Washington’s 2026 Session: Are We Getting What We’re Paying For?
A Tax Reversal That Raises Process Questions
In 2024, the Washington State House of Representatives passed citizen’s initiative 2111 — an income tax ban — by a 76-21 vote. The Senate followed 38-11. Over 400,000 citizens had signed petitions to place the initiatives in front of the legislature.
Yet, just two years later, the legislature passed SB 6436, a 9.9% income tax, 27-22 in the Senate and 51-46 in the House. When asked why so many members of his party had flipped-flopped on the income tax issue, Senate Democratic Leader Jamie Pederson stated the 2024 vote was “a pie crust promise. Easily made. Easily broken.”
Whatever one thinks of the policy merits, that framing is a problem. Voters notice when their input is ignored by political leaders.
And the economic signals since the vote have not been encouraging. Downtown Seattle’s commercial vacancy rate already stands at a record 35.6%. Starbucks announced it was moving corporate jobs to Tennessee. Former CEO Howard Schultz said he was relocating to Florida. Several job creators and other smaller businesses have also announced their departure from the state. Super Bowl Champions Seahawks GM John Schneider noted the tax would complicate free-agent signings as the team rebuilds. Whether or not those decisions are directly attributable to the tax, the optics matter in a competitive economic environment.
Budget Growth and the Accountability Gap
The new income tax funded a 3% spending increase ($2.3 billion), pushing the supplemental budget from $77.9 billion to $80.2 billion. This follows a record-breaking budget increase passed just the prior session. Twelve years ago, the state’s two-year budget was $33.6 billion. It’s now $80.2 billion — a 138% increase during the Inslee/Ferguson administrations, during a period when average household income grew just 60%.
That level of public investment ought to produce results. The data tells a different story. Washington now ranks near the bottom nationally on homelessness, police staffing, transportation, education, and housing availability. Spending more isn’t the same as governing better, and the gap between the two deserves honest engagement.
Citizen Initiatives Deserve a Hearing
Two initiatives — IL26-001 (parental rights) and IL26-638 (protecting girls’ sports) — gathered enough signatures to be formally presented to the 2026 legislature. Legislative leaders refused to hold hearings on either. Both will now go before voters on the November ballot.
Regardless of where you stand on the underlying issues, denying a hearing to qualifying initiatives is a process failure. It hands opponents a legitimate grievance and signals that the majority views citizen participation as an inconvenience rather than a common feature of democracy.
Legislators continued to ignore historical procedure by adding “emergency” and “necessity” clauses in their legislation, making it more difficult for citizens to have a say on controversial bills. By tagging the income tax as a “necessity” for state government to perform its duties, they have denied citizens the right to overturn it through a referendum. Instead, opponents must pass a more complicated initiative process to overturn the tax. The legislature also floated legislation that would have made the initiative process significantly harder — SB 5973 was dubbed the “initiative killer” by critics and fortunately died in committee.
Homelessness: A Program Design Problem
The December 2024 HUD report ranked Washington first in the nation for chronically homeless individuals — those not accepting available services — and third highest overall. The state’s homeless population has grown nearly 80% in a decade, largely under Housing First policies that prioritize more taxpayer-funded housing over treatment. That growth in the state’s homeless population tracks directly with those policy choices.
Two legislative sessions have now passed without the majority party introducing a meaningful course correction. Experts have consistently argued that there needs to be more focus on addiction and mental health treatment and less on expanding a housing bureaucracy that has not improved conditions. Instead, the legislature has considered:
HB 2489 — which would have required local officials to navigate a lengthy state approval process and face likely litigation before clearing drug encampments — was killed in committee.
HB 2266, which passed, overriding local zoning authority to let the state determine where and how emergency housing gets built. Critics note this empowers organizations like Plymouth Housing, which has a documented record of drug use and violence within its facilities, to operate in residential neighborhoods without local oversight. The concern isn’t housing people — it’s whether these facilities will meaningfully differ from the encampments they replace, and whether treatment is any part of the equation.
The Bottom Line
Washington has the tax base and the political will to build genuinely functional public systems. The risk is that continued spending growth without accountability — combined with dismissiveness toward voters — will erode the public trust needed to sustain that investment over time. Taxpayers are paying twice what they paid a decade ago. They deserve straight answers about what they’re getting for it.