When the budget gets ugly, Democrats reach for the one tax Washington voters have rejected for generations.

Midnight Money Grab: Democrats Sneak Income Tax Back Onto the Menu

Washington Democrats quietly rolled out companion bills late Monday night to impose a 9.9% income tax on high earners—because nothing says transparency like filing sweeping tax legislation just before midnight. House Bill 2724 and Senate Bill 6346 would tax income above $1 million, including public pensions, while conveniently overriding Initiative 2111, the voter-backed law banning state and local income taxes that lawmakers themselves approved just two years ago.

According to draft language previously reviewed by KIRO Newsradio, the proposal taxes individuals earning more than $1 million and married couples once their combined income crosses that threshold—meaning two earners who each make less than $1 million could still get swept into the tax. Democrats estimate the plan would generate roughly $4 billion annually, with implementation delayed until at least 2028 or 2029 while the state builds a bureaucracy capable of collecting it and prepares for the inevitable legal brawl.

Republicans wasted no time warning that the proposal is less about fairness and more about opening the door to a full-blown income tax. Senate Minority Leader John Braun argued Democrats are banking on the Washington Supreme Court to reverse nearly a century of precedent treating income as property, a legal interpretation that has repeatedly blocked graduated income taxes. GOP leaders also warned the plan would hit small business owners—many of whom file taxes as individuals—and penalize married couples by combining incomes under a single threshold.

House Republican Leader Drew Stokesbary noted that income taxes pitched as targeting the wealthy rarely stay that way. He argued Democrats could address tax fairness by lowering the burden on working families instead of creating a new revenue stream that critics believe will inevitably expand.

Democrats, however, appear undeterred. They point to the state Supreme Court’s 2023 decision upholding Washington’s capital gains tax as a sign the legal landscape may be shifting in their favor. Governor Bob Ferguson and legislative leaders argue the tax is necessary to close an eye-watering $12 to $16 billion budget shortfall—though critics note that comes after years of aggressive spending increases.

Whether the proposal survives legal scrutiny remains to be seen. But politically, Democrats are signaling they’re willing to gamble on court rulings, voter backlash, and Washington’s long-standing anti-income-tax tradition in pursuit of their biggest revenue play yet. Read more at Seattle Red.

Democrats Target the Cloud While Industry Leaders Try to Ground the Debate

In a joint op-ed, Joe Nguyen, President and CEO of the Seattle Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce, and Heather Kurtenbach, Executive Secretary of the Washington State Building & Construction Trades Council, push back against House Bill 2515, warning the proposal risks undermining Washington’s economic and technological backbone while pretending to solve energy challenges.

Nguyen and Kurtenbach argue that while HB 2515 is pitched as protecting ratepayers, ensuring grid reliability, and supporting clean energy goals, it misses the real issue: Washington’s struggle to expand energy production and modernize its power infrastructure fast enough to keep up with demand. Instead of fixing that bottleneck, they suggest the bill singles out data centers—an easy political target but a deeply flawed policy focus.

The op-ed stresses that data centers aren’t some fringe industry—they power nearly every part of modern life. From small business operations and telehealth services to emergency communications and everyday online activity, data centers function as essential infrastructure. Nguyen and Kurtenbach contend Democrats are treating them like optional luxuries rather than recognizing their role as the digital equivalent of highways and ports.

They also argue Washington already has strict regulatory guardrails. Large energy users are required to pay their full cost of service, including infrastructure upgrades, and utilities already have authority to prevent cost-shifting onto residential customers. Adding new mandates, they warn, would inject uncertainty into long-term planning without meaningfully improving oversight or affordability.

From an economic standpoint, the authors highlight that data centers create union-backed construction jobs, generate long-term tax revenue, and attract infrastructure investment. Their concern is that policies signaling unpredictability or hostility toward these projects could drive investment to other states—without reducing the demand for digital services that Washington residents and businesses rely on daily.

Nguyen and Kurtenbach also emphasize that data center operators already have strong incentives to improve efficiency and reduce energy use because it directly impacts their operating costs. They point to examples like Amazon’s Seattle data center projects that reuse excess heat to warm nearby buildings as proof that collaboration and innovation—not punitive regulation—are more effective ways to align economic growth with environmental goals.

Ultimately, the op-ed frames HB 2515 as a well-intentioned but misguided attempt to regulate growth rather than manage it responsibly. Nguyen and Kurtenbach argue Washington’s success has historically come from balancing innovation with smart infrastructure investment, warning that Democrats risk abandoning that formula by targeting industries instead of solving systemic energy and grid challenges. Read more at Center Square.

Democrats’ Homelessness ‘Fix’ Risks Re-Camping Washington’s Cities

House Democrats advanced two homelessness bills Monday that critics warn could unravel Spokane’s recent success reducing public camping and crime. House Bill 2489 would block cities from enforcing camping bans unless they can guarantee housing for every homeless individual—along with accommodations for pets and personal belongings—in the immediate area. House Bill 2266 would force cities to allow homeless shelters in most areas zoned for housing or hotels while eliminating auditing requirements for service providers receiving taxpayer dollars.

Democrats backing the legislation frame it as a compassionate effort to address housing insecurity. Rep. Mia Gregerson, D-Seattle, defended HB 2489 by arguing homelessness should not be criminalized. But opponents say the bills ignore the complex reality of addiction and mental health struggles that often drive chronic homelessness. They also point out that neither proposal provides additional funding to expand shelter or treatment capacity, instead placing new mandates squarely on local governments.

The proposals have triggered significant pushback from local officials statewide, especially in Spokane, where leaders say they’ve spent years crafting a balanced approach to public camping enforcement. Spokane City Council President Betsy Wilkerson and Councilmember Michael Cathcart warned the legislation could undermine local authority and threaten public safety, arguing their city already offers strong social services but still needs enforcement tools to respond to evolving homelessness and addiction challenges.

The situation is particularly contentious because Spokane’s own Democratic state representatives, including Housing Committee co-chair Rep. Natasha Hill and bill sponsor Rep. Timm Ormsby, supported advancing the bills despite local opposition. Business leaders like East Spokane Business Association Vice President Wendy Fishburne have urged lawmakers to reconsider, warning that policies driven by good intentions have produced deadly unintended consequences by failing to prioritize addiction treatment and recovery.

Supporters of Spokane’s current approach point to data showing measurable improvements. Police Chief Kevin Hall reported that officers issued 728 citations between late October and late January while successfully connecting 265 individuals with services. Hall noted previous policies allowing individuals to refuse help produced virtually no service uptake. He also highlighted that overall person and property crime dropped 14.4% from 2024 to 2025, offering hope to business owners concerned about downtown safety.

Hall emphasized enforcement is meant to encourage treatment and housing rather than punish individuals, describing camping bans as a tool designed to push people toward available services. Critics argue HB 2489 would eliminate that leverage while HB 2266 would reduce financial accountability for organizations receiving public funds.

Opponents say the bills reflect a broader pattern of state lawmakers overriding local solutions with one-size-fits-all mandates. With both proposals now heading to the House Rules Committee, local leaders worry Olympia Democrats are poised to reverse progress in communities trying to balance compassion with public safety and accountability. Read more at Center Square.

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].