Election Year Candidate Survey

UW Impact conducts a non-partisan candidate survey prior to every Washington State legislative election in order to provide alums and UWAA members with information on the candidates who champion the value of public higher education.

Please see below for your candidates’ answers to UW Impact’s 2014 higher education questionnaire. You may search by candidate name or search by legislative district. Click on underlined answers to see complete candidate comments (if submitted) for each question.

If you do not see your candidate(s) listed below, he or she did not fill out a survey.

» Find your district

 

*Indicates an incumbent candidate.

Name:

Chamber:

Legislative District:

Do you support restoring state funding for public higher ed to a level where the state splits the cost with students & families 50/50? …

Read more

Washington students and families have taken on a greater share of tuition costs due to the economic downturn and deep state budget cuts. Ten years ago, UW’s tuition was around $5,000, and the state covered half that cost; in the 1980s – 1990s the state funded close to 70 – 80% of the cost.

Today, in-state tuition is over $12,000 and students and families are responsible for 70% of the costs, with the state paying 30%. Would you support restoring state funding for public higher education to a level where the state evenly splits the cost with students and families (50/50)?

Do you support expanding the definition of “basic education” in Washington to include higher ed & early learning? …

Read more

A “basic education” in Washington State includes grades K-12. Yet, an estimated 70 percent of jobs in our state will require some form of postsecondary training by 2020, and many experts say our post-secondary system is already unable to produce the number of college graduates demanded by the labor market.

Do you support efforts to establish a dedicated funding source for higher education? …

Read more

The demands of the McCleary decision and a predicted revenue shortfall are creating unprecedented education funding decisions in the 2015 legislative session. Public universities are already being asked to model 15 percent budget cuts, which would end a two-year tuition freeze.

Do you support efforts to establish a dedicated funding source for higher education?

Do you support expanding UW medical (WWAMI) and dentistry (RIDE) education programs in Spokane? …

Read more

The health needs in communities east of the Cascades are expected to be hit hardest as our population pages and a generation of primary care physicians retires. The UW proposed increasing the number of students in the existing WWAMI program at WSU Spokane in an effort to boost the number of primary care physicians and health practitioners in Eastern Washington. WWAMI is ranked top in the nation for primary care medical education, family medicine and rural medicine while educating its students at one-third of the national average per student.

Do you support expanding UW medical (WWAMI) and dentistry (RIDE) education programs in Spokane to better serve citizens in rural and underserved areas?
Ed Barton House 1 Yes

I believe we need to look at what is driving the cost of education to rise significantly faster than inflation, wages or the cost of living. The restoration of balance needs to be accomplished by a combination of cost reductions and controls, as well as additional funding.
 Yes

This will require a state constitutional amendment and will absorb the elements of the McCleary decision, and may, in fact, assist the state in meeting these requirements.
 Yes

I support a separate budgeting item for education first to meet McCleary requirements, and advocate including postsecondary and preschool as part of basic education.
 Yes

Based on what I understand today, I would be supportive. I would like to better understand what barriers or reasons currently stand in the way of expansion.
Greg Hartman House 2 Yes

I believe education is the great equalizer in our society and the state should do as much as possible to fully fund as much education as it can afford.
 Yes

Early learning has proven to be the most productive time for a child to learn. I believe postsecondary training is important now and the state should expand the definition of 'basic education".
 Yes

A dedicated funding source would help meet growing need for postsecondary. This would meet employer demands and in the long term stimulate the states economy, there by offsetting the initial costs.
 Yes

Yes this is a good plan and helps reduce the "reacting too, rather than planning for" service needs of our citizens.
Steven Nielson House 2 No

I will not support Tax Payer backed funding of private/public Universities to this scale unless the costing structure returned tuition levels to those of the 1980's / 1990's. It has been my observation that universities unnecessarily increase tuition to capture more revenue solely because more revenue has been made available, only to ultimately flow the burden onto families. When Universities take responsibility regarding tuition and their tution practices, the taxpayers may be more willing to participate in renegotation.
 No

Excessive state funding for private education is already a burden to the taxpayers, one that has put the state judicial and legislative branches at odds. I will not support expanding the definition of 'basic education'. If there is a significant need for higher education and additional training, my recommendation is and always has been that the education structure needs to sufficiently modify the structure to meet the job market demands. We currently educate students in an archaic fashion for sectors of a job market that no longer exist. Junior Colleges need to expand (as they are currently doing) to meet immediate job needs, and curriculum of primary and secondary education needs to be modified and made competitive to allow for elements of change in the job market and the needs of the industry/workforce. Finally, Universities should be required to evaluate the validity of the degrees they offer based on current and predicted needs of the industry, economy, and society, and restrict awarding of specific degrees to the predetermined needs. That is to say a University should encourage applicable degrees (such as Math and Science) and discourage general studies or non-necessary degrees (such as women's studies).
 Yes

I do support this venture, but under the model of fixed tuition, grants, and other innovative and sustainable revenue resources.
 Yes

I support this need, but also encourage growth in the Physicians Assistant programs to provide basic services under the license of a general practicioner. Non-licensed physicians assistants provide the same basic health services as a GP or PCP but at a reduced cost, and are more readily available to rural areas.
Graham Hunt* House 2 Yes Yes Yes Yes
Paul Delaney House 3 Yes No Yes Yes
Chad Magendanz* House 5 Yes

I expect that much of these new appropriations will be in the form of performance funding, however, which would be tied to key performance metrics like wage growth, placement rates, and on-time graduation rates.
 Yes

We will likely see push back on doing this before 2018, because of concerns that we "grow the box" of funding requirements to be met before the 2018 McCleary deadline, but there is definite bipartisan support among education champions to recognize a broader definition of basic education that reflects modern requirements to be competitive in a 21st century workforce.
 No

This is unnecessary if higher education is captured under the definition of basic education, which is required to be funded "as the State’s first and highest priority before any other State programs or operations."
 Yes
David Spring House 5 Yes

Actually, I believe that the State should cover 100% of the cost of higher education by rolling back tax breaks to wealthy multinational corporations rather than leaving our students and their families with a staggering debt.
 Yes

A plain reading of our State Constitution already includes a requirement that the legislature fund common schools - which includes higher education. See my campaign website springforschools.org for a detailed discussion of this issue.
 Yes

This could be easily funded by rolling back corporate tax breaks which have risen from $15 billion per year in 2000 to $45 billion per year today. Rolling back corporate tax breaks would not harm wealthy corporations as they could deduct their state taxes from their federal taxes. But our economy is greatly harmed by students either being saddled with a mountain of debt or not being able to afford to go to college at all.
 Yes
Essie Hicks House 5 Yes Yes Yes Yes
Rich Cowan Senate 6 Yes

Given what we know about how important higher education is, it is shocking that this isn't a priority for Washington. I was able to work my way through college as an Firefighter/EMT, this is not something that can be achieved today because of skyrocketing tuition rates and stagnant incomes. The average in-state tuition increase was $4,085 between the years 2008 and 2014, double the national average ($1,885). The Washington State Legislature balanced the budget on the backs of middle class families who wanted to send their kids to college.
 Yes

It is of paramount importance to include early learning in “basic education,” studies show that there is a seven to one return for dollars allocated to early learning. This sets us up for success. By including higher education in “basic education” we are ensuring our leadership of job growth and development in the Nation and the world. It is important to recognize the importance of producing more STEM degrees to support the high-tech companies we have here in Washington.
 Yes

The Supreme Court has ruled that funding K-12 education is the paramount duty of the state - a ruling that my opponent would prefer to ignore, famously telling the Supreme Court to “pound sand” instead of working to solve the problem. While the majority of funding is reserved for K-12, we cannot ignore institutions of higher education. Washington companies are already importing graduates from other states and countries because our state institutions are not producing enough graduates, particularly in the STEM fields. To get the legislature behind education funding, higher education stakeholders first have to come together with one voice. Disagreement between the four year institutions and different priorities among the four year and two year institutions are a significant part of the problem. In the legislature, I would like to work with both the institutions and outside groups like UW Impact to come up with a list of priorities that are achievable, and then speak with one voice so we can accomplish our goals. Even that would be a major change in how the institutions lobby the legislature.
 Yes

There is clearly is a need to expand the medical education programs, particularly in eastern Washington. I will support any measured and economically responsible expansion of medical programs in eastern Washington.
Donald Dover House 6 Yes

Total costs (not just tuition) for resident students attending Washington's four year higher education institutions should be sixty percent underwritten by state revenue. For resident students enrolled at community and technical colleges a seventy percent subsidy should be in place. Subsidies for out-of-state should be significantly less, and out-of-country student subsidies should not be available. The state need grant program and state loan program should be made more available to resident students.
 Yes

Article nine of the Washington state constitution should be amended to include all educational programs from early childhood programs to worker retraining programs.
 Yes

As a result of the legislature's revision of the definition of basic education, it is now time to implement a separate budget and revenue stream for Washington's educational offerings, much in the same manner that transportation projects have a budget and revenue stream separate from the general operating budget.
 Yes

The WWAMI and RIDE programs are excellent examples of efficiently operating educational programs reliant on technology for graduate distance learning programs. However, because there are few incentives for new doctors and dentists to practice their fields in the rural communities, the benefit to Washington State has been muted. Until such time as those incentives are in place, funding for medical education programs of all providers should be pursued, not only those of the University of Washington.
Ronnie Rae House 7 Yes Yes Yes Yes
James Apker House 7 No

