It’s time for calculated cuts to Washington state budget

Published 1:30 am Monday, January 26, 2026

Before reflexively rejecting Gov. Bob Ferguson’s proposals for a supplemental state budget, Democrats in Olympia should pull out their calculators.

In 2015, essentially a decade ago, lawmakers passed a two-year operating budget of $38 billion. Given the rate of inflation since then, that would equate to a $52 billion budget for the current biennium. If we factor in population growth, the equivalent would be roughly $60 billion in state spending these days.

But lawmakers last year passed a two-year budget of $77.8 billion, demonstrating how spending has significantly outpaced inflation and population growth over the past decade.

There are good reasons for this. Washington has enjoyed a strong economy that increases revenue for state government and bolsters government’s ability to provide services that improve the lives of residents. Not content to rely on economic growth, lawmakers also have passed a series of tax increases to meet perceived needs.

But just as the state can provide additional services when times are good, some cuts are necessary when a budget shortfall arrives. Ferguson understands that as the state faces a $2.3 billion budget gap while lawmakers piece together a supplemental budget.

The governor’s proposed budget, released in December, calls for across-the-board spending cuts, the use of $1 billion from the state’s emergency reserves (the “rainy day” fund) and the shifting of nearly $600 million in revenues from auctions of carbon pollution credits under the Climate Commitment Act.

“Despite a challenging situation, my combined budgets move our state forward in significant ways … ,” Ferguson said. “We can provide hundreds of millions of dollars for tax credits for Washingtonians. We can, and must, responsibly deal with the impacts of the Trump administration. My budgets provide a path.”

In the early days of the legislative session, the possibility of spending cuts has drawn sharp opposition. As media outlet Washington State Standard reports about testimony last week: “They booed his push to cap access to a coveted child care program, cut funding for public schools and colleges, and redirect climate dollars away from pollution reduction and toward tax credits for low-income working families.”

In one example, Jacqui Cain, president of the American Federation of Teachers in Washington, said across-the-board cuts would have “immediate consequences. Even modest cuts lead to hiring delays, fewer course offerings, and increased workloads.”

In another, Robin Everett of the Sierra Club decried a proposal to redirect climate money: “Our members are outraged at the proposal.”

The list goes on, with a roster of education, environmental, labor and social services leaders testifying in defense of their interests. Undoubtedly, each program has value and improves the lives of residents in ways ranging from significant to incremental. But when legislative leaders write the budget and when members vote on it, the ledger must balance. And that likely calls for cuts that will be painful to somebody.

It also calls for some adjustments in the wake of federal cuts under the Trump administration. Instead of being prudent, President Donald Trump’s spending cuts at the federal level often simply pass the burden along to the states.

The situation is difficult. But after a decade of sharp state government expansion, it is time for the Legislature to crunch the numbers and make some surgical cuts to the state budget.