WA House pushes through controversial public health bill after heated late-night debate
Mar 10, 2025, 4:55 PM | Updated: 5:18 pm
Nurses have seen an increase in communicable diseases which a new House bill tries to address. (Getty Images)
(Getty Images)
In a late-night debate lasting 2.5 hours, the Washington State House of Representatives passed which aims to strengthen public health responses to communicable diseases. The bill is a response to the legacy left behind by former Gov. Jay Inslee and the public health directives he issued, including mask and vaccination mandates that divided the state.
The bill passed along party lines, with Democrats in the majority, 58-35, and five excused absences.
The debate began late on a Saturday night at 10:30 p.m., with lawmakers discussing the bill’s impact on public health, individual freedoms, and the role of state and local governments in handling disease outbreaks.
Related from MyNorthwest: State Senate passes bill strengthening patient privacy from hostile out-of-state inquiries
The intent of the public health bill: Follow best available science
Rep. Dan Bronoske (D-Lakewood), the bill鈥檚 main sponsor, explained the rationale for the legislation: 鈥淚 intend to preserve the ability for public health officials to go out and do the work that they need to do to keep us safe,鈥� Bronoske said. 鈥淐urrently, over the past couple of weeks, most recently, public health officials in our state are being hampered from their ability to do the work they need to do.鈥�
Bronoske鈥檚 supporters emphasized the need for a science-driven approach to disease prevention, citing the rise of dangerous communicable diseases like syphilis, tuberculosis, and gonorrhea.
However, many lawmakers on the other side of the aisle voiced strong concerns during the debate, questioning the vagueness of the bill鈥檚 language, particularly around the term 鈥渂est available science.鈥�
Rep. Suzanne Schmidt (R-Spokane Valley) argued that the bill鈥檚 reliance on terms like 鈥渆vidence-based鈥� and 鈥渂est available science鈥� was problematic. 鈥淚 don鈥檛 know what those terms mean,鈥� Schmidt said. 鈥淭hey could mean anything. They could mean science from today or science from 50 years ago. There鈥檚 no definition in the bill.鈥�
Others expressed frustration about the legacy of the COVID-19 pandemic and its impact on trust in public health institutions. Rep. Matt Marshall (R-Eatonville) raised concerns about the bill鈥檚 approach to public health data, citing past mistakes like the six-foot distancing rule during the pandemic. 鈥淲hat happens when the science is wrong?鈥� Marshall asked. 鈥淚t鈥檚 important that we use peer-reviewed science moving forward.鈥�
Rep. Mary Dye (R-Pomeroy) added a personal perspective, recalling her experience growing up with a public health nurse in her community. 鈥淯nfortunately, COVID broke us, and there is no trust in that institution anymore,鈥� Dye said, referencing the challenges public health officials have faced in rebuilding credibility after the pandemic.
Jason Rantz: Democrat鈥檚 bill offers free rent and early release for murderers, child molesters
The COVID-19 backdrop: A state divided
The passage of HB 1531 cannot be viewed in isolation from the state鈥檚 recent history with the COVID-19 pandemic. Gov. Jay Inslee鈥檚 administration implemented stringent health mandates, including vaccination requirements for state employees and healthcare workers. These measures, while lauded by some as necessary for public safety, were met with significant opposition from various quarters.
In August 2021, Governor Inslee announced a mandate requiring COVID-19 vaccinations for most state employees, private healthcare, and long-term care workers as a condition of employment. The directive stipulated that employees must be fully vaccinated by October 18, 2021, or face termination, with exemptions considered only for medical or religious reasons.
The Washington State Nurses Association acknowledged the mandate’s intent to protect public health but emphasized the need for employers to negotiate the effects of the mandate with unions, highlighting concerns about workforce shortages and the rights of employees.
Critics argued that such mandates infringed upon personal freedoms and bodily autonomy.
The Washington Policy Center, for instance, contended that Governor Inslee鈥檚 strict and long-lasting vaccine mandate led to the destruction of careers and stigmatized individuals who chose not to receive the vaccine, irrespective of personal health considerations or advice from medical providers.
A major issue for opponents is the emergency clause attached to the bill. While necessary for the immediate preservation of public peace, health, or safety, it means the bill is exempt from the referendum process. Voters will not have the opportunity to gather signatures and put a measure on the ballot to repeal it.
HB 1531 now heads to the Senate.
Matt Markovich is the 成人X站 Newsradio political analyst. Follow him on聽.听