The state is only constitutionally required to provide funding for the public school system (K-12). It is not required to provide funding for higher education. How ever the state does provide the courtesy of the state need grant to help pay for higher education, which at thirty percent is more than enough. Having students pay for more of their education will help create a higher education system that will be more competitive and geared to the needs of the students and their educational goals. With this system every state and private facility will be challenged to offer students a bigger bang for their buck instead of sucking the student and the state dry for every penny that they have earned.
 No

Once again the state is only constitutionally required to provide funding for the public school system (K-12). To expand on this you must change the constitution to "redefine" what basic education means.
 No

Once again the state is only constitutionally required to provide funding for the public school system (K-12). Where would you come up with the funds to establish a dedicated funding source for higher education? The Road funds which is suppose to be used only for the roads but is diverted to pay for non road projects. Every one has to cut their spending, why should Public universities be any different?
 Yes

If you want to expand the UW medical (WWAMI) and dentistry (RIDE) education programs by all means please do so. But you have to figure out how to pay for it without the legislators and state funding assistance. You are a private university and as such you must make your school attractive to potential students to come and seek an education from you verse other programs in other state that offer better bang for the students buck. If you do not make your selves more attractive to potential students then you will lose money and fail in your endeavor to seek public and private funds. You must lower your own cost of educating potential students both within the state and out of the state.
Eric Kalia House 8 Yes Yes Yes Yes
Larry Haler* House 8 Yes

As the Ranking member of the House Higher Education Committee I led the successful effort to freeze tuition for the last two legislative session. I am currently working on proposals to be submitted next session to return tuition to at least 50 – 50. That is 50% state contribution and 50% students and/or their families.
 Yes Yes

The Chair of Higher Education, Rep Larry Seaquist, and I are continuing to search for a means to establish dedicated funding for all of Higher Education.
 Yes

I am leading the efforts and legislation to expand/revise the WWAMI program to also include funding for Residencies. We need to expand Residency offers in Eastern Washington and I have been working on this for the last 3-years. I will be reintroducing revised legislation to expand the WWAMI program, and fund mote Residency programs in 2015. I have spent this summer, along with a team of interested citizens, talking to and lobbying key House and Senate members to support expansion of WWAMI and the Residency programs in Washington State, particularly for Eastern Washington.
Zack Hudgins* House 11 Yes

While I support spliting higher ed tuition evenly, it will be difficult while the Court ordered K-12 McCleary funding is still a driver in the state budget.
 Yes Yes

Tuition, even while not covering the entire cost, is a big piece of that dedicated funding source that many government services don't have.
 Yes

I think it is very important to continue to increase capacity in higher ed at all levels and programs. We shouldn't have talented students willing to work hard not able to get the classes or programs they want.
Matt Manweller* House 13 Yes No

The Court has shown itself to be stunningly arrogant and irresponsible with respect to the current definitions of "basic education". Their actions have precipitated a constitutional crisis that may result in massive cuts to important social services and higher ed. By including higher ed in the definition of "basic education" we would exacerbate the problem down the road and hand off more decisions to a Court that has proven itself ill equipped to handle them.
 N/A

Depends. A dedicated source from where?
 Yes

I do, but my support for expanding your WWAMI slots should not be interpreted as opposition to a new medical school at WSU. I am still undecided on that issue.
Teodora Martinez-Chavez House 15 Yes

I believe quality education is a key to our children's and grandchildren's better future. When they succeed our communities will also.
 Yes

I believe preschool education in a child's first language is one of the best way to help our students be prepared to succeed in their education. I also believe programs such as "running start" should be offered to many more students so they too will be prepared to suceed in higher education.
 Yes

I see establishing a dedicated funding source for higher education as an investment in our state's future leaders, workers and economy.
 Yes

As someone who has been raised, educated and has become a community advocate for the Yakima Valley, programs that better serve our underserved in rural areas gives our families hope for a better future.
Terry Nealey* House 16 Yes No

The State Cannot afford it at this time. The definition of basic education for K-12 is now overbroad. It would a large unfunded mandate. But I agree we need to allocate more funds to higher education.
 No Yes

If it is cost effective.
Richard McCluskey House 17 Yes

I favor Thomas Jefferson's position that a fully funded public education is essential for a properly functioning democratic republic. Further that higher education is the great social equalizer providing equal opportunity for all people. So my response to your 50/50 proposal is technically incorrect in that we the people should provide a no cost to the individual, lifetime of public education. It will not likely happen in my lifetime but I am prepared begin change toward that goal. 50/50 is just a starting point.
 Yes

As previously stated, I support publicly funded lifetime education.
 Yes Yes
Paul Harris* House 17 Yes Yes Yes Yes
Monica Stonier* House 17 Yes Yes Yes Yes
Maureen Winningham House 18 Yes

Students are graduating with an average of $27,000 of student loan debt and it is crippling our economy. The domino effect is that the students don't buy homes, or get married or buy new cars (thus slowing the economy) or start families. In fact, they are moving back in with their parents at historical numbers! Yes, this is a major problem we must tackle. We must partner with the federal government to stop making the student loan industry For Profit. We must stop paying for K-12 education on the backs of post-secondary education students. One idea I have is for Washington State colleges and universities to accept MOOCs (Massive Open Online Courses) from accredited universities for transferable credit. Thus, lessening student loan debt.
 Yes

I am the Global Director of Learning for Intel. I have a global certification that only 1500 people have. Everything about the success of my career is due to the college education and the continuing education I have pursued. I also see the growing demand for constant, just-in-time learning at my company and in my industry. Learning is constant. We need to support that to compete globally.
 Yes

Funding McCleary is not an option! In a recent endorsement interview my opponent refused to answer this question 5 times. http://blogs.columbian.com/political-beat/2014/08/21/say-gets-cut/ We cannot cut our way into prosperity. We must had additional revenue streams that are scalable and consistent to fund McCleary. There simply is not much left to cut.
 Yes
Liz Pike* House 18 Yes

For the first time in 26 years, the WA legislature froze tuition increases. I am proud of this. The only way to reduce the burden on our students is to lower the cost of higher education. We must challenge our state universities to delivery a quality higher education for less cost.
 No

I think we have our work cut out just identifying what K-12 basic education is.
 N/A

I support a reduced cost of higher education for all Washington students. If there are to be increases in tuition, I recommend increases for out of state students.
 Yes
Mike Briggs House 18 Yes

Absolutely. If you look over my website, www.briggs4rep.com, you will see that Education is a chief priority for me. I am in favor also of working out a plan to reduce or eliminate school levies for communities. I would like to see the State pick up much more of the total tab for education and this way, by reducing levies, the tax burden is put back on the State's back and not on individuals.
 Yes

Again, ABSOLUTELY (it's as if I wrote this questionnaire, not you folks). As I tell all of my constituents in this area of SW Washington, "The days of our youth graduating from HS and going to work in the woods cutting timber, or in the fields on the family farm or even going to the local paper mill to work- is over. Our children need some form of higher education, be it a four year traditional education, a union apprenticeship, or a trade school." I hear way too much, "We need jobs here." But we need an educated and trained labor force for business to hire those young people just starting out. If Washington State will not do this for our youth- we will have to import labor for the kinds of jobs in a new and growing future economy.
 Yes

Again, yes, yes, yes. I believe in prioritization of our state's needs which should balance (hopefully) with the revenue required. Education, if not at the Top of that list, should be very close. We need to make sure the State's essential services are always covered and again—I believe Education is surely an essential service.
 Yes

I do not know that much of the WWAMI program and the state of primary care physicians and dentists in the rural areas of Eastern Washington. My district is located in SW Washington- Clark County. However, I am very much geared for the social concerns of my constituents and believe that government is for the people and I intend to follow that mantra as much as possible.
David Steenson House 19 No

Tax payers should not be funding Universities nor should illegal alliens be allowed the same services as those that are citizens and live in the borders of Washington. Why should any tax payer have to pay for other people going to school. Lower the cost of your education service, it is a service that does not need to be funded by the states citizens. You run a business at the exspense of your neighbors. Any funding from the state should not be given at the University Level.
 No

Basic education is just that basic. Instead of Administrators out numbering teachers, why not reduce the number of "Administrators" thus reducing the cost to students and families. Leave the state out of it and run your business as any other business owner must. Higher eduction? really? How about trade schools that will teach a trade, a skill that will be useful in our state. If a person wishes to attend a college, then he or she needs to find the sources to fund that want.
 No

The Federal court / government should butt out of our state and local schools. We have Legislative and Senate personel that are responsible for the funding of our state needs. The Federal court / government should worry more about it's promise to it's citizens. Public schools are the responsibility of the communities that need them. It's not the states, nor the Federal government to dictate how they should be run, who should run them, or what the children in those communities should learn; ie; NO COMMON CORE STANDARDS, NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND. If the universities want more money, more students, as a business owner I say, lower your cost, sell more t-shirts, bake sales, have fund raisers. But do something other than steal money from your neighbors to run a business.
 No

Reduce your cost of your service, our population is always getting older with every generation. Physicians come and go just like every other business. Increasing any program at the exspense of the Tax Payer is wrong. I think you should look at private investments as a source for your projects not the public to fund your project by way of Taxes.
Lillian Ortiz-Self* House 21 Yes

