Washington’s Department of Children, Youth and Families is defending its decision to hide the names of three daycare providers receiving grants from a $251 million early-learning expansion. The providers are in Benton City, Kent and Renton. Their identities? Redacted. The public’s money? Very much involved.

State Sen. Leonard Christian, R-Spokane Valley, says the secrecy is particularly troubling amid growing concerns about daycare fraud. Taxpayers are being asked to trust the system while being denied basic information about who receives their money.

DCYF blames Initiative 1501, a 2016 law restricting the release of certain sensitive information about in-home caregivers. But there’s a catch: just five months earlier, the Department of Commerce initially hid 20 daycare grant recipients under the same law—then released their names after consulting with Attorney General Nick Brown’s office. Apparently, one agency found a way to disclose the information while another says it can’t.

DCYF insists the redactions are legally required, while the Attorney General’s Office declined to discuss any guidance it provided, citing attorney-client privilege. Conveniently, that leaves the public with few answers.

Christian says he’ll keep pushing for transparency. With hundreds of millions in public funding flowing through these programs and fraud concerns mounting, taxpayers shouldn’t have to take the government’s word for it. If the grants are legitimate, why make it so difficult to see who’s getting paid? Read more at The Center Square.

In a new column, Matt McIlwain, managing director at Madrona, a Seattle-based venture capital firm that invests in technology companies, argues Washington voters should approve Initiative 645 this November to repeal the state income tax. He warns that despite promises to target high earners, the law creates broader taxing authority that could eventually reach more residents, pointing to provisions covering pension income as a particular concern.

Even prominent Democrats are raising alarms about Olympia’s spending. Former Govs. Christine Gregoire and Gary Locke have criticized the state’s spending habits, yet lawmakers approved a reported $9.3 billion tax increase in 2025, followed by another $2.3 billion spending increase in 2026.

McIlwain also warns that Washington’s tax climate threatens its economic competitiveness. He cites an Association of Washington Business survey finding nearly one in four employers are considering leaving the state, along with migration data showing high-income residents moving elsewhere. He argues a new income tax could accelerate the loss of jobs, investment and charitable giving.

Washington voters rejected an income-tax proposal by a 64%-36% margin in 2010. McIlwain says I-645 offers another opportunity to reject the tax and pressure lawmakers to rein in spending rather than continually demand more revenue. Read more at GreekWire.

Democrats apparently decided a nearly unanimous bipartisan vote for parental rights was a little too much parental rights. Just one year after the original Parents’ Bill of Rights passed, lawmakers rewrote it—and now voters get to decide whether to undo their handiwork.

Initiative 001 would repeal the Democrats’ 2025 rewrite and restore the original law. That means parents could access their children’s academic, medical and mental health counseling records within 10 business days instead of 45, opt their children out of certain sensitive lessons, and review textbooks and curriculum.

When the initiative reached the Legislature this year, Democrats refused to give it a public hearing. So much for welcoming debate over parents’ rights.

Now Ferguson is leading the opposition, claiming the initiative would actually weaken existing protections. His argument centers on a change to the law’s requirement that schools notify parents about alleged crimes against their children. The Washington State PTA argues the new wording could delay notification in some cases involving suspected crimes or investigations.

Republican Rep. Travis Couture, who says he drafted the current notification language, calls that interpretation “pure sophistry” and argues the wording change makes no legal difference.

At the heart of the fight is a straightforward question: Should parents have timely access to information about their own children, or should Olympia get to decide when they’re allowed to know?

Let’s Go Washington founder Brian Heywood says parents are the primary stakeholders in raising their kids. Democrats rewrote the law, declined to hear the effort to restore it, and now want voters to believe the restoration is the real threat.

Ballots go out October 16 for the November 3 election. Voters will have the final say on whether Washington restores the original Parents’ Bill of Rights—or sticks with the version Democrats decided parents should have instead. Read more at Seattle Red.

Yakima Municipal Court Presiding Judge Aryn Masters is offering defendants remote hearings—or letting their attorneys appear when their presence isn’t required—amid concerns about ICE arrests at the courthouse. Worried federal agents might be waiting in the lobby? No problem. Just log in from the couch.

Masters and Judge Troy Clements are complaining that ICE agents aren’t following the court’s preferred procedures under Washington’s Courts Open to All Act. ICE, meanwhile, maintains that federal enforcement authority isn’t controlled by state restrictions.

The courthouse handles misdemeanor cases involving DUI, theft and assault. Not every defendant has been convicted, but apparently the prospect of encountering immigration agents is enough to turn showing up to court into an optional-looking proposition.

Democrats say ICE should focus on criminals. Then agents show up where people face criminal proceedings, and suddenly the agents are the problem. The message from Yakima’s judges? By all means, come to court—unless you’re worried about the federal government enforcing immigration law.

Remote hearings have legitimate uses. Helping people sidestep an encounter with immigration agents, however, raises an obvious question: Is the court focused on administering justice, or making enforcement more difficult? Read more at Seattle Red.

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].