Washington Democrats want voters to keep the state’s new 9.9% income tax on household income above $1 million. Initiative 645 would repeal it, and the choice is simple: Yes means repeal. No means keep the tax. But Olympia’s tax defenders seem determined to make the decision anything but simple.

The ballot warning claims repealing the tax would reduce funding for schools, higher education and human services—even though collections aren’t expected to begin until 2029. The revenue goes into the general fund, not a dedicated school account. A challenge to the wording ended in a 4-4 state Supreme Court deadlock, leaving the warning in place.

Then there’s the money behind the campaign to save the tax. Gov. Bob Ferguson and organized labor are leading the opposition, which had raised $7.8 million by late September—more than six times the $1.3 million raised by repeal supporters. The Washington Education Association alone contributed $3 million. Apparently, the unions that benefit from government spending are willing to spend big to protect another stream of taxpayer revenue.

And the promise that this tax only affects millionaires is already looking shaky. Democratic Rep. Cindy Ryu says she’d support lowering the threshold to households earning $250,000. That’s quite a leap from taxing the ultrawealthy to potentially reaching far more upper-middle-income families. Ryu even acknowledged that wealthy residents leaving Washington is a risk.

Democrats keep insisting the tax is necessary, but their own actions tell a different story: defend confusing ballot language, pour millions into defeating repeal, and start talking about expanding the tax before it has even collected its first dollar.

Washington taxpayers have seen this movie before: government wants more money, politicians promise it’s only for someone else, and the definition of “someone else” keeps getting bigger. Read more at Seattle Red.

Washington school boards are expected to balance their budgets, negotiate contracts responsibly and live within their means. Olympia, apparently, gets a different set of rules: pile on mandates, leave major legal costs unchecked, and let local schools figure out how to pay.

In a new op-ed, Mead School Board member Michael Cannon says the system is approaching a breaking point, pointing to two growing pressures: costly lawsuits and state mandates that arrive without adequate funding.

A jury awarded $17 million to two families in Mead’s football hazing case in June. Last November, Seattle Public Schools faced an $8 million verdict in a case involving a student punched by a teacher. Schools must answer for harm they cause, Cannon acknowledges, but he argues taxpayers have a legitimate interest in whether enormous awards and legal fees are sustainable. Mead is appealing its verdict on several grounds, including alleged misconduct by plaintiffs’ counsel.

Insurance doesn’t make the bill disappear, either. Large losses can drive up costs for public school insurance pools, leaving other districts paying more for events they had nothing to do with. Cannon argues lawmakers need to examine liability rules, legal fees and ways to resolve valid claims fairly without placing an unsustainable burden on public schools.

Then there’s Olympia’s favorite trick: passing another mandate without providing enough money to carry it out. Mental health services, meals, staff benefits, public records requests and complicated complaint procedures all require resources. When the state doesn’t cover the full cost, local districts must absorb the difference—often using money that could otherwise support students and classrooms.

The arrangement lets lawmakers announce ambitious new programs while local school boards explain why staff and services must be cut. It’s political responsibility without the financial accountability.

Cannon is urging lawmakers to pursue liability reform and identify the full cost of new mandates before imposing them. With elections approaching and the next legislative session beginning in January, voters should ask candidates a basic question: Will you pay for the policies you pass, or keep sending the bill to local schools? Read more at The Center Square.

The Bainbridge Island Review is facing questions about its editorial standards after editor Tyler Shuey declined to publish an opinion piece supporting Initiative 638, which seeks to protect girls’ sports by restricting participation based on biological sex.

Brian Anderson, Washington coordinator for Democrats For An Informed Approach to Gender, said the paper initially agreed to consider his op-ed as a response to an article opposing the initiative. Shuey ultimately refused, explaining that past coverage of transgender participation in sports had triggered subscriber threats.

“I’m not willing to risk putting our paper in that position again,” Shuey wrote.

In other words, the paper published one side of the debate, but the prospect of angry readers—and potentially lost subscriptions—was enough to shut down the other. Anderson called it another example of biased local news coverage.

The original op-ed warned that I-638 could lead to unnecessary genital exams. Anderson disputes that claim, arguing the initiative does not require genital inspections or pelvic exams and that providers can rely on existing medical records. The Center Square also reported that the initiative does not mandate genital examinations.

A newspaper doesn’t have to publish every submission. But when it runs an opinion piece on a contentious issue and then declines a response because subscribers might complain, it raises a fair question about whether editorial decisions are being driven by the merits of an argument—or the fear of upsetting the audience. 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].