I know this can't be done immediately and it would have to be accomplished incrementally, but having this as a future goal will move us back in the direction of making education accessible for all.
 Yes

If we want to see economic growth in our State,and meet our economic needs of the future, while staying competitive, we need to ensure that all students have access to a p-21 seamless, continuum of educational services.
 Yes

If
 Yes

Equitable health care access across our state should not be a privilege but a right.
Strom Peterson House 21 Yes

I strongly support efforts to have the state and the families split the cost at 50% each. When we invest in students and reduce their debt burden, it is a long-term investment in the economic future of our state. Removing some of the financial barriers to earning a post-secondary education will improve the education and skills of our workforce.
 Yes

The demand for workers with a post-secondary education is clear and it is important that Washington State works to meet that demand. By including post-secondary education in the definition of “basic education,” it ensures that the discussions had in the legislature reflect that reality. We need a workforce attending post-secondary schools and we should not treat that as a separate issue from educating our citizens.
 Yes

Establishing a dedicated funding source for higher education is an effort I would support in Olympia. As discussed in my previous responses, giving post-secondary education the financial support it needs is a benefit for both the future workers and the economy of this state. With the stability that a dedicated funding source provides, our schools would be able to make better long-term strategic and planning decisions.
 Yes

I do support expanding the UW medical and dental programs for rural and underserved areas. The shortage of physicians and medical practitioners in those areas is something the state should not ignore. Investing in these programs would be an intelligent method of addressing these future health needs.
Allen McPheeters House 21 No

While I am sensitive to the plight of students with regard to the high cost of tuition, I am concerned about two serious problems: a) Many students who enter college fail to complete their degree or are unable to find work within their chosen field after completing their degree. In both of these cases, the taxpayers' investment in these students' educations have been wasted. By lowering tuitions relative to market rates, we encourage both of these negative outcomes. I would rather let tuitions rise and increase scholarships and need grants for those students to demonstrate superior drive and ability at the high school level and continue to perform at that level during college. b) Colleges and universities nationwide increased their spending on administrative and staff resource far more than on teaching resources. A return to market rates for tuition would encourage our state's higher education institutions to reduce administrative bloat that fails to benefit students, and therefore to reduce costs.
No

The Constitutional guarantee of "ample provision for the education of all children" is an enormous defined benefit that our state has already failed to provide. It seems foolish to expand the definition of a benefit that we are already failing to provide.
N/A

Generally, I prefer dedicated funding sources to increasing the general fund. However, I am reluctant to increase taxation, especially when the tax burden in Washington state falls more heavily on lower-income taxpayers. I would be willing to consider proposals that dedicate a portion of our current tax receipts to higher education.
N/A

I am not sufficiently familiar with these programs to commit to expanding them; however, having lived much of my life in smaller Eastern Washington communities such as Republic and Omak, I am willing to consider these options. .
Steve Owens House 22 Yes

Obviously such support is predicated on identifying sensible funding strategies to enable us to do this.
 No

While I firmly support increasing the availability of post-secondary training as well as early learning, we have already seen the consequences of expanding the scope of the definition of basic education. The McCleary decision has shown that the term "basic education" provides the courts an invitation to legislate from the bench by demanding expenditures on "basic-education" without regard to ensuring that such expenditures provide successful results. We cannot afford to blindly throw money at our educational challenges in the hopes that they will somehow resolve themselves. We need to ensure that we get good value for the money spent, and that we take into consideration the much bigger picture of maintaining our other very important services.
 No

The McCleary decision highlights much more than a deficiency in funding. What the McCleary decision highlights is that there is a deficiency in results. As a State we already spend significantly more per child than most European countries yet we achieve comparatively poor results. This demonstrates fundamental flaws in the way we make use of our educational resources. Until we address those fundamental flaws in our use of resources, incentives and metrics, we will continue to achieve sub-par results regardless of how much more we spend. The State must preserve the flexibility to provide for all of the states needs whether it is addressing homelessness, poverty, transportation or education. Earmarking funds will not address the issues our educational system faces.
 Yes

Absolutely. The problems we face with health care are essentially supply/demand imbalances. Too much demand and too little supply. This effort will cut to the root of the issue, by increasing the supply of health care professionals to better meet our demand.
Franklin Edwards House 22 Yes

I believe every family that resides in our state should be able to afford to attend UW if they so choose. This is why I would support any effort to make this possible.
 Yes

I also believe that we need to expand in to technical training also.
 Yes

I believe if we change the tax structure of I-502, so recreational cannabis can complete with the medical market. We can increase revenue, and this revenue should be used only for education.
 Yes

We need to allow more students in these fields. So we can insure proper care for all our citizens of this great state.
Sam Hunt* House 22 Yes

Yes, assuming other legislators would join in voting for the additional revenues and removal of tax exemptions to fund this.
 No

I support increased funding for early learning and postsecondary education, but oppose further mandated funding until the Legislature addresses the K-12 mandates. I do support comprehensive tax reform to provide necessary revenues. If Tim Eyman's initiatives had not been enacted, Washington would have adequate revenues to address both postsecondary and early learning funding needs.
 No

Philosophically, I oppose creation of dedicated funds because it hampers the Legislature's ability to address state funding needs as a whole. Creating a series of funding "silos" does not address the overall revenue and funding needs.
 N/A

I am not sure. I need to look at the WSU proposal for a medical school as well as the UW proposal. I do support expansion of medical school and dentistry education in the state.
Chris Reykdal* House 22 Yes

A 50/50 policy with adequate grant aid is a reasonable approach. The ticking time bomb of student debt will hold back an entire generation if we don't take action!
 Yes

We should guarantee every Washington student at least a year of college free of cost as long as they are at a university, CTC transfer program, or getting an industry recognized credential or certificate.
 Yes

I would prefer a substantial tax restructure so that our General Fund is once again in excess of 6% of Gross State Product. Then within that, I would like to dedicate funds to higher education. As an alternative, creating a dedicated source of revenue for higher education is something I would support but it will also put a big fat target on higher education efficiency for Tim Eyman and the anti-tax forces. We risk them vilifying higher education to eliminate the dedicated tax.
 Yes

I support the expansion of WWAMI and RIDE but I don't rule out the idea of a WSU medical school in Spokane if the parties can work out an agreement.
Drew Hansen* House 23 Yes

The double-digit tuition spikes of the last several years can't continue; it's not fair to students and parents who are trying to plan for college.
 No

The Legislature already does not adequately support "basic education" per McCleary; it does not do a lot of good to change the definition of "basic education" because that just adds to the unfunded gap. The real question is how to fund higher education adequately.
 Yes Yes
Capt. James M. Olsen, USCG (ret) House 23 Yes

However, we cannot continue with Higher Education rate of increase, even with a 50/50 split. It is an incontrovertible fact the national rate-of-increase for Higher Ed has vastly exceeded the rate of inflation. Washington Legislature must develop strict and enforceable steps to stem the Higher Ed rate of increase. This would include slower rates of increase for labor, operating costs through aggressive negotiations and cost-saving technologies and contracting. Given this throttle-back in rate of increase, I would support a 50/50 split.
 No

However, I believe innovative 21st Century technological advances will allow the goals of Higher Ed training to be available without throwing another gigantic fiscal responsibility on the Legislature. Currently WA Legislature is grappling with tremendous K-12 fiscal problems. This is not the time to add Higher Ed to a fiscal shortfall.
 Yes

However the "dedicated funding source" will fall in line after legally required services are funded for the most vulnerable in the state. This dedicated funding will not be given head-of-line privileges.
 Yes

Bases on tremendous problems created by the ACA in terms of doctor/medical provider shortfall, I support efforts from WWAMI and RIDE to provide medical providers to rural and under-served areas. I would also support a Eastern Washington second medical facility being created.
Sherry Appleton* House 23 Yes

More young adults would go to college if the funding was restored. I believe that it should be PK-14, so every young adult could at least have a community college/Vo Tech education.
 Yes

See above.
 Yes Yes
Scott Henden House 23 Yes

We need to look at cost as a whole. Are we being effective with the dollars spent? How many students do we invest in who do not graduate. As a incentive to graduate should we offer tuition forgiveness base on service to this state , like some states do ?I think so. Could students who request aid be required to help out in our farm industry in the summer? Just more money is not the answer. A qualified yes.
 No

The State is not kids parents. There are tragic cases with some kids who need to be looked at on a case by case bases. Lets set a goal of doing a great job K-12 .Work to have ever student carrier or college ready. For my own kids I would help them if they have higher education goals but they will work at it .There is no free lunch.
 No

Education is a great equalizer in our country. Should we be paying College Presidents a million a year while we have 300 students in a class? Students at every income level should feel that higher education is a privilege not a right. Something to reach for ,to earn, to repay not to be handed to .Money is only a piece of the answer.
 Yes

A qualified yes. It is great to see WWAMI success in cost control as listed .We need to look at that innovation in all areas of education. I would consider funding based on a staying in the state and paying it back . That could come in the form of working in the state in a needed area. How do we include business and industry to help drive the needed areas?
Thomas Greisamer, M.D. House 24 Yes

I would support the state paying 50% of the costs if the additional monies required would come from savings on the current budgets of public higher education. Remember, more so now than in the past there is more money available in grants and student loans. That being said, I believe that the $1trillion+ in student debt was incurred without considering the consequences.
 No

