Latest news with #CascadePBS
Yahoo
11-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Donald Trump approval ratings for Washington state, US: Here's what the polls show today
It's been another eventful week for President Donald Trump, as his approval ratings slipped in national surveys and polls. On April 5, thousands of demonstrators rallied in opposition to the Trump administration across the country, with a unified message: "Hands off!" On April 9, Trump again changed his tariff posture, pausing his so-called "reciprocal" tariffs while increasing tariffs on Chinese imports. Here's what recent polls show. Most Washington state voters believe Trump is bringing the "wrong kind" of change to the country, according to a new survey from Cascade PBS/Elway Poll. A majority of Washington state voters also say they either "disapprove" or "strongly disapprove" of Trump's leadership style. The poll surveyed 403 registered voters in Washington state from March 27 to March 31 via landline with live interviewers, cell phone with live interviewers, and cell phone text to an online survey, according to the poll results. Here are some of the questions that were asked and how voters responded: 23% Yes – Positive 45% Yes – Negative 28% No Impact 4% Don't know/NA 31% Right Kind 60% Wrong Kind 6% Not Much Change 3% DK/NA 20% Strongly Approve 15% Approve 15% Disapprove 48% Strongly Disapprove 3% DK/NA (March 28-30): This poll shows a steady 47% approval rating for Trump, with a slight decline in his disapproval rating from 51% to 50%. The poll surveyed around 2,200 registered voters. (April 7): Trump's approval has shifted, with 51% of Americans now disapproving of his job performance compared to 48% approving. Rasmussen tracks Trump's approval rating daily. His rating has fluctuated over the past two months, starting at 56% on Inauguration Day, but dropped below 50% for the first time on April 3. (March 30 - April 1): This poll shows Trump with 46% approval and 49% disapproval. The survey sampled 1,626 citizens. (March 31 - April 2): Trump's approval rating in this survey has reached its lowest point of his second term, with only 43% approval and 53% disapproval, based on a sample of 1,486 adults. (March 26-27): Trump leads with 49% approval and 46% disapproval, based on a sample of 2,746 registered voters. The poll also shows that 49% of Americans believe the nation's economy is on the right track, while 41% think it's on the wrong track, and 11% are unsure. (April 6): Trump's approval stands at 44%, with 54% disapproving. These numbers have remained relatively stable since the start of the year. A president's approval rating reflects the percentage of Americans polled who approve of the president's performance. Anything can impact a president's rating, such as legislation passed, actions, and elections. According to ABC News, an approval rating doesn't just represent how well the administration is faring for the general public but could factor into the outcome of an upcoming election or how much they accomplish while in office. Contributing: USA TODAY Network This article originally appeared on Kitsap Sun: Trump approval ratings for Washington, US: Here's what the polls show
Yahoo
24-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
WA sheriffs respond to Trump's immigration enforcement plans
(Getty Images) President Donald Trump has identified state and local law enforcement agencies as being pivotal in his plans to deport millions of undocumented people from the U.S. But the extent of how his undertaking will play out on the ground remains unclear, especially in Washington and other 'sanctuary states' that have local laws prohibiting such collaborations. Washington's 'sanctuary law,' formally called the Keep Washington Working Act, restricts the extent to which local law enforcement agencies may participate in federal immigration enforcement actions. The law prohibits the use of county jails for immigrant detention and does not allow local law enforcement to interview or detain those suspected of being an undocumented immigrant. In a survey conducted by InvestigateWest and Cascade PBS, the majority of Washington sheriffs said they would focus their resources on public safety and local laws, not federal immigration enforcement. 'We recognize that immigration enforcement is a federal responsibility and not a part of my elected office or sworn duty. Therefore, we focus our resources and efforts on local law enforcement matters just as we have always done,' Pacific County Sheriff Daniel C. Garcia wrote in a statement. 'We will not detain or arrest individuals solely based on suspected immigration violations.' But some responses were less clear-cut. 'The Pierce County Sheriff Office will abide by all enforceable U.S. immigration laws and legal mandates,' wrote Sheriff Keith Swank, who took office on Jan. 15. 