According to Chris Cargill, President of the Mountain States Policy Center, Washington Democrats and much of the media have quietly swapped out the accurate term “income tax” for the softer brand “millionaires tax.”

The state’s own Department of Revenue has a page dedicated to Washington’s “new income tax.” The law imposes a 9.9% tax on Washington taxable income, starting from federal adjusted gross income with a $1 million standard deduction. House Democrats’ own FAQ acknowledges it is a tax on the receipt of taxable income. Even Democratic lawmakers such as Rep. Liz Berry and Speaker Laurie Jinkins have described it as an income tax or high-earner’s income tax.

Yet news coverage and Democratic messaging overwhelmingly prefer “millionaires tax.” The label makes the policy sound limited and targeted — something that applies only to someone else. That branding is useful when voters will decide Initiative 645 in November, which would repeal the tax and restrict the broader ability of state and local governments to impose taxes on individual income.

Cargill notes the difference is not semantic. Calling it an income tax reminds voters of Washington’s long-standing debate over whether the state should tax individual income at all. Calling it a “millionaires tax” changes the question to whether the rich should simply pay more. Those are not the same issue.

Reporters are not obligated to adopt the most politically advantageous label supporters invent. The agency charged with collecting the tax is not confused about what it is. The media should not be either. It’s an income tax. Call it what it is. Read more at The Center Square.

Governor Bob Ferguson and Democratic lawmakers held a press conference Thursday urging voters to reject IL26-001, the parental rights initiative on the November ballot.

The measure would restore and strengthen parents’ rights to be notified before their child receives medical or mental health services at school, gain faster access to textbooks, classroom materials and records, and receive timely notice of academic, disciplinary and safety issues. It also requires advance notice and opt-out options for sensitive classroom topics.

Ferguson claimed the initiative “actually weakens existing laws by removing parents’ rights.” Rep. Monica Stonier and other opponents argued it could harm children and make it harder for schools to share information — including in cases of sexual assault.

Let’s Go Washington rejected those claims, noting that current notification requirements for crimes against children remain and are expanded under the initiative. Mandatory reporting and student safety protocols stay in place. The group says opponents are deliberately adopting parental-rights language because the public strongly supports parents being informed.

This fight follows a familiar pattern. Voters and the Legislature previously backed stronger parental rights in 2024. Democrats then passed changes in 2025 that weakened those protections. When Let’s Go Washington brought a new initiative to restore them, Democratic leaders refused to advance it and sent it to the ballot.

Now the same side that limited parental access is warning that restoring it is dangerous. In any other context, adults encouraging children to keep secrets from their parents would be treated as a red flag. Progressive leaders in Olympia are asking voters to treat it as a feature. Read more at The Center Square.

The Washington Supreme Court on Thursday struck down Initiative 2066 in a 6-3 decision, wiping out a measure that nearly two million voters approved in 2024 to protect natural gas as an energy choice and limit rising energy costs.

The majority ruled that the initiative violated the single-subject rule, claiming it contained four distinct subjects. Supporters of natural gas and the initiative process called the decision a direct blow to the people’s power to check the Legislature through the ballot.

Building Industry Association of Washington Vice President Greg Lane said the court is “willing to step in and protect government and prohibit the people from having a say.” The Washington Hospitality Association warned that the underlying problem remains: converting commercial kitchens and systems away from natural gas is expensive and difficult for restaurants and hotels.

Climate advocacy groups celebrated, calling the initiative a “deceptive” attempt to lock the state into fossil fuels. Let’s Go Washington founder Brian Heywood condemned the ruling as part of a coordinated effort by all three branches of government to undermine the initiative process itself.

Justice Salvador Mungia’s dissent, joined by two other justices, sharply criticized the majority for discounting the will of the people and treating the constitutional right of initiative as something to “gloss over.”

There is no appeal under state law. Once again, voters passed a measure to push back against progressive energy mandates, and a progressive-leaning Supreme Court majority nullified it. Working families facing higher heating and business costs are left with the consequences. Read more at The Center Square.

Thirty-three people accused of occupying a University of Washington engineering building and leaving roughly $1 million in damage will escape conviction, jail time, and any restitution order under deals with the King County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office.

The defendants, charged with first-degree criminal trespass, entered stipulated orders of continuance. The gross misdemeanor charges will be dismissed after 12 months if they complete community service and stay out of further legal trouble. It is not a guilty plea.

The May 2025 occupation by pro-Palestinian activists demanded the university cut ties with Boeing. Protesters barricaded entrances, set a dumpster fire, smashed lab equipment, and spray-painted walls. Twenty-one students were suspended. Prosecutors declined felony charges after investigators said they could not determine who caused specific damage — a problem compounded by King County’s raised felony threshold for malicious mischief.

Sen. Matt Boehnke (R-Kennewick) called the outcome inadequate. “What happened at the University of Washington was not simply a protest,” he said. “People took over a university building, barricaded entrances and caused more than $1 million in damage… That’s not much of a consequence.”

Taxpayers funded the building. Students and faculty use it. Progressive prosecutors in King County have once again signaled that when politically favored activists cross into property destruction and occupation, the consequences will be minimal. Protest is protected. Vandalizing public property and walking away without restitution is a policy choice — and it is the one Democrats in power keep making. 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].