Improvements and reforms of the education system must come from innovation and not legislation. The post secondary system has the current resources to not only improve the quality of education, but to increase the number of graduates if both its teaching resources and capital resources were used in a more efficient manner.
 No

By asking for a “dedicated funding source”, you are asking for more taxpayer money; students, ask your parents and you'll find out that they are already taxed to their eyeballs. I believe that a 15 to 20% operating and capital budget cut for universities is not only doable but desirable. The tuition freeze should not only continue, but I believe there should be a strategy for lowering future tuitions.
 Yes

Along with that expansion, I would include expansion in internal medicine, OB/GYN, and psychiatry programs. These programs have a high fixed costs, but small marginal cost per resident. A modest expansion could occur with simply a little more work from the faculty (no whining please). The modest monetary investment needed would be repaid many times over by future healthcare improvements.
Steve Tharinger* House 24 Yes Yes Yes

I would support some dedicated funding, but it is important not to tie the hands of budget writers to meet another needs of the State.
 Yes
Eric Renz House 25 Yes

I believe the state share of tuition should be allocated to students as financial aid according to their available personal and family resources. Students from low income homes might get 90% d tuition paid, while students from affluent homes could pay their tuition. I think the number of siblings should be considered in granting aid.
 Yes

At the post-diploma level the state's responsibility should be graduated financial aid and assuring campuses have adequate and safe facilities for education and research. Funding plans should be made assuming every student will have the opportunity to receive higher education if they are prepared and they prepare themselves at each level. Higher education funding is an economic investment as well as community resource development.
 No

I believe the state budget should be unified, giving the legislature responsibility to shift priorities as the economy rises and falls and unforeseen needs arise such as natural disasters.
 Yes

A program like WWAMI medical school is essential for providing health care to broadly dispersed populations. The legislature should see WWAMI funding and program expansion as a public health investment rather than career and commercial development.
Dawn Morrell* House 25 Yes Yes Yes Yes
Melanie Stambaugh House 25 Yes No

Our current definition of basic education has not been fully funded. We must fund K-12 education first before we consider addicting higher ed and early learning.
 Yes N/A

Undecided. I would like more information and a greater understanding on this issue.
Hans Zeiger* House 25 Yes No

I believe that K-12 is the state's paramount duty, while higher education is not an entitlement. That does not negate my belief in its importance to our economic future and in the importance of state investment.
 Yes

We need to be creative in our search for funding for higher education.
 N/A

Undecided
Dawn Morrell House 25 Yes Yes Yes Yes
Larry Seaquist* House 26 Yes

Our real goal MUST BE to drive the cost way, way down. 50/50 is not good enough. That leave way too many families and working adults priced out of going to college. My personal commitment is to drive the cost to the student way back down.
 Yes

Note the 2nd page of the McCleary decision. You will find there this definition BY THE COURT (as I recall it): [a basic eduction is "...the knowledge and skills necessary to compete in today's economy and meaningfully participate in this state's democracy." That is far more than a high school diploma.
 Yes

I have a team of legislators and staff working this Interim on specific revenue proposals and on other innovations that would also a) increase throughput, b) increase quality, and c) lower the cost to the student. This is going to take both a concerted legislative effort and a state-wide advocacy campaign.
 Yes

Must also rapidly expand health care residencies in Central and Eastern WA.
Nathan Schlicher House 26 Yes

As a graduate of the University of Washington School of Law and School of Medicine in the last decade, I have seen first hand the impact of escalating tuition and fees on students. If we are going to have an educated and skilled workforce to attract new businesses and continue to support our economy in Washington State, we must have an affordable higher education system. I am committed to restoring the partnership that the state has had with students to make a sustainable education system for all our children.
Yes

We need an integrated, holistic, and complete education system. That includes not only K-12, but also preschool, higher education, and CTE programming. The approach to limping along through the process to maintain and not improve our system has to stop. We must invest in our future through a robust education system.
Yes

We need a sustainable and dedicated funding source for our entire budget and I hope that the crisis of McCleary is an opportunity for us to look at fixing the long term health of our state government.

 Yes

As an emergency medicine physician, I understand firsthand the challenges of our underserved populations. We need to not only increase our WWAMI slots in medical and dental schools, but also promote additional residency and GME training programs. The reality is that most doctors and dentists will settle within 50 miles of where they trained. We need more GME programs east and south of the puget sound to promote local training and recruitment of physicians and dentists to these underserved communities.
Jake Fey House 27 Yes

I hope that the Legislature will be able to vote on this issue. I believe that the Legislature and the Governor need to step up to the plate and restore funding for higher education. The State benefits from the investments we make in higher education.
 Yes

In principal I support investments in higher education and early learning. And I would vote for the revenue to support that. I do believe that students should contribute to the cost of higher education however.
 Yes

I would,in concept, support a dedicated funding source. There are two issues, however. Many funding sources do not keep up with inflation and many "dedicated" funding sources get raided by the Legislature from time to time.
 Yes

I understand that there are differences of opinion on how best to serve the need for physicians however.
Steven Cook House 27 Yes

Based on getting government issues out of the way, so that we can get more people to work at reasonable wages. If they have to take jobs at lower wages, the economy should be such that they can expect to work their way back up the wage scale - which does not seem to be happening yet. Once that is done, and we have funded "basic education" and the proper housing of those with mental issues, and corrected the even worse situation our transportation programs are in - then we should work to get this item back in balance with the surplus of funds our budget would have available..
 No

The redefining of "Basic Education" is why the State Supreme Court says the state is failing to properly fund education at this time - though many of the problems are not directly related to funding (i.e. providing more dollars will not directly fix the lack of educational progress many of our students are facing. Additionally, there are other reports that many of our college/technical graduates cannot find jobs in their fields at this time, so not sure about whether there is real shortage or "created shortage" to bring about more immigrant visas.
 No

Every time a "dedicated source" has been set up in the past, there has always been some "good reason" to either direct it into the general fund or cannibalize it for other purposes.
 Yes

However, that will not be sufficient to meet all the needs of the state - so other medical and nursing programs need to be expanded as well.
Paul Wagemann House 28 N/A

Maybe. I think we have to many taking college courses that would be better served at a trade school. Higher costs force individuals to make sure that what they want to do is worth the cost and risk. Students like business need to look at return on investment.
 No

I do support our community college system which provides the best value for our students and taxpayers.
 Yes

I do but we need to make sure that we get the best return on those dollars invested. My question is can we deliver the same or better service for a lower cost? I have read several books on how we can stretch the education dollar and we need to explore those options. My concern is if we get dependable dedicated revenue we become complacent and we stop being creative in providing education services.
 Yes

I support programs that make a positive difference for our citizens. Families that live in rural areas need medical care and these program support that need.
Mary Moss House 28 Yes Yes Yes Yes
Dick Muri* House 28 Yes No

The courts are now partially in control of the legislative process. To expand the state constitutional requirement to "amply fund basic education", to early learning and higher education would become a budget buster.
 No Yes
Jason Bergstrom House 29 Yes No

We cannot continue to put the burden onto the State or the taxpayers for continuing education. I currently have $24,000 in student loans and knowing that I had those loans made me work hard in school to make sure that money did not go to waste. I do believe that there should be incentives to continue your education but per the McCleary decision we haven't even been able to fully fund K-12, so how would we add into the budget early learning and higher education? Families need to take the responsibility of working hard for what they have.
 No

Private universities have seemed to make it through the economic downturn. It seems anything having to do with "Public" Education falls short of expectations. Public universities should not have special circumstances because they are funded by State and Federal money. We need to stop pushing the issues of miss-management off on the Tax-payers.
 Yes

I do support expanding the UW Medical programs. Due to Obamacare doctors are getting out of the profession at an astronomical rate. With low payments from Medicare and Medicaid causing the largest problem. We do need more doctors in Eastern Washington. Also because they are educated in Eastern Washington doesn't mean that is where they will practice.
Cindy Ryu* House 32 Yes Yes Yes Yes
Mia S. Gregerson House 33 Yes Yes Yes Yes
Tina Orwall* House 33 Yes Yes

Possibly. We need to invest in early learning, k-12, and higher education to make sure all students have a path to be successful.
Yes Yes
Jeanette Burrage House 33 Yes

We also need to expand the number of program spaces and perhaps the number of colleges.
 No

Redefining education will not produce more funds. Legislators need to be elected who prioritize long term programs rather than band aid solutions.
 No

Legislators need to be elected who understand the need for higher education and will support it.
 Yes
Joe Fitzgibbon* House 34 Yes

I support increasing state funding for higher education and believe that this will require responsible increases in state revenue.
 Yes

Higher education and early learning are both critical components of preparing students for success in the workforce and in life. This expanded definition would cost billions of dollars and it is important that we be transparent about the fact that this will require a substantial revenue increase.
 Yes

I proposed HB 2803, which would have enacted a carbon tax and allocated the proceeds ($2.3 billion a biennium) to the education legacy trust account, which in part funds higher education. The McCleary decision will undoubtedly result in an even greater squeeze on higher education funding unless new revenue specifically higher education is secured.
 Yes
Brendan Kolding House 34 Yes Yes Yes Yes
Drew MacEwen* House 35 Yes Yes

Our constitution and subsequent court cases and law have defined basic education as K-12. I have been a strong supporter of Early Learning as that directly feeds into K-12. I believe we can increase higher education funding and graduates without redefining basic education.
 N/A