'Law enforcement agencies are obligated to honor applicable federal detainers. I believe there will be more legal guidance in the near future.' In the same vein, Grant County Sheriff Joe Kriete said in his statement that while his office is aware of the Keep Washington Working Act, his office 'will not impede federal operations,' providing no further clarification. While other local law enforcement agencies across the country have formal agreements with the Department of Homeland Security under the federal 287 (g) program that allows jails to be used for immigrant detention, Washington doesn't have any such formal agreements on the books. Still, nothing is stopping federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials from conducting immigration raids or arrests in Washington or tapping in local law enforcement to help if the person of interest is suspected of committing a crime — which could be as simple as a traffic violation. InvestigateWest and Cascade PBS reached out to all of Washington's 39 sheriffs, inspired by similar work done by CalMatters, and asked how they plan to balance conflicting local, state and federal laws. Nine county sheriffs did not respond to multiple requests for comments, and nine others did not respond to our specific questions, instead forwarding a statement released by the Washington Association of Sheriffs & Police Chiefs in December. Our questions: What role does the Sheriff's office believe local law enforcement should play in federal immigration enforcement? Will the Sheriff's office change or modify any of its policies or procedures related to immigration enforcement, while still complying with the state's Keep Washington Working Act? Anything else you'd like to add? While no sheriffs in Washington outright said they would work hand in hand with federal immigration enforcement, Klickitat County Sheriff Bob Songer, who considers himself a constitutional sheriff and did not respond to our requests, posted a video on Facebook on Dec. 11 telling federal ICE officials to 'put me on speed dial.' Here is what the sheriffs who did respond to our requests said:
Yahoo
20-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Here's what WA sheriffs said when asked about Trump administration's immigration plans
President Donald Trump has identified state and local law enforcement agencies as being pivotal in his plans to deport millions of undocumented people from the U.S. But the extent of how his undertaking will play out on the ground remains unclear, especially in Washington and other 'sanctuary states' that have local laws prohibiting such collaborations. Washington's 'sanctuary law,' formally called the Keep Washington Working Act, restricts the extent to which local law enforcement agencies may participate in federal immigration enforcement actions. The law prohibits the use of county jails for immigrant detention and does not allow local law enforcement to interview or detain those suspected of being an undocumented immigrant. In a survey conducted by InvestigateWest and Cascade PBS, the majority of Washington sheriffs said they would focus their resources on public safety and local laws, not federal immigration enforcement. 'We recognize that immigration enforcement is a federal responsibility and not a part of my elected office or sworn duty. Therefore, we focus our resources and efforts on local law enforcement matters just as we have always done,' Pacific County Sheriff Daniel C. Garcia wrote in a statement. 'We will not detain or arrest individuals solely based on suspected immigration violations.' But some responses were less clear-cut. 'The Pierce County Sheriff Office will abide by all enforceable U.S. immigration laws and legal mandates,' wrote Sheriff Keith Swank, who took office on Jan. 15. 'Law enforcement agencies are obligated to honor applicable federal detainers. I believe there will be more legal guidance in the near future.' In the same vein, Grant County Sheriff Joe Kriete said in his statement that while his office is aware of the Keep Washington Working Act, his office 'will not impede federal operations,' providing no further clarification. While other local law enforcement agencies across the country have formal agreements with the Department of Homeland Security under the federal 287 (g) program that allows jails to be used for immigrant detention, Washington doesn't have any such formal agreements on the books. Still, nothing is stopping federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials from conducting immigration raids or arrests in Washington or tapping in local law enforcement to help if the person of interest is suspected of committing a crime — which could be as simple as a traffic violation. InvestigateWest and Cascade PBS reached out to all of Washington's 39 sheriffs, inspired by similar work done by CalMatters, and asked how they plan to balance conflicting local, state and federal laws. Nine county sheriffs did not respond to multiple requests for comments, and nine others did not respond to our specific questions, instead forwarding a statement released by the Washington Association of Sheriffs & Police Chiefs in December. Our questions: What role does the Sheriff's office believe local law enforcement should play in federal immigration enforcement? Will the Sheriff's office change or modify any of its policies or procedures related to immigration enforcement, while still complying with the state's Keep Washington Working Act? Anything else you'd like to add? While no sheriffs in Washington outright said they would work hand in hand with federal immigration enforcement, Klickitat County Sheriff Bob Songer, who considers himself a constitutional sheriff and did not respond to our requests, posted a video on Facebook on Dec. 11 telling federal ICE officials to 'put me on speed dial.' Here is what the sheriffs who did respond to our requests said: View Link: InvestigateWest ( is an independent news nonprofit dedicated to investigative journalism in the Pacific Northwest. Visit to sign up for weekly updates.
