OLYMPIA, Wash. — This story was originally published on MyNorthwest.com
Now that cutoff day in the state legislature has come and gone, several key bills survived, while others died on the vine, stuck in Senate and House committees.
Here’s a quick roundup of some of those key proposals.
Mandatory arbitration bill fails
A bill to require mandatory arbitration for certain tort claims against the state is now dead.
Lawmakers failed to find a political balance between compensating victims of abuse and neglect, including multiple claims against the Department of Children, Youth and Families, and staving off a spike in claims that cost the state $500 million last fiscal year.
“Our shared goals are to make sure that anybody who is a victim of childhood sexual abuse or other kinds of misconduct have access to justice,” Democrat Rep. Laurie Jenkins explained. “But we have also seen skyrocketing tort claims.”
Former Republican Attorney General Rob McKenna told The Center Square, “We have unparalleled levels of exposure and payouts, which means there’s less money for human services … less money for everything else, and there’s just no accountability for it.”
Bill restricting police face coverings survives
Senate Bill 5855 remains alive and well in the House Committee on Community Safety.
The bill defines when law enforcement officers, including federal agents, can wear masks and when they can’t, and was drafted in reaction to recent immigration enforcement and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents covering their faces.
Republican Rep. Dan Griffey recently introduced an amendment to make sure the bill referred only to federal agents and not local police, but that amendment was rejected.
“What I was trying to do was make sure that the intent section pointed that out, that showed that this was a federal issue,” Griffey explained. “And that in Washington State, we dealt with this about five years ago.”
Lower DUI limit fails despite Utah’s success with similar law
The bill to lower the state’s legal DUI limit from .08% to .05% is now officially dead after failing to pass a House committee.
Andrea Ray with the Washington Hospitality Association testified that the bill shifted focus away from people who choose to drive drunk.
“It expands liability in ways that do not meaningfully improve road safety,” Ray said.
Democratic State Senator John Lovick, a former Snohomish County Sheriff and a State Trooper, sponsored the bill. He said when Utah passed a similar bill, that state saw a 20% drop in fatalities on highways.
The death of that bill secondarily impacted Senate Bill 5880, which would allow agencies around the state to send toxicology samples to private companies for testing in addition to the state crime lab.
Seattle City Attorney Erika Evans is a big supporter of the bill because she recently testified before both the Senate and House that, for DUIs, it currently takes more than a year to get results from the state lab.
“We have multiple cases in my office where someone gets a second and third DUI, in the meantime, as we delay justice,” Evans said.
The bill also clarified how test results may be admitted in court and reinforces procedural requirements for breath testing, including observation periods and calibration checks, while preserving a defendant’s right to challenge the reliability of the results.
Also, during a public hearing, Amy Freedman, a Senior Deputy King County Prosecutor, testified that backlogs at the state crime lab might ease if lawmakers dropped the state’s blood-alcohol limit to 0.05.
“That is part of the reason why our toxicology lab is backlogged, because they are having to do drug testing on all the tests that are under a 0.08,” she explained. “If you lower the per se level, three things happen. One is, we have fewer crashes, we have fewer of those going to the toxicology lab. The second thing is, if you lower the per se level, the limited testing that the toxicology lab does now will stop at 0.05, and they won’t have to do the additional drug testing for 0.05 and above. The third thing is that you’ll have less people having to come in and testify.”
Supporters of the bill fear travel and other costs for lab workers to testify about the evidence chain of custody and testing would create a bidding war among governments. Wealthier cities and counties that could better afford private labs would get priority because they can pay.
Running Start funding bill advances
House Bill 2289, designed to streamline the state’s Running Start program by taking away some $14 million in support, remains alive and well.
Running Start allows 11th and 12th graders to take college courses and earn 10 credits before they get to a college, university, or technical school, helping many students who may not have been able to afford a full four years of classes. It also allows students to avoid massive debt upon graduation.
In three years, Running Start participation grew 400% while students and families didn’t have to pay tuition under the program.
Budget negotiations head behind closed doors
Two of the state’s biggest bills include the proposed supplemental budgets from Senate and House Democrats.
Both call for additional spending, Democrats said, to keep pace with rising costs of services. The Senate version calls for $2.5 billion in new spending and wants to dip into the state’s rainy day fund to the tune of around $700 million. The House version dips into more than $800 million in reserves.
Jerry Cornfield from The Washington State Standard explained the state lawmakers’ process behind closed doors.
“What they’re really going to be doing in these next couple of weeks is when they get in the room together, they have charts, and they basically have the same line items, but just different numbers in them,” Cornfield said. “And it becomes pretty easy for the House to say we’re going to spend $200 million on this, and the Senate says $300 million on the same thing. They can then find a middle ground.”
About dipping into the rainy day fund, Cornfield explained there can be a difference between asking for the money and getting permission to dip into it and using it.
“You never have to take it all out, you know, you put that number down, and then as the budget year goes along, they can move it, and they can move it back. And it always looks good to move it back, so at the end of the budget, that number is large again,” Cornfield said.
Follow Luke Duecy on X. Read more of his stories here.
©2026 Cox Media Group