I support doing a separate K12 budget outside of the operating budget. We can than focus on higher education within the operating budget.
 Yes
Daniel Griffey House 35 Yes

We need to ensure that our citizens are prepared to meet the challenges of today's economic environment. Education is the key to success and the more educated our workforce is, the stronger our economy will be both locally and nationally.Our employers are in desperate need of an educated work force. We can't allow a lack of funding to cover tuition stand in the way of a prosperous Washington State.
 Yes

We absolutely need to expand the definition of basic education beyond K-12. I would also like to see more opportunities for our high school students to take advantage of post secondary educational opportunities while working on their high school diplomas and include apprenticeships. Getting our students started on a post graduate path early on will encourage them and keep them focused on a career and perhaps discourage "dropping out".
 Yes

We need to prioritize and fund education first and not put it last and expect to fund it with the left over scraps of the budget. That is and has been, simply irresponsible.We are expecting to see revenue increases again this budget cycle and we can afford to expand the definition of basic education and how we fund it. The McCleary decision made it clear that we are not funding education properly. I would like to eliminate unfunded mandates and have a steady and predictable education budget.
 Yes

We have to recognize that our citizen's needs are changing and we need to be prepared to adapt with those changes. I support expanding educational opportunities and making sure that our under served and rural areas are prepared to meet future challenges. It is always best to be thinking ahead and be proactive instead of reactive, which can be very costly.
Tammey Newton House 35 Yes

Education is critical to economic security, not just for the student, but for our nation. We must make education a priority.
 Yes

Our markets have shifted, businesses, trades and the markets are telling us what they need. We have an opportunity to rise to the occasion to meet those market needs. We should move in the direction that will ensure prosperity for our students, their future families and our communities.
 Yes

Education is linked to economy. We know that an educated citizenry is an innovative, successful and economically viable citizenry. We need to ensure that we are able to consistently fund education and protect the quality of the education we provide.
 Yes

As job markets shift, our educational institutions are best poised to support our students to position themselves for successful careers and economic security. Programs like this not only benefit our students, but also our communities.
Kathy Haigh* House 35 Yes Yes Yes Yes
Paul Addis House 36 No

Basic education in WA is defined as K-12, so there is no constitutional case for state funding of higher education. Government regulation should be minimized so as not to require so much non-academic staffing, which increases costs. Free market solutions should be incorporated into the higher education model so that costs are lower and outcomes are better.
 No No Yes

However, I don't think throwing more doctors into a failing insurance-model system is economically sustainable. I think HSA funds, as well as funds from benefits for low income individuals (like EBT), should be allowed to pay for monthly fees for Direct Primary Care (DPC) service providers. The DPC model will attract more medical students and current doctors in every region of our state.
Gael Tarleton House 36 No

The 50-50 formula will not put us on a path to affordable, accessible higher education for the vast majority of our students. Making students and families share 50 percent of the costs would put the UW out of reach for a majority of our students. I will continue to support tuition freezes, and decreases where possible, while also taking other steps: increasing baseline state funding to our institutions, increasing financial aid resources, reducing the cost of post-secondary education by expanding college credit programs in high schools, and creating industry participation in GET tuition credit purchases. The "50-50" model would not protect us against frequent tuition hikes nor give the state or UW sufficient flexibility to tailor a financial aid package to a student's financial situation. I will continue to fight for increased state funding for public higher education so that it is affordable and accessible to everyone, at any age, for life-long learning.
 Yes

The State constitution's language suggests that our founding fathers viewed "common schools" as the equivalent of today's community and technical colleges. We need to renew our commitment to public education from early learning through life-long learning because access to continuous learning opportunities is an essential part of a vibrant democracy.
 Yes

As a member of the House Higher Education Committee, I advocated for the tuition freeze, increased baseline funding to higher education institutions, expanded financial aid, and decreased interest rates on student loans. I also supported retaining GET and expanding the categories of individuals and organizations that can buy GET credits for future students. I will continue to advocate for these policies. This year, I also am prepared to propose an education investment fee on property owners for ten years. All the monies generated would be dedicated to higher ed and early learning.
 Yes

The need for health care professionals throughout our state and the Pacific Northwest is not only a longer-term concern - it must be an immediate priority. The implementation of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, and our expansion of Medicaid eligibility, will give an additional one million Washingtonians health care coverage in the near term. We must be ready to provide health care to these residents. I will continue to support educational initiatives that make Washington State's health care system one of the best in the nation. This means giving people access to affordable care where they live.
Reuven Carlyle* House 36 Yes

110% on board to increase funding.
 No

The legal definition of 'basic education' as an 'entitlement' relative to funding is not the most effective way to increase funding for higher education. However, the principal is essential—and dedicated funding options are a more effective way to build higher education.
 Yes

I am working on this initiative.
 Yes
Daniel Bretzke House 37 Yes

The economic impact of students taking out student loans to pay for the every increasing cost of higher education will have a significant impact on the future of our State's economy.
 Yes

Education is the basis of a strong economy. Expanding basic education of at least two years of higher education, that includes both academic and vocational training is needed.
 Yes

I support the designation of dedicated funding sources from State land, or property taxes. I do not support the introduction of an income tax.
 Yes

Yes. This makes great sense. Expanding educational opportunities in areas where costs are less expensive, will allow for a greater number of students to attend a University nearer to their homes.
Mike Sells House 38 Yes Yes Yes Yes
Craig French House 38 No

I would really like to address this in the near future. but at this time, when this states spending is far greater then its revenue I wonder where the money would come from? Continue borrowing? Until the Washington state spending is far less than its revenue I cannot support any legislation that would force increases in taxes of any kind.
 No

Again we have to control the spending in this state first.
 No

We do not even have a dedicated funding source for K-12.
 No

Pertaining to questions 4, 5, 6, 7, while I have noted above if there is a time when our spending has been reduced and our state debt is on the decline, then I would be glad to revisit these programs.
Elijah Olson House 38 Yes No

I don’t believe common core would be beneficial to higher education.
 Yes Yes
June Robinson* House 38 Yes No

Not at this time. I understand the importance of both early learning and higher education and support state funding for both, however, I believe we need to first deal with funding for K-12 as demanded by the McCleary decision, before we complicate that by expanding the definition of basic education.
 Yes Yes
Mike Sells* House 38 Yes Yes Yes Yes
Charles Jensen House 39 Yes

We can't continue to balance our budget on the back of education. Higher education opportunities are what attracts and keeps the best and brightest. I favor restoring the cuts and ensuring tuition is affordable.
Yes

We have to have a strong higher education system in order to compete in a global market.
Yes

Again, I believe secondary education must be accessible and affordable.
Yes

Health care demands are only going to grow more pressing in the future. I believe expanding the WWAMI program is crucial to rural and underserved areas.
Daniel Miller House 40 Yes

I would If we could find a way to Lower the cost of education!! 10 years ago it was around $5,000 now it is over $12,000 So, I think, if the state pays half like it used to then a reduction in costs should be explored!
 N/A

Not Sure!
 Yes Yes
Tana Senn* House 41 Yes Yes

The McCleary decision is about educational outcomes. For young Washingtonians, these outcomes start by being prepared for Kindergarten with access to quality early learning and are enhanced by strong higher education.
 Yes

In order to ensure other critical programs that our state funds, we must add additional revenue to the equation. Dedicated funding for higher education makes a lot of sense and something I believe the business community can get behind.
 Yes

Especially with the expansion of people receiving health care through the Affordable Care Act, primary physicians are in even higher demand than before. It is a critical position that too many physicians are choosing not to take. We must ensure that our entire state has access to high quality, primary care physicians and health practitioners.
Satpal Sidhu House 42 Yes

After the devastating cuts after the Great Recession, colleges of every type have become increasingly unaffordable for students as they try to get the skills necessary for a stable career and a prosperous future. I believe student loans should have no interest for a period of time and new innovative financing options should be introduced like a 50/50 proposal. It is imperative to make education affordable for all students.
 Yes

Not only do employers need a college degree for critical fields, they need a college degree which provides particular skills which will be in demand for the future. Our basic education needs to include the instruction of these skills, whichever way will be the most efficient and cost-effective.
 Yes

Higher education is critical to our future. Both students, families, and colleges need stable funding sources to plan their expenses around. However, this can’t come at the expense of other programs which make sure children are fed and give families a helping hand up. We must make sure that the revenue source matches the expenditure and doesn’t hurt other critical areas of the state budget.
 Yes
Joy Monjure House 42 Yes Yes Yes Yes
Frank Chopp House 43 Yes

This calculation needs to include the significant state funding for financial aid (state need grant, opportunity grants, college bound scholarship, opportunity scholarships, etc.), with a specific focus on helping low-income students at a greater level above 50%.
 Yes

The first priority would be to include early learning in the definition of basic education, which the House of Representatives has already passed.
 Yes

I have been working on this approach for some time now.
 Yes
Jess Spear House 43 Yes

Under the leadership of my opponent, House Speaker Frank Chopp, Washington State topped the nation in forcing families and college-bound students to pay for the economic recession by decreasing funding for higher education while increasing tuition. The increases in tuition fees have priced many students from poor and working class backgrounds out of higher education, undermining their chances of getting higher-paid jobs in the future, and holding them back from reaching their full potential. I strongly support restoring state funding for higher education, but I would go further and advocate that the state to take on a much larger portion of the costs with the goal of moving towards fully funded higher education available to all students. This would be paid for by eliminating the billions the state spends annually on corporate tax handouts, and by taxing the super rich. The economic recession was not created by Washington students or their families. It was sparked on Wall Street. And while shares and corporate profits are hitting new record highs, many students, families and working people still live in a recession. There is enough money in Washington to fully fund higher education - without huge student debt – and the state government should make this a priority.
 Yes

