that are really driving prices. 

Yes, international events can nudge prices—but Braun argues the real damage is coming from Olympia. Chief among them: Democrats’ Clean Energy Transformation Act, the Climate Commitment Act (aka cap-and-tax), and the low-carbon fuel standard—all policies Inslee pushed and lawmakers approved.

The result? Higher electricity bills, higher gas prices, and a whole lot of “affordability” promises that didn’t exactly pan out. Utilities are already citing these mandates as reasons for major rate hikes, and fuel costs have been padded with policy-driven increases that go far beyond the temporary effects of global events.

Braun’s point is simple: Washington was already paying some of the highest gas prices in the country before any international conflict entered the picture.

And while Democrats now complain about high energy costs, Braun argues those costs are exactly what their policies were designed to create—making energy more expensive in the name of climate goals.

So when families feel the squeeze at the pump or open their power bill, Braun suggests they don’t need to look halfway across the world for answers.

They can just look at the policies passed in Olympia. Read more at The Chronicle.

New campaign finance filings show that Congressmember Marie Gluesenkamp Perez is getting the bulk of her support from outside Washington—both geographically and politically. More than half her fundraising for re-election in the 3^rdcongressional district comes from party transfers, not grassroots donors, and a massive share of individual contributions are flowing in from places like New York and California.

The kicker? Less than 10% of her total fundraising came from within the state she’s supposed to represent.

So while she leans hard into the “Southwest Washington, working-class” brand, the financial reality tells a different story—one where big-city donors and national Democrat networks are keeping the lights on.

And it’s not just small-dollar donors from afar. The filings also show tens of thousands coming from the billionaire Pritzker family—because nothing says “in touch with local voters” like cash from one of the wealthiest political dynasties in the country.

Critics say the disconnect is obvious: the image is flannel and pickup trucks, but the funding pipeline runs through elite donor circles and party machinery.

But hey, why rely on the people in your own district when you’ve got a nationwide network of donors ready to write checks?

Because in today’s Democrat playbook, “local representation” apparently just means knowing how to cash out-of-state donations. Read more at Seattle Red.

A new report from the Mountain States Policy Center highlights what should be an uncomfortable reality for Washington Democrats: Idaho cut its income tax rates—and nearly doubled its income tax revenue anyway.

Over the past decade, Idaho dropped its top rate from 7.4% to a flat 5.3%. The doom-and-gloom predictions were predictable—budget collapse, gutted services, fiscal chaos. Instead? Revenue jumped from about $1.16 billion to $2.26 billion. That’s roughly a 95% increase while rates were going down.

According to MSPC’s Chris Cargill, it’s not magic—it’s basic economics. Lower taxes encourage more work, more investment, and more people paying into the system. More participation, bigger pie. Pretty straightforward—unless you’re writing tax policy in Olympia.

Meanwhile in Washington, Democrats are heading in the exact opposite direction—pushing a brand-new income tax while reportedly strategizing ways to bulldoze nearly a century of constitutional precedent to make it stick.

Of course, progressive advocates insist higher taxes on “the wealthy” are necessary to fix a “regressive” system. That’s the theory. Idaho, inconveniently, ran the experiment—and the results don’t exactly back it up.

Even accounting for population growth, the numbers don’t pencil out the way tax-hike advocates claim. Idaho’s population rose modestly, but revenue skyrocketed far beyond that—suggesting something else is at play besides just “more people.”

But don’t expect Washington Democrats to take notes. When your entire governing philosophy revolves around squeezing more out of fewer taxpayers, the idea that lowering taxes could actually increase revenue isn’t just inconvenient—it’s heresy.

So while Idaho grows its economy and its tax base, Washington is busy testing how much you can raise taxes before people—and their money—start heading for the exits. Read more at Center Square.

When your “secure” election system ends up next to a strip mall dumpster, maybe it’s time to stop lecturing everyone about how flawless it is.

