From education funding to drug use, lawmakers tweak the details in final weeks of session

Washington lawmakers are entering the home stretch for budget negotiations and last chances to pass bills.

The 2023 legislative session ends Aril 23.

Austin Jenkins with Pluribus News and host of "Inside Olympia" on TVW joined KUOW's Paige Browning and Amy Radil to break down the latest.

This interview has been edited for clarity.

Paige Browning: Austin, I want to ask you first about the budget. The Senate Democrats and House Democrats have released their budget proposals. What are some of the core priorities we're seeing?

Austin Jenkins: Well, for starters, I'd say public schools and within that, in particular, special education. [There's also] workforce development, behavioral health, housing and homelessness, and climate/clean energy. I would say those are the five big overarching priorities in these budgets.

There are also pay raises for state employees and for educators. There is money specifically targeted at communities of color. And coming out of the pandemic, majority Democrats want to invest in the state's foundational public health services.

There is also money to help ensure that abortion services are available to people from other states where abortion has been restricted or prohibited who are coming to Washington [for care].

A big and complex list of priorities in a complex state. Do the House and Senate plans line up, Austin? Or are there going to be some sore spots to work out between the chambers?

Jenkins: Spending wise, there's some difference there. But in the grand scheme of a $70 billion budget, it's not that big a difference between the two proposals. By the way, they are proposing to spend about $10 billion more than current state budget.

The differences don't seem insurmountable. It's always easier when Democrats are negotiating with Democrats. Mostly, it's going to be about spending levels for individual line items. And I'll give you an example: The Senate budget increases special education funding by more than the House. So, that's going to be an example of a difference they're going to have to reconcile.

I'll also note that Joseph Sullivan writing for Crosscut noted that they're going to have to negotiate how to spend the money that has been generated by the new carbon credits program.

And what about Gov. Jay Inslee's priorities? He kicked off this session by outlining his own budget. Are lawmakers on the same page with him?

Jenkins: In many ways, yes — you know, when we're talking about broad spending priorities. But there is one potential big sticking point: The governor wants a $4 billion bond measure to fund affordable housing. This would go to voters. That was not included by Senate Democrats, but it is contemplated by the House budget. In a statement, the governor said that he was heartened to see the House included the money necessary to get this proposal off the ground, but we'll have to see. I know that there are concerns among state lawmakers about the state taking on debt above and beyond the state debt limit. And, of course, anytime you're sending something out to voters, you want to have some confidence that it's actually going to pass.

So, Austin, Democrats are in the majority. But Republican lawmakers also carry weight in Washington state. Are they getting behind these budget proposals?

Jenkins: Well, it's interesting. The Senate has already passed its budget, and that vote was largely bipartisan — 40-9. You do not see that every day because the reality is Democrats don't need Republican votes to pass budgets. But it sounds like Republicans played a role in crafting the Senate budget, and while they don't love everything about it, they had nice things to say generally.

By contrast, House Republicans seem quite unhappy with the House budget. Rep. Drew Stokesbary, the lead Republican on the Appropriations Committee, indicated that he did not play a significant role in helping craft that budget. He said he was pretty disappointed in how the budget turned out. He did praise the fact that neither of the budgets raised taxes. He thinks that the the money being left in reserve in the House budget isn't enough. So, it depends on what chamber you're talking about. Republicans in the Senate generally seem on board. Republicans in the House? Maybe not so much.

Well, we will keep tracking that.

Amy, you've been following a drug possession bill that will have to be factored into the budget in one way or another. The bill would determine how people are charged when they're caught possessing drugs and put emphasis on diverting people to treatment rather than ending in jail time. What tweaks have happened to keep this moving toward passage?

Amy Radil: We had some pretty major tweaks as it was voted out of the House Community Safety, Justice and Reentry Committee this week. This is Senate Bill 5536. The latest version actually moves it down from making drug possession a gross misdemeanor to making it a simple misdemeanor. So, that means less jail time and lower fines for people who are charged with or convicted of drug possession. That's the biggest change.

The House committee also got rid of some mandatory jail sanctions for people who willfully abandon treatment, who don't engage with treatment and services. They could have been sent to jail for 21 days or 45 days in some cases, and the committee got rid of those sanctions as well.

Critics said that jail disrupts any progress that someone with substance use disorder is making, and getting rid of the sanctions gives judges more flexibility for the particular case that they're considering. I heard mayors and some law enforcement organizations speak in public hearings, saying they felt like the previous version was kind of striking the right balance, making drug possession a gross misdemeanor. But now, it's emerged from this House committee with some lighter criminal penalties.

It sounds like lawmakers have to figure this out, right? This all stems from a state Supreme Court decision that lawmakers need to address. So, what's next for this bill?

Radil: Yeah, our current law is kind of a stop-gap. It's going to expire at the end of June. And yeah, this all stems from the Blake decision from the Washington Supreme Court two years ago when the when they struck down the felony drug possession law in Washington state. So, you know, lawmakers have been trying to figure out the right path ever since then, the right balance to address public drug use and addiction.

So, the bill that we've been following really emphasizes giving people the option to engage in treatment and services and not get a criminal record if they do that. But the next question is: How much is the state going to spend to strengthen the network, especially in rural areas? That's still under discussion. I saw House Democrats are seeking $1.3 billion for behavioral health overall. And this bill is next headed to the House Appropriations Committee.