Absolutely. Higher education should be available to all, free to those who attend, and funded to meet those needs. However, as the McCleary hearings have shown, we cannot rely on the state legislature to guarantee students' constitutional rights. We need to build a new type of politics than what we currently have, where politicians habitually say one thing and do another. That’s why I’m challenging the House Speaker in this race, independent of the Democratic and Republican party machines but working closely with community campaigners, labor organizers and social justice activists. I want to build a network of students, graduates and working people, who I can work with during the campaign and after the election, as I did as the Organizing Director of 15 Now. Unlike my opponent, I accept no corporate money – since I will not be a representative of big business. Instead, I will fight for the needs of the people of WA state.
 Yes

The state legislature took just three days to decide on the largest tax handout in U.S. history - $8.7 billion for Boeing last Fall. But, since the McCleary ruling in 2012, it has in no way prioritized the securing of an estimated $7.8 billion needed to adequately fund education. I completely oppose any further cuts to higher education, tuition increases, or any attempt to take from one sector of education to pay for another. Washington State has over 300 corporate loopholes, allowing big business to escape paying the taxes that should be due, and starving the state treasury of $6 billion every year. I would look to bring in billions of new revenue by closing corporate tax loopholes. I would also work to implement a more stable form of revenue for education by taxing the richest in society. King County alone has over 68,000 millionaires. A tax on the income of the wealthiest in our state would provide the revenue necessary for funding education and allow us to decrease the tax burden on working people. Closing corporate tax loopholes and a tax in the rich would allow us to fully fund education at all levels, as well as reverse cuts in transit and vital social services.
 Yes

The WWAMI and RIDE programs can and should be expanded. Access to healthcare should be available to all, and not dependent on where you live or treated as a privilege. I advocate for a single-payer healthcare program. The WWAMI and RIDE programs play a positive role in educating healthcare workers - but the intake is unfortunately limited. To solve the growing problem of lack of access to healthcare these should be significantly expanded - opened up to many more students, beyond the 5 participating states, and also provided free of charge to the students. The British public healthcare system, the National Health Service (NHS) provides not only free treatment but also free training to potential medical workers, and I would like to see WWAMI and RIDE expanded in a similar manner.
Hans Dunshee* House 44 Yes

This will require revenue increases. I work to create jobs which help the revenue picture but am not afraid to talk about or vote for revenue increase.
 No

No but I will vote for the revenue to fund higher ed. Inclusion doesn't change the reality of too little revenue. Cutting family support human services doesn't help higher ed.
 N/A

New revenue yes, existing revenue no.
 Yes
Mike Wilson House 44 Yes

Investment in higher education is a very smart investment. Higher paying jobs result from advanced education. It is a part of the solution for our economic recovery, and social well being.
 Yes

The goal of education is opportunity. That begins with early learning and continues through higher education. I support anyone who makes the decision to advance their career options through education, and believe that it should not have to take 20 or more years to pay for your education.
 Yes

We have had several dedicated funding sources for public education over the years. The problem with dedicated funding is that it seem to get lost in the budget. I have always felt we could do a better job of identifying a funding source not only for higher education, but for public education too.
 Yes

Health care is a necessity. Keeping people healthy, and treating people with health care issues is what we should do.
Rob Toyer House 44 Yes

As a graduate from Western Washington University I understand the costs associated with higher education. Still paying on my student loans 10 years later.
 Yes Yes

New marijuana tax revenues
 Yes
Joel Hussey House 45 Yes

Over the past decade, Washington students and families have suffered in the form of higher tuition costs as a result of the Legislature prioritizing the growth of non-education related programs. This needs to change and bring balance back to higher ed funding.
 Yes

I would consider an expansion of the definition of basic education.
 No

Instead of trying to find a dedicated funding source which may subsequently prove to be overly volatile, we need to assure that our elected legislators understand the critical need for providing excellent, effective, and affordable post-secondary educational options for our students, and make funding for these college, vocational and professional training options a top priority.
 Yes

We do face a dramatic shortage of primary care physicians due to growing population, an aging society, significant physician retirements and little or no expansion of medical school capacity.
Roger Goodman* House 45 Yes Yes Yes Yes
Larry Springer* House 45 Yes

Given our budget constraints it is imperative we find a dedicated funding source for higher education that can be protected much like funding for K-12.
 Yes

I have advocated for a constitutional amendment to expand basic education to include Early Childhoood Education through at least two years of post econdary education.
 Yes

Several of us in the House Democratic Caucus are working to find the dedicated funding source.
 Yes

It will require a cooperative relationship with WSU but is critical to addressing the health needs of rural Washington.
Brendan Woodward House 45 Yes

I consider this an investment in our region and work force.
 No Yes

Yes/No. Within the budget, this simply means funding priorities first, so a dedicated funding source would be to pay for education out of the budget before other lesser priorities.
 Yes

Yes, as long as other participating States keep pace with our commitments to share them equally.
Jessyn Farrell* House 46 Yes

All students deserve access to a well-rounded education, but young people currently face major economic barriers to achieving their goals. It is time to start thinking more creatively and strategically about our higher education funding. As a legislator I have advocated against cuts to higher education at all levels, holding the line on tuition increases across the state.
 Yes

As a legislator,I have been closely involved in improving the quality of our state's early learning programs. In addition, we need more resources for our Community and Technical Colleges to ensure that they continue to play the important role they have historically in providing a skilled workforce. We must actively support and promote certified apprenticeship programs which provide training and mastery of skills which will in turn lead to family-wage salaries. In particular I look forward to a focus within apprenticeship programs on trades related to energy efficiency, green building and renewable energy related skills development.
 Yes Yes
Gerry Pollet* House 46 Yes

I have introduced legislation and will continue to work towards a goal of tuition not exceeding 10% of median household income. In 2008, tuition at UW was about 10% of median income. Now, it is over 20%. The House passed this goal on a strong bipartisan basis twice in the past year. This goal for "affordable" tuition would provide greater support from the state than the 50-50 split. I was part of the small group of House and Senate Democratic Higher Ed leaders who insisted we actually provide the funding to have NO tuition increase in our budgets for 2013-15, allowing us to avoid tuition increases for the first time in 26 years. The Senate R majority caucus proposal for no increase was actually a $160 million cut to our schools since it had no funding to make up for the loss of tuition.
 Yes

I am working on supporting analyses and a strategic plan for how we increase higher ed access and capacity to meet our 70% goal.
 Yes

I am actively working for dedicated funding for higher ed, and have offered specific proposals in the past Session.
 Yes
Mark Hargrove* House 47 Yes

When the state made this shift, it resulted in my average middle class constituent graduating with $30,000 in debt. Meanwhile 1/3 of their UW classmates pay no tuition or fees and 1/4 of their WSU classmates paying no tuition or fees. Our middle class students, whose parents have paid the taxes which support tuition, are bearing an unreasonable burden.
 No

The McCleary court ruling and associated fiscal demands will already require significant financial resources to meet. Broadening the scope of that ruling will result in excessive spending requirements. We can meet our educational goals without this redefinition.
 Yes

I support the concept that funds should be dedicated to the purpose for which they were intended, rather than raided for other purposes, as they so often are in the legislature. This does not mean that I support an additional revenue source. And I do want to keep to tuition freeze.
 Yes

This is a tentative Yes, based on the premise of the question. I'll need more information to firm up my answer.
Pat Sullivan* House 47 Yes

The great recession helped move us in the wrong direction but we must now reverse that trend and increase state support.
 Yes

I sponsored HB 2261 a few years ago that would have added early learning to the definition but Governor Gregoire vetoed that section over mine and other objections. I would also favor adding higher education. What good does it do to invest in K-12 and ignore our higher education system.
 Yes

We need to stabilize funding for higher education and identifying a specific source of revenue would help us in accomplishing that goal.
 Yes
Joan McBride House 48 Yes

We need to defend against further cuts to programs like the Opportunity Grant and need-based scholarships and expand them to meet the needs of our students. At the same time, we must fund our institutions of higher education to the extent that they do not need to regularly raise tuition; even small tuition increases can have big impacts on a student’s access to higher education. Funding our universities will also ensure that we can attract top-tier teaching talent to build on our state’s legacy as a leader in higher education.
 Yes Yes

The State Legislature is under court order to fully fund basic education, which by the decision’s definition ends with high school. However, we can’t end our commitment to our students there. In the last five years, we have allowed public support for higher education to crater. This has resulted in less access for our students because of higher tuition prices and depleted resources for financial aid. This trend must be reversed as our economy continues to improve and stable funding must be put in place to ensure that this does not happen should we experience another economic downturn.
 Yes

We benefit from having one of the best medical schools in the country right here in Washington and many innovative healthcare opportunities come with that. Programs like WWAMI and RIDE provide incredible training for students and much-needed, high quality services to our rural and underserved areas. I would be proud to support expanding these programs for the benefit of both students and patients.
Tim Turner House 48 No

