KUOW73%

Opponents of WA ‘millionaires tax’ submit signatures to qualify for ballot 31%

By Sarah Mizes-Tan41%

7/2/2026, 10:24:48 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 25 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Appeal to Emotion, and Recency Bias, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 16.2% saturation with 83 hits. Analysis detected 949 faulty-reasoning hits from 513 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 40.1% and a BS Rank of 31% (15,304 of 21,886 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 69.90% of the article peer group.

An effort to repeal Washington state’s first income tax on high earners took a major step forward on Thursday. 
Brian Heywood, a wealthy hedge fund founder, and his conservative political action group, Let’s Go Washington, rallied outside the secretary of state’s office, unloading cardboard boxes full of signatures supporting the repeal. 
Workers in the secretary of state’s office will now verify the half-million signatures before the measure qualifies for a spot on November ballots. 
Officials say it will take two weeks to verify the signatures. 
“It’s an income tax, but it’s not really an income tax, it’s accumulation of all the regulation and taxation that’s made this state less and less affordable and less easy to live in,” Heywood said. 
"This is the start where we begin to fight back with this taking down the income tax.” 
Let’s Go Washington has been lobbying support for its repeal effort since May and has collected far more than the 300,000 signatures required to put an initiative to voters. 
While the group has successfully gathered signatures for several initiatives in recent years, this new tax repeal effort garnered a record amount of signatures in the shortest amount of time yet, said Hallie Herzberg, director of communications for Let’s Go Washington. 
The tax in question, which Democrats call the “millionaires tax,” passed the Legislature in March and would take a 9.9% cut of annual household income over $1 million. 
It is expected to bring in about $3 billion a year. 
The state will start collecting that revenue in 2029, directing it toward a state budget that’s in the red by billions of dollars. 
It would also fund child care subsidies, tax breaks for low-income families, and sales tax breaks on certain personal hygiene products. 
Advocates of this measure  including Gov. 
Bob Ferguson, a Democrat  have said this tax could level the playing field in a state where the poorest residents shoulder the heaviest proportional tax burden. 
Republicans say the tax is unconstitutional and that this legislation opens the door to an income tax on lower-earning people as well. 
Despite the relative speed with which initiative campaigners collected signatures for a repeal of the millionaires tax, their effort faces a bigger challenge at the ballot box. 
Recent polling shows that only a minority of state voters would choose to overturn the tax if the question were to appear on ballots. 
Research that Democratic polling firm GBAO published at the end of June shows Heywood’s initiative losing by 19 points, with 38% in favor of repealing the tax and 57% opposed. 
“[The repeal measure] is sloppily written and fiscally irresponsible, and this new polling shows that voters aren’t impressed,” said Erik Houser, spokesperson for the coalition to save the millionaires tax. 
Let’s Go Washington did not directly address questions about the new poll results. 
A lawsuit filed by former Attorney General Rob McKenna is challenging the constitutionality of the tax and is expected to work its way to the state Supreme Court in the next year. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 5.8%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 2.3%KUOW: 2.6%Confirmation Bias5.8%This article: 0.0%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 0.4%KUOW: 1.3%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 5.7%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 2.7%KUOW: 3.4%Availability Heuristic5.7%This article: 4.7%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 1.3%KUOW: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic4.7%This article: 0.0%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 0.6%KUOW: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 1.8%KUOW: 1.4%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 14.4%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 7.4%KUOW: 7.4%Framing Effect14.4%This article: 3.3%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 0.7%KUOW: 1.0%Loss Aversion3.3%This article: 0.0%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 1.2%KUOW: 1.0%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 0.1%KUOW: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 8.0%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 3.2%KUOW: 3.8%Optimism Bias8.0%This article: 5.3%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 1.5%KUOW: 1.8%Pessimism Bias5.3%This article: 16.2%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 5.4%KUOW: 8.0%Negativity Bias16.2%This article: 2.5%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 2.3%KUOW: 2.0%Self-Serving Bias2.5%This article: 0.0%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 0.6%KUOW: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 0.2%KUOW: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 5.3%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 2.0%KUOW: 2.0%In-Group Bias5.3%This article: 4.3%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 0.7%KUOW: 0.5%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias4.3%This article: 6.2%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 1.1%KUOW: 2.7%Halo Effect6.2%This article: 0.0%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 0.1%KUOW: 0.2%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 0.1%KUOW: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 12.7%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 1.0%KUOW: 1.1%Recency Bias12.7%This article: 5.8%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 0.5%KUOW: 0.4%Primacy Effect5.8%This article: 0.0%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 0.0%KUOW: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 1.1%KUOW: 0.5%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 0.1%KUOW: 0.3%Straw Man0.0%This article: 5.8%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 4.1%KUOW: 4.3%Appeal to Authority5.8%This article: 0.0%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 1.2%KUOW: 1.4%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 4.3%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 2.1%KUOW: 0.9%Slippery Slope4.3%This article: 0.0%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 0.2%KUOW: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 8.0%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 3.9%KUOW: 4.1%Hasty Generalization8.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 0.1%KUOW: 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 11.5%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 1.0%KUOW: 0.8%Bandwagon11.5%This article: 14.4%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 8.3%KUOW: 6.1%Appeal to Emotion14.4%This article: 0.0%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 0.9%KUOW: 0.8%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 1.7%KUOW: 2.2%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 0.1%KUOW: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 0.6%KUOW: 0.3%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 0.2%KUOW: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 0.1%KUOW: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 1.8%KUOW: 3.3%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 0.0%KUOW: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 11.5%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 1.8%KUOW: 1.4%Ambiguity (Equivocation)11.5%This article: 0.0%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 0.0%KUOW: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 0.2%KUOW: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 0.2%KUOW: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 0.4%KUOW: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 0.0%KUOW: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 1.4%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 0.8%KUOW: 1.0%Unattributed Quote1.4%This article: 0.0%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 1.4%KUOW: 0.8%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 10.1%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 2.2%KUOW: 3.2%Biased Writer Voice10.1%This article: 0.0%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 1.6%KUOW: 1.5%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 5.8%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 1.9%KUOW: 1.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias5.8%This article: 6.2%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 1.4%KUOW: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias6.2%This article: 5.7%Sarah Mizes-Tan: 0.5%KUOW: 1.3%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…5.7%

513 words analyzed.

Speakers

5speakers35%attributed speech334writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageBrian Heywood • 35 words • 0.0% coverageBrian Heywood • 17 words • 0.0% coverageLet’s Go Washington • 29 words • 100.0% coverageHallie Herzberg • 41 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageBob Ferguson • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 100.0% coverageErik Houser • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Hallie Herzberg

100%flagged-word coverage
41 attributed words23% of attributed speech75% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice+96.7 ptsWriter: 3.3%Hallie Herzberg: 100.0%100.0%Politically Right Leaning -9.6 ptsWriter: 9.6%Hallie Herzberg: 0.0%0.0%Politically Left Leaning B-9.0 ptsWriter: 9.0%Hallie Herzberg: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote-2.1 ptsWriter: 2.1%Hallie Herzberg: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.