Candidates for the State House of Representatives discussed the state's role in financing health and social services as federal grants for these programs decline. Candidate Stonier noted that while Washington has safety nets, the state cannot fully replace this funding, arguing that social services must remain a shared responsibility with the federal government. Meanwhile, Candidate Thompson emphasized that any awarded federal and state grants must prioritize local control, transparency, and practical community needs rather than top-down mandates and red tape.
Cross_cutting
Election 2026: League of Women Voters General Election Candidate Forum · Oct 14, 2026 · 21:50–22:36 · Watch on CVTV ↗
Keywords: federal grant state grant
What was said
20:49 that provide health care and health care services. We have federal grants that are going to disappear and social services to our most vulnerable people across the nation. In Washington, I think we have done a fine job of trying to make sure that we have captures or safety nets for people who may not qualify or who need an extra step in the ladder to get to the next level to be without the need of government assistance. Unfortunately, with the disappearance of these grants, the state is not going to be in a position to be in a position to be in a position to do that. We are in better shape than many other states for making sure we have some protections in place. But there is no substitute for what should be a shared responsibility from the federal government in providing health care and social services to people in our community
21:39 who are looking to thrive in Washington state. Candidate Thompson. Excuse me. When I was asked about federal and state grants, where federal and state grants are concerned, federal and state grants are awarded the first priority has to be local control and transparency. Accountability. We don't need more red tape. That red tape just gets in the way. As we know, we get used to it and we shouldn't. We have pet projects, projects that are dictated from the top down and it should not be that way. It should be from the bottom up. Those funds need to go directly toward practical needs for our communities. No games and no hidden agendas.
22:36 So what changes, if any, would you make to the state's system of voting? Starting first with Candidate Thompson. You say changes in voting? What changes, if any, would you make to the state's system of voting? I've never really given that any thought, to be honest. I don't have a fight with the way that things are going now. It's not the voting itself. It's the voter education that I think is where we need to pay some attention to, that we need to open that up a whole lot. But the voting itself, I don't -- that's the only way that I can answer that one for you. Thank you.
23:22 Now it's my turn to double down on Mr. Thompson's answer. I agree that voter education is the thing that is most deserving of attention and care. We have incredibly secure voting system here in Washington State. Mail-in ballots have come under fire and criticism. But we still struggle to find examples of where there's a real problem there. So I'm proud of our voting system.
Evidence (1 match)
cross_cutting keyword 21:50–22:36 federal grant, state grant
at should be a shared responsibility from the federal government in providing health care and social services to people in our community who are looking to thrive in Washington state. Candidate Thompson. Excuse me. When I was asked about federal and state grants, where federal and state grants are concerned, federal and state grants are awarded the first priority has to be local control and transparency. Accountability. We don't need more red tape. That red tape just gets in the way. As we know,