We need to ask why tuition has gone up 140% in ten years. How much of that money actually went to the heart of education, teacher salaries? Before we put extra taxes on workers, we need to reform our educational system. We need to focus on reducing the cost of school, not on funneling money from working people into a commercial education system.
 No

We need to recognize that higher education is a step above, requiring greater dedication and greater focus. Changing the definition to "basic" is a calculated political maneuver to expand the McCleary decision and widen the spending shortfall. Education has become a monopolized commercial product, and creating a forced increase in demand with an unlimited funding source will cause tuition prices to skyrocket further. Dumping money into the monopoly is what has helped bring us to this point. We need to open career-training to other forms, like apprenticeships, employer-sponsored college funding, less expensive college degrees, removing unnecessary courses from curricula, and increasing technical certifications. We also need to prepare students for college better. One student recently told me they were planning on going to college without knowing what kind of degree they were going to get. Students should not be put in a $50,000 assembly line to "find themselves". This can and should be done outside of the bonds of college debt.
 No

I am severely concerned about forcing people to pay for college educations they receive no benefit from. It is easy for politicians to promise money from other people's pockets. The people who receive the benefit should bear the costs. Because of this, I support market-based prices, but we need to focus on reducing those prices, not on increasing the money-flow. Politicians promise money because money means votes, but this infinite money supply is what is helping to fuel the rise in costs, making the problem worse.
 No

Again, we need to focus on reducing the cost of education, not on increasing the flow of money.
Ross Hunter* House 48 Yes

This will cost over a billion dollars a biennium. I would be happy to do this, but it will require either additional revenue or reductions in some corresponding part of the budget. For example, we could eliminate 2/3 of the funding for the correction system. I would support additional revenue to get to the point where a young person could work during his time at the UW and leave school with no student dept, a proposal from the students I thought particularly well crafted.
 Yes

I would be happy to do this once we have worked our way through the budget problem associated with paying for K12.
 No

Higher education is a large part of the state budget and should remain so. As a budget chairman I do not support additional silos of dedicated funding. The best/worst example of this is the "lottery" effect, where people believe that lottery revenue was created to completely fund K12, when in fact it's about 1% of the current funding. We should make decisions about what level of higher education funding we support and raise enough revenue from the sources that seem appropriate at the time to fund it.
 N/A

I do not have an educated opinion on the internecine dispute between the UW and WSU on the future of medical education in Washington. I will develop one this fall after visits and in-depth analysis of the different cost models. It is clear that we need more family practice doctors and dentists in most parts of the state, and particularly in the more rural parts. The interesting bottleneck isn't the number of slots in medical school though - it's the number of residencies in various parts of the state. These have typically been funded by the federal government, which has not expanded fast enough to keep up with growth of demand. I am looking forward to reviewing the proposed expansion plans from both universities. Hopefully these plans will include plans for residencies and the funding necessary to support them.
Lisa Ross House 49 No

Tuition prices seem to be affected by maximum federal student loan amounts that are authorized. Has the cost of higher education actually gone up 140% in ten years, or just the amount we are charged for it?
 No Yes

I am not sure what it would look like, but a guaranteed stream would alleviate funding pressures.
 Yes
Anson Service House 49 Yes Yes Yes Yes
Sharon Wylie* House 49 Yes Yes Yes Yes

I believe that the state could also look at models in others states that have more than one medical school, though. This discussion will be coming up in the future.
Rich Cowan Senate 6 Yes

Given what we know about how important higher education is, it is shocking that this isn't a priority for Washington. I was able to work my way through college as an Firefighter/EMT, this is not something that can be achieved today because of skyrocketing tuition rates and stagnant incomes. The average in-state tuition increase was $4,085 between the years 2008 and 2014, double the national average ($1,885). The Washington State Legislature balanced the budget on the backs of middle class families who wanted to send their kids to college.
 Yes

It is of paramount importance to include early learning in “basic education,” studies show that there is a seven to one return for dollars allocated to early learning. This sets us up for success. By including higher education in “basic education” we are ensuring our leadership of job growth and development in the Nation and the world. It is important to recognize the importance of producing more STEM degrees to support the high-tech companies we have here in Washington.
 Yes

The Supreme Court has ruled that funding K-12 education is the paramount duty of the state - a ruling that my opponent would prefer to ignore, famously telling the Supreme Court to “pound sand” instead of working to solve the problem. While the majority of funding is reserved for K-12, we cannot ignore institutions of higher education. Washington companies are already importing graduates from other states and countries because our state institutions are not producing enough graduates, particularly in the STEM fields. To get the legislature behind education funding, higher education stakeholders first have to come together with one voice. Disagreement between the four year institutions and different priorities among the four year and two year institutions are a significant part of the problem. In the legislature, I would like to work with both the institutions and outside groups like UW Impact to come up with a list of priorities that are achievable, and then speak with one voice so we can accomplish our goals. Even that would be a major change in how the institutions lobby the legislature.
 Yes

There is clearly is a need to expand the medical education programs, particularly in eastern Washington. I will support any measured and economically responsible expansion of medical programs in eastern Washington.
Mohammad Said Senate 13 Yes

Public higher education is a priority, and it is the future of our nation. I believe the state is able to come with this shared cost through tax increases on tobacco, liquor, particularly beer, and others.
 Yes

I strongly believe in this. My children are an example, as two of them graduated from UW. My oldest son, 37 years old, is a physician in Chicago, board certified in pediatrics and internal medicine and special adviser for several private hospitals. The younger one, 32 years old, is a journalist and editor of the renowned T.V. News satellite station in New York. My daughter, 35 years old, who graduated from Seattle University, is a business analyst with Boeing Commercial.
 Yes

Again, higher education is fundamental and a priority in our state.
 Yes

I very strongly support as I have been primary care in this small town of Ephrata, less than 10,000 population, for the last thirty two years. It is very important to do this, as healthcare has become a mess, very expensive, too many procedures and references, which negatively impact healthcare as a whole because of cost, too much waste and duplication of services. The primary care is very important, as it is cost-effective, though you have to protect those physicians from almighty powerful attorneys at the state level, who are practicing medicine, and the Quality Assurance Commission, who have become an instrument for repression as a tool for those attorneys representing the state’s Attorney General office, causing the doctors to practice defensive medicine. I am very much familiar with this issue and had experience for the last twenty four years. One of my priorities, if elected, is to implement reform to make healthcare affordable and universal for the basic only. See my extensive letter in this regard, sent to the White House on July 25, 2009, found on my website, drsaid.net.
Dan Matthews Senate 21 Yes

I would support this for in-state residents first and foremost, as they (or their parents) have presumably been paying taxes and would be more entitled to such a split than others who are not residents of Wash. State.
 Yes

Though I think this would have to be defined by the voters of the state - in a Referendum - that clarifies this significant change.
 Yes

This concept has merit in providing a more reliable funding source for higher ed. I believe that all possibilities for funding and revenue should be discussed and that priorities need to be established so that education funding isn't the "beneficiary" of poor planning and allocation by legislators. This all will require a truly bi-partisan dialogue between legislators and policy-makers, and concerned parties.
 Yes

We have a family member who participated in a similar program in another state and the benefits, for all involved, are clear.
Judy Arbogast Senate 26 Yes

Students’ access to higher education should not be hindered by its financial burden. We need to ensure, as a State, that students have the option of education beyond high school. This would be an important step in helping these students and their families.
 Yes

Students cannot thrive in K-12 education without proper early learning programs, and, as mentioned, most students seek education beyond high school. Our State must recognize these needs and fund these programs accordingly. Studies have shown that the preschool programs are most effective for those in poverty and are thus needed to eliminate the “opportunity” gap. Students’ higher education cannot be limited by their background and financial circumstances or we will never close the educational gap.
 Yes

Our state has fluctuating revenue sources and, as we saw last session, an unreliable legislature. A dedicated funding source for higher education would provide financial stability for students and their families.
 Yes

All citizens of our State should have access to health and dental care, no matter if they live in a city or rural area. These programs serve an important role in ensuring this access.
Jan Angel* Senate 26 Yes Yes

Education must all link together — I believe there are new ways to do much of this through technology and choices.
 Yes

I also support extending the tuition freeze as the Senate Majority Coalition Caucus has done over the past two years. This was the first time in over 30 years this has been done and I support doing it again.
 Yes

I also support the efforts of WSU to expand their services in the medical fields. I have met personally with representatives from both of your schools regarding these expansions. I see both of you as apples and oranges serving in different areas and different ways.
Terry Harder Senate 29 Yes

I would with a audit of administration costs with the goal of reducing overall costs and reviewing tuition of non residents.
No

Early education yes secondary no since this would drive up the tuition costs not lower them.
Yes

With an performance audit.
 Yes
Cathy Dahlquist Senate 31 Yes Yes Yes Yes
Maralyn Chase* Senate 32 No

As Long as the UW continues to apply the tuition increases to priorities other than the instruction budget I will oppose additional state funding. The UW's central bank has used the tuition increases to fully reserve the bond debt service and as of 2009, have pledge the tuition to debt reserve and debt service. Read the rating agencies reports on this. Furthermore, students have ever increasing tuition payments but received fewer course offerings, larger class sizes, fewer professors and instructors. This is all documented in the reports to the regents. If you want additional citations I am happy to provide them. Otherwise do a few google searches.
 N/A

