Not Just the Income Tax: A Troubling Session in Olympia

Washington’s 2026 legislative session that adjourned last week was defined in large part by the controversial income tax proposal now sitting on Governor Ferguson’s desk. But while that fight has dominated headlines and advocacy efforts, it’s far from the only story coming out of Olympia this year. Beneath the surface, majority lawmakers advanced a series of policies that raise serious concerns about transparency, affordability, and the growing reach of state government.

From limiting the public’s ability to participate in the initiative process, to increasing costs on families already struggling with inflation, to expanding the power of unelected officials, the broader picture of this session deserves just as much attention.

Shutting Out the Public

At multiple points during this session, lawmakers who often preached the importance of “democracy” sidelined public input when it conflicted with their agenda. The result was a pattern of decisions that weakened direct democracy and reduced accountability to voters.

• Initiative inaction. Despite clear constitutional obligations, lawmakers refused to even hold hearings on the two citizen initiatives. Thousands of Washingtonians engaged in the process, only to be ignored when their voices became inconvenient. This decision effectively shut down public participation at one of the few points where citizens can directly influence state policy.
• Initiative killer — SB 5973. This proposal would make it significantly harder for citizens to bring forward initiatives in the future. Rather than improving the process, it was designed to shield lawmakers from voter accountability. While this proposal did not pass due to our and others’ efforts, if it had, it would’ve created new barriers that discouraged grassroots participation and limit direct democracy.
• Sheriff removal expansion — SB 5974. This bill expands the authority of an unelected state entity in ways that could undermine locally elected officials, including sheriffs. It opens the door to politically driven removals, shifting power away from local voters and toward centralized control. That shift could weaken local accountability and erode trust in elected law enforcement leadership.

Making Washington Less Affordable

While families across the state continue to deal with rising costs, and? plenty of elected officials, like Gov. Ferguson, paid lip service to this, this session’s decisions moved in the opposite direction. Instead of prioritizing relief, lawmakers advanced policies that are likely to increase financial pressure on households.

• State budget. Lawmakers approved a budget that increases spending by more than $2 billion after a $7 billion increase just one year ago, setting the stage for continued pressure to raise taxes. Combined with the pending income tax proposal (which may or may not hold up in court and by voters), it signals a long-term trajectory toward higher costs for Washington families. Instead of tightening priorities, the approach leans heavily on future revenue increases to sustain growing spending.
• Ferguson’s priorities left behind. Even Governor Ferguson’s own stated tax relief priorities were excluded from the final plan. That raises serious questions about whether affordability was ever a real priority during negotiations. It also highlights a disconnect between public messaging and the policies that ultimately moved forward.
• First-time homebuyer tax hike — HB 2089. This bill removes a tax deduction for first-time homebuyers, making it even harder to enter an already unaffordable housing market. At a time when access to homeownership is shrinking, this moves policy in the wrong direction. For many young families, it could mean delaying or abandoning the goal of buying a home altogether.
• Insurance tax hikes — HB 2487 / HB 2442. These measures impose new taxes on insurers, which are certain to be passed on to consumers through higher premiums. For families already dealing with rising costs, this is another hit to their bottom line. Even small increases in premiums can add up quickly across health, auto, and property insurance.
• Estate/Death tax repeal — SB 6347. This bill repeals the 2024 estate tax increase and stands out as a rare positive step. However, its impact is limited, as the estate tax is still the highest in the county and offers no relief to low- and middle-income families and largely overshadowed by broader tax increases, including the pending income tax.

Expanding Government Power

A number of bills this session also point to a broader trend of expanding state authority with fewer checks. These changes raise concerns about how power is exercised and whether sufficient safeguards are in place.

• Attorney General “fishing expedition” powers — SB 5925. This bill expands the investigative powers of the Attorney General, raising concerns about unchecked authority and potential “fishing expeditions” into local governments. Expanding power without clear guardrails risks politicizing enforcement. It also creates uncertainty for local governments trying to operate without fear of broad, undefined investigations.
• Homeless housing mandate — HB 2266. This legislation increases state control over housing for the homeless, prohibiting restrictions on where these facilities can be located and limiting local flexibility. It imposes one-size-fits-all mandates that may not reflect the needs of individual communities. In the past, local governments have had the ability to respond to community needs by placing restrictions on where these types of housing can be located; this legislation prohibits any local restrictions.
• Fentanyl response failure — HB 1092. This bill highlights a deeply troubling gap in current law, where the state is often unable to remove children from clearly dangerous situations involving drugs like fentanyl. Lawmakers had an opportunity to fix this overreach and restore basic child safety protections, but those efforts were disregarded during the legislative process. Even more concerning, when the issue was raised publicly, some lawmakers and activists mocked the concern on social media rather than addressing the real risks to vulnerable children.

Just as importantly, historic levels of citizen advocacy did play a key role in stopping numerous harmful proposals before they ever made it out of committee. That momentum matters. It shows that sustained engagement via Future 42 can still shape outcomes and that this fight is far from finished.