KUOW73%

Washington governor, AG and state lawmakers get 7% pay hikes 12%

By Jerry Cornfield0% Washington State Standard0%

7/1/2026, 10:52:55 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 20 faulty reasoning types, including Representativeness Heuristic, Appeal to Emotion, and Appeal to Authority, with Unattributed Quote as the most egregious example at 10.6% saturation with 58 hits. Analysis detected 521 faulty-reasoning hits from 549 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 28.5% and a BS Rank of 12% (19,404 of 21,886 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 88.70% of the article peer group.

Gov. 
Bob Ferguson received a 7% raise on Wednesday. 
Combined with a similar-sized pay bump a year ago, his annual salary is $234,275, roughly $30,000 more than when he took the oath as Washington’s 24th governor in January 2025. 
It’s not his doing. 
The Washington Citizens’ Commission on Salaries for Elected Officials, a panel established by voters in 1987, ended the practice of politicians deciding their own pay. 
This panel of unelected individuals from across the state approved a new two-year salary schedule in March 2025 that awarded double-digit pay hikes for the offices of the governor, attorney general and state lawmakers. 
It agreed to give members of the legislative, executive and judicial branches an across-the-board cost-of-living adjustment of 3% on July 1, 2025 and 2% on Wednesday. 
That’s what thousands of state workers secured in collective bargaining agreements. 
Commissioners tacked on additional increases each year for some offices. 
Legislators got an extra 5% on Wednesday, for a total increase of 7%. 
That’s on top of a 6% boost a year ago. 
A lawmaker now earns $72,494, roughly $10,000 more than two years ago. 
Leaders of the four caucuses continue to receive a stipend for added responsibilities. 
Ferguson and Attorney General Nick Brown each received 7% raises this year and in 2025. 
Washington’s seven other executives  lieutenant governor, secretary of state, state auditor, superintendent of public instruction, insurance commissioner, treasurer and commissioner of public lands  got only the cost-of-living adjustments. 
Several people, including present and past Democratic and Republican lawmakers, and a statewide officeholder, urged commissioners to improve lawmakers’ compensation. 
“The members of the Legislature are the board of directors of our 8 million-person state and the entire state workforce,” Democratic Lt. 
Gov. 
Denny Heck said at a 2024 meeting where the panel deliberated over the pay changes. 
“Simply put, state legislator pay is not commensurate with the magnitude of their responsibilities and the time demands.” 
His views haven’t changed. 
Despite the state constitution outlining a “part-time legislature,” the lieutenant governor is “hard pressed to identify any member of the legislature who treats their responsibility as an elected official as such,” a spokesperson said in a Monday email. 
Sen. 
Yasmin Trudeau, D-Tacoma, also appealed to commissioners, saying compensation should be enough to interest residents from all walks of life in serving. 
If salaries are too low, some people, like working parents, small business owners and young adults, will feel they cannot afford to do so. 
She said Wednesday that this remains a problem. 
The commission must continue to be cognizant of why “regular” people find it hard to serve, she said. 
At the same time, she acknowledged people frustrated with rising costs and inadequate wage growth may react negatively to the pay hikes. 
The statewide median wage in Washington in 2026 is about $73,000 a year, according to figures from the state’s Economic Services Administration. 
“My role was to convey the reality for younger people and mothers that public office should not just be for those that can afford it,” she said. 
Commissioners will meet in September to start the next round of salary-setting. 
Final salary recommendations for 2027 and 2028 will be made early next year. 
This story was originally reported in the Washington State Standard. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 3.3%Jerry Cornfield: 2.2%KUOW: 2.6%Confirmation Bias3.3%This article: 4.0%Jerry Cornfield: 1.1%KUOW: 1.3%Anchoring Bias4.0%This article: 5.6%Jerry Cornfield: 1.4%KUOW: 3.4%Availability Heuristic5.6%This article: 10.2%Jerry Cornfield: 0.9%KUOW: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic10.2%This article: 0.0%Jerry Cornfield: 0.5%KUOW: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.7%Jerry Cornfield: 0.7%KUOW: 1.4%Overconfidence Bias0.7%This article: 4.9%Jerry Cornfield: 5.7%KUOW: 7.4%Framing Effect4.9%This article: 0.0%Jerry Cornfield: 1.3%KUOW: 1.0%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Jerry Cornfield: 0.8%KUOW: 1.0%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jerry Cornfield: 0.0%KUOW: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jerry Cornfield: 1.5%KUOW: 3.8%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 4.4%Jerry Cornfield: 1.7%KUOW: 1.8%Pessimism Bias4.4%This article: 0.0%Jerry Cornfield: 8.9%KUOW: 8.0%Negativity Bias0.0%This article: 0.7%Jerry Cornfield: 2.2%KUOW: 2.0%Self-Serving Bias0.7%This article: 6.9%Jerry Cornfield: 0.9%KUOW: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error6.9%This article: 0.0%Jerry Cornfield: 0.1%KUOW: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 3.3%Jerry Cornfield: 1.8%KUOW: 2.0%In-Group Bias3.3%This article: 0.0%Jerry Cornfield: 0.5%KUOW: 0.5%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jerry Cornfield: 2.3%KUOW: 2.7%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jerry Cornfield: 0.2%KUOW: 0.2%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jerry Cornfield: 0.0%KUOW: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 1.5%Jerry Cornfield: 1.3%KUOW: 1.1%Recency Bias1.5%This article: 0.0%Jerry Cornfield: 0.1%KUOW: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jerry Cornfield: 0.0%KUOW: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jerry Cornfield: 1.4%KUOW: 0.5%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Jerry Cornfield: 0.4%KUOW: 0.3%Straw Man0.0%This article: 8.6%Jerry Cornfield: 3.6%KUOW: 4.3%Appeal to Authority8.6%This article: 0.0%Jerry Cornfield: 1.1%KUOW: 1.4%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 4.4%Jerry Cornfield: 1.2%KUOW: 0.9%Slippery Slope4.4%This article: 0.0%Jerry Cornfield: 0.0%KUOW: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 6.9%Jerry Cornfield: 1.5%KUOW: 4.1%Hasty Generalization6.9%This article: 0.0%Jerry Cornfield: 0.0%KUOW: 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Jerry Cornfield: 0.2%KUOW: 0.8%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 8.9%Jerry Cornfield: 4.4%KUOW: 6.1%Appeal to Emotion8.9%This article: 3.3%Jerry Cornfield: 1.1%KUOW: 0.8%Begging the Question3.3%This article: 0.0%Jerry Cornfield: 1.3%KUOW: 2.2%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Jerry Cornfield: 0.2%KUOW: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Jerry Cornfield: 0.2%KUOW: 0.3%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Jerry Cornfield: 0.2%KUOW: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 2.0%Jerry Cornfield: 0.1%KUOW: 0.2%Composition/Division2.0%This article: 0.0%Jerry Cornfield: 0.5%KUOW: 3.3%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Jerry Cornfield: 0.0%KUOW: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 4.0%Jerry Cornfield: 0.7%KUOW: 1.4%Ambiguity (Equivocation)4.0%This article: 0.0%Jerry Cornfield: 0.0%KUOW: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Jerry Cornfield: 0.0%KUOW: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Jerry Cornfield: 0.0%KUOW: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Jerry Cornfield: 0.3%KUOW: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Jerry Cornfield: 0.2%KUOW: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 10.6%Jerry Cornfield: 2.2%KUOW: 1.0%Unattributed Quote10.6%This article: 0.0%Jerry Cornfield: 2.5%KUOW: 0.8%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 0.7%Jerry Cornfield: 2.4%KUOW: 3.2%Biased Writer Voice0.7%This article: 0.0%Jerry Cornfield: 0.2%KUOW: 1.5%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Jerry Cornfield: 0.8%KUOW: 1.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jerry Cornfield: 0.3%KUOW: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jerry Cornfield: 0.2%KUOW: 1.3%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

549 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers32%attributed speech373writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 34 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 100.0% coverageDenny Heck • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageDenny Heck • 15 words • 0.0% coverageDenny Heck • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 38 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageYasmin Trudeau • 22 words • 0.0% coverageYasmin Trudeau • 24 words • 0.0% coverageYasmin Trudeau • 8 words • 0.0% coverageYasmin Trudeau • 18 words • 0.0% coverageYasmin Trudeau • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageYasmin Trudeau • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Yasmin Trudeau

82%flagged-word coverage
121 attributed words69% of attributed speech42% writer coverage
0%10.0%20.0%Unattributed Quote-15.5 ptsWriter: 15.5%Yasmin Trudeau: 0.0%0.0%Biased Writer Voice-1.1 ptsWriter: 1.1%Yasmin Trudeau: 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.