I am favor of expanding our community college system to train the most highly qualified workforce in the world. We need to prioritize early childhood education. Our area used to have the very highest levels of parent co-ops to handle early childhood education. Over the past 20-30 years as more moms are in the workforce, that system went away. We need early childhood education.
 No

We need a system of to fund community colleges but the research institutions need to have transparency and accountability.
 No

Let Eastern Washington set up their own medical school.
Robert Reedy Senate 32 N/A

Only if the money is available to do that. I will not support a state income tax to support that or anything else. Is the UW spending all of their money wisely? And, I will not be extorted by the "brain drain" idea.
 No

It would be nice, yet I am not sure the jobs are really there. Kids graduate from STEM programs and yet they have no place to go. A vibrant economy, not a politically correct economy, will drive the idea of a good job for everyone who wants one. Minimum government oversight as opposed to maximum government micro management is the a large part of the solution.
 No

a dedicated funding source sounds like a tax raise just in different words. Is the high tuition needed or is it higher than need be as the UW admin can get more money from families overseas. They get the education but we get the bills for it. I suppose if I were to tell you that it should be Washington kids first, American kids , then if there is any space, then kids from other lands I would be considered a racist, xenophobe, and a whole group of other ists and isms. You get what you vote, and deserve what you get.It sounds to me like the liberals at the UW are getting their just desserts.
 N/A

I thought of medical college, even at the UW. Costs are a problem, liability insurance for doctors makes a practice more of a charity ward for all the premiums a doctor has to pay. Also, the "vaunted" (progressive now) political correctness and affirmative action makes a straight white man think of something else for a living. The retiring liberals are soon to face a serious problem they themselves created. Now they expect me and people like me, their sworn enemies, to come galloping to their rescue. Interesting.
Martin Metz Senate 33 No

There is a limited amount of money available and priority for funding has to be towards K-12. Higher education costs must be kept reasonable and affordable. We have to be careful on committing taxpayer provided funding. Legislators also must provide oversight to ensure public universities and colleges are doing their part to contain expenses while providing quality education.
 Yes

I do support a broader view of higher education to include more consideration of community colleges, trade schools, and vocational-technical institutions. Funding priorities still need to be directed primarily to the formative years from K-12.
 Yes

All sources of funding should be considered, but taxpayer provided funding must be carefully reviewed.
 Yes
Karen Keiser* Senate 33 Yes Yes No

The real issue is how can we successfully increase revenue. If we can reach an agreement for some new revenue source that has a nexus with higher education, I would be open to dedicating that revenue to higher education.
 N/A

I support more medical and dental students to practice in our state, especially with an emphasis on primary care practice. We have primary care shortages all over the state, not only in rural Eastern Washington.
Tim Sheldon* Senate 35 Yes

For the last 2 years the Legislature has not increased tuition for the first Time since 1986.
 Yes Yes Yes
Irene Bowling Senate 35 Yes

Absolutely. I graduated from U.W with a doctorate and worked at the same time. That is really impossible for students now. This is a serious threat to WA students and must be addressed.
 Yes

A firm YES!!
 Yes

Finding new revenue sources will be my main priority once elected.
 Yes

A great program that I fully support.
Sarina Forbes Senate 36 No No No Yes

Provided that 1) funding can be raised through expanding current public-private partnerships or seeking additional private/community sources and partnerships, and 2) that new graduates incur a 4 year service committment to provide primary care in a rural community.
Jeanne Kohl-Welles* Senate 36 Yes Yes Yes Yes
Louis Watanabe Senate 37 Yes

As a Bellevue College professor, I have been increasingly concerned with the rising cost of tuition which makes college education unaffordable. Our students and their families deserve better in being prepared for the jobs and challenges of the 21st century.
 Yes

Yes, education is the great equalizer. Our competiveness in a global economy depends on providing a "world class" education that includes early learning and higher education.
 Yes

Yes, I support efforts to establish a dedicated funding souce for higher education. Before there was a rainy day fund, higher education was treated by the legislature as the rainy day fund which has created long term problems.
 Yes

Yes, meeting the medical and dentistry needs of rural and underserved areas is at a critical point and a key human service need.
Pramila Jayapal Senate 37 Yes

Tuition for all Washington students must be kept affordable and predictable in order to keep a college education accessible. I will support efforts in the Senate to minimize the increasing costs of a college education for our students and restore our status as a state that values and prioritizes higher education. Even though we are facing difficult economic times, we must look for new ways and revenue sources to restore state funding for higher education to the historic levels of the past that our changing economy and workforce requirements demand.
 Yes

I think the issue is less about expanding the definition of basic education and more about how we fund and recognize the necessity of early learning, K-12 and higher education as a necessary continuum. As jobs in Washington State increasingly demand some type of post-secondary training, it is important that we evolve our thinking and policy planning around what any individual needs in terms of education all the way from early learning to post-secondary to prepare them for success and a living wage job. I will work hard to continue to push for this in numerous ways at the State Senate.
 Yes

The most basic improvement we need to make is a commitment and plan to fully fund education in Washington. Currently, we are not living up to our paramount duty as defined by our Constitution and the Supreme Court has said that we must provide billions of dollars in more funding by 2018 for education. Students cannot be expected to learn and instructors cannot be expected to teach if they do not have the resources required. We must also increase our education investments without cutting funding for social services, transportation improvements and other valuable state expenditures. I would be an advocate in Olympia for closing unnecessary tax loopholes, implementing a modest capital gains tax or an extension of certain sun-setting tax increases as ways to raise revenue for education, while at the same time talking about the dire need we have to have a less regressive, more sustainable form of revenue for the long term.
 Yes

As income inequality around the state intensifies and wages continue to stagnate, some communities are feeling that pinch harder than others. These tend to be our rural communities and those that are underserved due to economic hardships and struggles of the neighborhood. It is important that no matter where you live in Washington you have affordable access to health care. I would support an expansion of UW medical and dentistry education programs to better serve all communities.
John McCoy* Senate 38 Yes Yes

My public position is a public education system from birth to career
 Yes Yes
Seth Fleetwood Senate 42 Yes

We have serious budgetary issues in the state of Washington. It is unfair to try and solve those issues on the backs of students in higher education through tuition increases. We should be making progress to a 50/50 split and I will try to make that a goal for the legislature for next session.
 Yes

Early learning has been proven to be one of the most critical stages of development in a young person's life, and could be one of the best areas for us to invest in as a state. Higher education is also a tool to help keep up with labor market demands. I would support expanding the definition of Basic Education.
 Yes

Higher education is going to need more support if we expect to keep the excellent education that public universities currently provide. I am committed to working with colleagues and stakeholders from both sides of the aisle on finding permanent solutions to funding higher education.
 Yes

These programs provide critical needs to people who most need it. We should be providing effective programs the support they need to grow, and WWAMI is one of those programs.
Jamie Pedersen* Senate 43 Yes

I support this investment if we can raise significant additional revenue. I would not support such a change if it means defunding UW and the other institutions.
 No

We are billions of dollars short of where the Supreme Court says that we need to be on K-12 funding. I do not see how we could responsibly constitutionalize higher ed funding with our existing revenue structure.
 Yes Yes
Matt Isenhower Senate 45 Yes

Ensuring that all Washingtonians have access to quality higher education is an important component of making sure that we retain the best and the brightest in our state. I fully support restoring state funding to 50/50 levels.
 Yes

I believe we should invest in education from cradle to graduation. Research clearly shows that Washington state will receive the highest return on its investment through pre-K education, and we will only have the workforce we need in the future if we invest wisely in higher education. I plan on being a strong advocate for increased funds across all education levels.
 Yes

The Supreme Court’s McCLeary decision brings the need for increased funding for our K-12 schools and the necessity for revenue reform to the forefront. I plan on being a champion in Olympia for both. To sufficiently fund all of our schools from pre-K through higher ed, Washington needs to reform our revenue system and provide higher education with a dedicated, reliable funding source. I would also encourage businesses that have an interest in a well-educated workforce to get involved in working with state lawmakers to prioritize higher education. We must work together to achieve the successful higher education system in Washington that we all envision.
 Yes

I fully support expanding both WWAMI and RIDE programs to ensure greater coverage for all Washingtonians.
David Frockt* Senate 46 Yes

I have been advocating for exactly this split for the last two years in the Senate.

Yes Yes N/A
Michelle Darnell Senate 48 Yes

Restoring an even split in state funding for public higher education would be difficult to do in one budget term, especially while satisfying the mandates set forth in the McCleary Decision. I am in favor of a plan where budget priorities are realigned so that higher education for state universities is restored to 50/50 within two budget terms. State costs would increase to 40% in the first term and then 50% in the second budget after I take office.
 Yes

I believe for Washington State to keep up with technology, our labor market must keep pace with the expectations of employers for skills they require for entry-level employees. This starts with early learning and continues with an expectation that education, including technical or vocational training, is the key to a student’s employment and success in life.
 Yes

I believe education must be one of the top priorities in any budget approved in Olympia. Only after a prioritized budget shows there is not enough revenue to meet needs, then talk of seeking additional revenue sources would be appropriate. Legislators owe it to the tax paying constituency to spend their tax dollars wisely and accountably.
 Yes

These programs have a proven track record of keeping costs down and providing a valuable service to the state. Expanding the program by increasing the number of students in the program makes sense in both the short term and the long term.
Cyrus Habib Senate 48 Yes Yes Yes Yes