Hundreds of Washington mail-in ballots—some from multiple election cycles—were discovered sitting in a box behind a Renton strip mall, alongside jury summons and voter materials. The ballots, reportedly tied to a private mailbox business, sat there long enough for a random passerby to find them… and then spend days getting ignored by the very agencies supposedly safeguarding elections. 

State and county officials insist no one contacted them. The guy who found the ballots says he did. Classic government accountability: if it’s not. in their inbox, it didn’t happen.

Now federal investigators—including the U.S. Postal Inspection Service and reportedly the FBI—are sniffing around. Meanwhile, no one has even bothered to pick up the ballots yet. That’s right—the ballots are still sitting with the state GOP chair because the system is apparently too “secure” to retrieve them promptly. 

Democrats and election officials rushed to reassure everyone: don’t worry, signatures are checked! You can track your ballot! Just ignore the part where hundreds of them somehow ended up abandoned behind a dumpster in the first place.

Even critics aren’t claiming this proves fraud—but they are pointing out the obvious: if ballots can disappear into the void between election offices and voters, that’s not a conspiracy theory… it’s a chain-of-custody failure.

And that’s the real problem Democrats don’t want to touch. Because once you admit the system has holes big enough to lose hundreds of ballots, it’s a lot harder to keep insisting everything is working perfectly.

But sure—nothing to see here. Just your democracy… taking out the trash. Read more at MyNorthwest.com.

When small business owners start saying your “millionaire’s tax” might put them out of business… maybe it’s not just a tax on millionaires.

A Kent trucking owner says Washington Democrats’ new income tax could hit his 14-employee company directly—not because he’s living large, but because small businesses often file taxes as personal income. That means the state’s shiny new 9.9% tax on earnings over $1 million doesn’t just skim the ultra-wealthy—it squeezes the very businesses Democrats claim to champion.

The result? Less money for hiring, expansion, or even keeping wages competitive. In other words: exactly the opposite of what politicians promised.

And this isn’t happening in a vacuum. Washington already piles on costs with its Business & Occupation tax, payroll taxes, property taxes, and a grab bag of fees. Add in surprise expenses—like being handed a six-figure infrastructure bill—and it’s no wonder business owners are asking whether it’s even worth staying.

Meanwhile, as Shift WA readers know, the tax itself is headed straight for court. Backed by heavy hitters like Rob McKenna and Phil Talmadge, the lawsuit argues the whole scheme violates Washington’s constitution, which treats income as property—meaning it can’t just be taxed at whatever rate lawmakers feel like.

And because Democrats knew voters might have something to say about it, they slapped on a “necessity clause” to block a referendum. Now that move is also under scrutiny, with the state Supreme Court set to weigh in.

So to recap: a legally questionable tax, pushed through without voter input, that business owners say could cost jobs and shut down companies.

But don’t worry—Democrats assure everyone it’s only targeting “the rich.” Just ignore the small businesses quietly doing the math and realizing they might be next. Read more at Seattle Red.

Starbucks just announced it plans to shift or hire 2,000 employees in Nashville over the next five years—more than half of its current Seattle-area workforce. Don’t worry though, they say Seattle will still be headquarters. You know, in the same way you “live” somewhere but spend most of your time elsewhere.

The company is setting up shop in downtown Nashville, praising Tennessee’s business-friendly environment and workforce—two things that somehow never make it into Washington Democrats’ policy discussions unless they’re explaining why companies are leaving.

Meanwhile, this isn’t happening in a vacuum. Under CEO Brian Niccol, the company is trying to revive lagging performance, and apparently that includes expanding somewhere that isn’t weighed down by rising costs, regulation, and policy chaos.

And let’s not forget the backdrop: dozens of store closures across Washington, hundreds of lost retail jobs, and a slow drip of corporate footprint shifting elsewhere. Add in Amazon already planting thousands of employees in Nashville, and suddenly this doesn’t look like a one-off—it looks like a trend.

But sure, keep telling everyone the business climate is just fine. It’s not like major employers are quietly voting with their feet.

Because in Washington, the plan seems to be simple: tax more, regulate more… and act surprised when companies start brewing their future somewhere else. Read more at MyNorthwest.com.