Yahoo
16-02-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
WA bill would require REI co-op to reserve board seats for workers
(Photo by) Some Democrats in Olympia think employees should have more representation on REI's board of directors. House Bill 1635, sponsored by state Rep. Cindy Ryu, a Democrat from Shoreline, would require any Washington-based consumer cooperative with more than 2,500 employees to reserve two seats on its board of directors for people who work at the co-op. The bill doesn't mention REI by name, but in an interview with Cascade PBS and KNKX last month, Ryu acknowledged that the bill is directed at the outdoor retail company. She wasn't aware of any other co-ops in Washington it would apply to. (PCC, a large local grocery co-op, has about 1,800 employees, according to a 2024 financial report.) Unionized workers at the REI store in Bellingham requested the bill. The Bellingham store is one of 11 REI stores nationwide that have voted to unionize since 2022. None of the unions have reached a contract yet with the company. REI members vote on board candidates in annual elections. Any REI member is able to nominate themselves to run for a board seat, but bylaw changes in the early 2000s gave the existing board final say over who appears on the ballot. The board's bylaws also prohibit employees from running for board seats. Unionized workers say the process has grown undemocratic and left them without a voice. Several REI employees testified in favor of the bill at a public hearing on Wednesday. 'REI used to take workers' experiences into account when making business decisions and every day people used to serve on the board,' said Andrew Soderquist, an REI employee in Seattle. 'Now there are no meaningful avenues to share our perspectives or give feedback.' Soderquist added that he was shocked to see the REI board recently sign onto a letter supporting U.S Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum, a Trump-administration appointee and former governor of North Dakota, who has faced criticism from environmental activists and REI members over his close ties to the fossil fuel industry and a recent order paving the way for oil and natural gas drilling on public lands. REI responded to members' criticisms about Burgum this week, saying the co-op had signed the letter 'in acknowledgement of his work to champion outdoor recreation, the link between health and nature, and establish the Office of Outdoor Recreation in North Dakota.' The company said it disagreed with his recent order regarding drilling on natural lands, and called on members to sign a petition in opposition. An REI spokesperson told Cascade PBS and KNKX that the company did not have a comment on HB 1635. Michael Hutchings, a Washington business lawyer who advises corporations and cooperatives on governance, testified against the bill on Wednesday. 'While this bill may have an admirable goal of elevating employee perspectives to the board, mandating through legislation employee board seats is fundamentally flawed and will create significant problems,' Hutchings said, speaking as an individual. Hutchings said he's concerned that the bill will set a 'dangerous precedent' by targeting one specific company and sending a message to other businesses that lawmakers in Washington are willing to 'legislatively interfere' in a labor dispute. He also worried that employees who sit on the board would open themselves to conflict-of-interest concerns. Unionized REI employees recruited two pro-labor candidates to run in this year's board of directors election: Shemona Moreno, a Seattle activist who leads the climate nonprofit 350 Seattle, and Tefere Gebre, the chief program officer at Greenpeace and former AFL-CIO executive vice president. It's unclear if either of the union-backed candidates will appear on the ballots this spring. An REI spokesperson said the company never received an application from Moreno, even though Moreno shared a screenshot that appears to show her emailing the board her application material before the deadline. The REI board met on Feb. 3 to decide which self-nominated candidates to allow on the ballot. The candidate slate won't be made public until March 3. In anticipation of Moreno and Gebre being left off the ballot, the REI union is urging members to vote No on whomever the board puts forward. Moreno testified in favor of the proposed bill on Wednesday. 'I was shocked to learn that REI banned workers from the board and still hasn't reached a fair contract with employees,' Moreno said. 'I believe large co-ops should have workers on their boards to make sure they stay true to their founding values.' A spokesperson for Rep. Ryu said in an email that if the co-op bill isn't voted out of executive session next week, it is likely dead for the session. This story was produced as part of the Murrow Local News fellows program and can be republished by other organizations for free under a Creative Commons license. Image rights may vary. Contact editor@ for image use requests.
