When “protecting vulnerable children” collides with the state budget, Olympia suddenly loses its voice.

Bob Ferguson Ghosts Washington After Feds Ask Why the State Might Be Taking Money From Foster Kids

Federal officials have formally warned Washington that it may be diverting Social Security survivor benefits away from foster children and into state coffers — and Gov. Bob Ferguson’s office has responded with a masterclass in silence.

The warning came from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, which flagged Washington as one of dozens of states that may be intercepting benefits meant for children whose parents died after paying into Social Security. For many foster kids, this money is the only remaining financial connection to their parents — and it’s supposed to help meet their needs or give them a small foundation when they age out of care.

Instead, the feds say states often take the money to reimburse themselves for foster care costs — effectively charging children for their own upbringing.

HHS didn’t accuse Washington of malice, but it did urge immediate action. It even offered technical help and ready-made executive orders governors can use to stop the practice. Idaho already did — preserving benefits for kids’ unmet needs and futures — proving reform isn’t exactly rocket science.

Yet Ferguson’s office, along with the state agency overseeing foster care, has declined to answer basic questions: Does Washington take the money? How much? How many kids are affected? Will the governor stop it?

None answered.

Washington now sits among the majority of states that still allow this practice, while progressive leaders who never miss a chance to sermonize about equity and compassion can’t be bothered to explain whether they’re siphoning money from orphaned children. Turns out “believe the children” comes with a fiscal footnote. Read more at Seattle Red.

Democrats’ Transportation Plan Hits a Pothole: Turns Out You Can’t Budget With Vibes

Washington Democrats are discovering — again — that you can’t tax and shuffle your way out of basic math.

Years of declining gas tax revenue and exploding construction costs left the state’s transportation budget in a hole. The Legislature’s solution this year? Jack up gas taxes, pile on new fees, and quietly siphon sales tax money from the general fund with a promise to “fix it later.” Very later.

The centerpiece of the plan is a sales-tax shell game: skim 0.1% of the state sales tax and send it to transportation in future years, while transportation kicks money back to the general fund right now. Lawmakers sold it as a clever long-term fix. Now, before it even starts, Democrats are openly discussing undoing it to plug yet another operating budget shortfall of their own making.

Transportation Democrats are panicking. Rep. Jake Fey warns that without the money, ferry projects stall, megaproject bids blow up, and the state still has no plan to pay for court-ordered culvert removals after 2031. Translation: the “balanced” plan only worked if no one touched it — which, of course, was never going to happen.

Senate leaders are publicly downplaying the idea while House budget writers admit it’s absolutely on the table. Everyone agrees it was unpopular when passed, may shortchange schools, and solves nothing long-term — but hey, desperate times call for desperate budget gimmicks.

Gov. Bob Ferguson says he’ll balance things with cuts, not taxes, after signing off on billions in new taxes earlier this year. How that squares with raiding transportation funds is, conveniently, unclear — and his office isn’t saying.

In the end, Democrats have managed to raise taxes, weaken school funding, endanger transportation projects, and still face looming deficits. It’s a masterclass in one-party rule: more revenue, more reshuffling, and the same unsustainable mess — just with better talking points. Read more at KUOW.

Strike Pay Meets Unemployment Checks: What Could Possibly Go Wrong?

Starting in January 2026, Washington will let striking workers collect unemployment benefits under Senate Bill 5041 — a union-backed expansion that treats voluntary strikes like involuntary job loss. Supporters insist this won’t strain the unemployment system. Reality, however, is lining up with a calculator and a red pen.

The problem is simple and entirely predictable: double-dipping. Many long strikes — Boeing, school districts, health care workers — eventually end with settlements that include back pay. Under the new law, that back pay turns unemployment checks into overpayments that must be repaid. Except workers won’t be clearly warned about this when they apply.

Right now, ESD doesn’t tell applicants up front that if a strike ends with retroactive pay, they could owe the state thousands of dollars months later. So workers may reasonably think the money is theirs — until a repayment notice arrives long after the strike signs come down. The state already recovers less than half of overpayments, meaning employers (and ultimately taxpayers) get stuck with the bill.

This matters because the unemployment trust fund is already under pressure and employer rates are expected to rise — in a state that already makes it expensive to do business. SB 5041 piles new demand onto a system funded entirely by employers, all while pretending it’s free.

The fix is almost offensively obvious: warn workers at the point of application. A checkbox. A clear notice. Something unavoidable. It wouldn’t undo the policy — it would just prevent predictable financial harm.

But that would require lawmakers to admit what this really is: not careful governance, but another feel-good, woke labor favor that ignores consequences until someone else has to clean up the mess. Read more at the Washington Policy Center.

Billions on the Line: Hospitals Learn Leftist Ideology Doesn’t Pay the Bills

The Trump administration just dropped a financial reality check on hospitals in Washington and Oregon: stop providing gender-related medical treatments for minors, or say goodbye to Medicare and Medicaid dollars.

Under proposed rules announced by HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., hospitals that continue offering puberty blockers, hormone therapies, or related interventions to minors could lose access to federal funding that makes up roughly 45% of hospital revenue nationwide. In other words, this isn’t a “choice” — it’s compliance or collapse.

That’s a problem for the Pacific Northwest, where state leaders aggressively promote so-called “gender-affirming care” for minors and dismiss growing international concern. The UK has already moved to effectively ban puberty blockers for children, citing weak evidence and serious risks. But local activists insist the science is “settled,” right up until the checks stop clearing.

Even legal experts are blunt: one former CMS attorney called the rule a “death sentence” for hospitals operating on thin margins — because it would force them to stop the treatments, regardless of what state politicians or advocacy groups demand.

President Trump has framed the move as child protection, calling these treatments a national disgrace, and unlike state bans, this policy works everywhere by leveraging federal money — even if that money isn’t directly used for the procedures.

The rule will face legal challenges and a 60-day comment period, but the message is already clear: Washington’s medical activists may love experimental policies, but federal taxpayers won’t be underwriting them anymore. When ideology meets the balance sheet, the balance sheet wins. Read more at Seattle Red.

Donate Today

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].