Bill Library

House Bill 1218 addresses competency to stand trial provisions that risks criminalizing mental illness. One of the most troubling aspects is the proposed “growth cap program,” which imposes financial penalties on counties that exceed a set number of inpatient competency restoration orders. This creates a clear incentive to deny or delay necessary treatment for mentally ill defendants in order to avoid costs, effectively placing a price tag on access to justice and healthcare.

Additionally, the bill weakens protections for vulnerable individuals by removing strict requirements for outpatient competency restoration—like abstaining from alcohol or drugs—potentially setting people up to fail in treatment. The expansion of involuntary medication under the Sell Doctrine (2003) also raises red flags. Forcing medication on defendants based on broad interpretations of court discretion risks violating civil liberties and bodily autonomy, especially for individuals already struggling with severe mental illness.

Ultimately, HB 1218 shifts the focus from compassionate, individualized treatment to systemic cost-cutting and administrative control. It risks exacerbating disparities and pushing already vulnerable people further through the cracks. Please reject this bill and demand legislation that genuinely prioritizes care, dignity, and due process.

House Bill 1232 expands the state’s oversight and regulation of private detention facilities—but it does so in ways that overreach, introduce unnecessary bureaucracy, and risk unintended consequences. While framed as a push for humane standards, the bill imposes sweeping mandates that could strain facility operations, create legal confusion, and compromise public safety by diverting resources from effective management to regulatory compliance. It eliminates previous exemptions for juvenile treatment centers, meaning therapeutic facilities—like those offering mental health or substance use care—could now be subject to the same penalties as for-profit detention centers, despite their drastically different missions.

This bill gives the Department of Health unchecked authority to inspect and penalize private facilities with vague definitions of noncompliance, including fines of up to $1 million. Such broad enforcement power invites inconsistency and opens the door to politically motivated targeting. Additionally, the bill duplicates existing oversight mechanisms, risking overlap and inefficiency, especially as federal courts have already issued injunctions blocking parts of previous similar legislation (HB 1470). Most importantly, HB 1232 reinforces the current system under a more complex web of rules, giving a false sense of reform. Citizens should oppose this bill because HB 1232 does too much, too broadly, without delivering real systemic change. It burdens facilities, jeopardizes community-based treatment centers, and invites costly legal battles, all without solving the root problems.

Washington law currently mandates a 60-day driver’s license suspension for individuals who accumulate three moving violations within a year or four within two years. The suspension is followed by a one-year probation period, during which any additional moving violation results in a 30-day extension. Under HB 1244, drivers who receive notice of a pending suspension for multiple infractions can complete a DOL-approved safe-driving course to have their suspension terminated early. They must still meet requirements for proof of automobile insurance and pay any necessary licensing fees. This alternative to suspension would be available only once every five years. If approved by the Senate and signed into law, SHB 1244 will take effect on April 1, 2026.

This legislation underscores another partisan divide over bills that loosen penalties for offenders. HB 1244 is the latest effort by Democratic legislators to ease penalties for repeat traffic offenders – and criminals in general. Supporters of the bill argue that mandatory education will have a longer-lasting impact on driver behavior than simply taking away driving privileges. If the bill becomes law, Washington would join 25 other states that already offer similar training-based alternatives to license suspension.

Republican lawmakers argue that lowering penalties for repeat traffic offenders could put public safety at risk. “Over the last several years, we have seen tragic statistics in our state,” said Rep. Andrew Barkis, R-Olympia. “Statistics on our highways, of some of the highest fatalities that we’ve seen in decades… there needs to be a deterrent to the behavior that we’re seeing.” Barkis emphasized that drivers receive multiple warnings before facing suspension, suggesting that reducing penalties could fail to deter repeat offenders. “It takes quite a bit to get a suspended license. It takes many different instances of a violation,” he said. “Most of the time when we’re seeing a suspended license, these are for egregious acts that have been committed—one, two, three times—and so that license should be suspended.” Barkis argued that penalties serve an important role in discouraging reckless driving. “Education is important, but so are penalties, so are deterrents,” Barkis said. “With that, I think that it would be best if we work on that deterrent, as opposed to education after the fact.” Please oppose HB 1244.