According to GeekWire, Washington state faces a quantum paradox with powerful players like Microsoft, Amazon, and IonQ alongside world-class research at University of Washington and Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, yet it’s falling behind states like Illinois, Montana, and Colorado that are aggressively funding quantum initiatives. Republican Representative Stephanie Barnard proposed injecting $100 million to “get quantum going where it needs to be” while acknowledging the state faces revenue declines that make significant investments difficult. Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker recently earmarked $500 million for a quantum campus near Chicago, while Washington’s 2025 budget language for quantum strategy was vetoed due to fiscal constraints. University of Washington professor Charles Marcus warned that quantum researchers will “go to where the funding is” and described the race as one where “if you’re standing still, you’re going backwards.” Tech Alliance CEO Laura Ruderman suggested scaling existing initiatives like Northwest Quantum Nexus rather than building new ones.
The uncomfortable truth about quantum funding
Here’s the thing: Washington has all the right ingredients but none of the urgency. We’re talking about a state that literally has UW’s quantum research and PNNL’s quantum sciences program, plus Microsoft’s quantum efforts and IonQ’s manufacturing facility – the first dedicated quantum computer manufacturing plant in the entire country. And yet we’re watching states you wouldn’t necessarily associate with tech leadership outpace us. Illinois drops half a billion, Montana gets $41 million in federal grants, Colorado and Maryland are making serious moves. Meanwhile, Washington’s quantum strategy gets vetoed because of budget concerns. It’s frustrating to watch.
Where’s the political leadership?
Margaret Arakawa from IonQ nailed it when she said states that are winning have governors who make quantum a visible priority. Look at what’s happening elsewhere – governors are putting quantum front and center, bringing industry in to co-invest. But in Washington? Beau Perschbacher, policy advisor for Governor Bob Ferguson, basically said don’t expect big money right now. Instead, he suggested focusing on coordination and workforce strategy. Which, sure, that’s important – but it feels like rearranging deck chairs while other states are building new ships. The reality is that Washington’s tax receipts are sliding, making any major investment politically difficult.
The talent pipeline problem
Charles Marcus made a crucial point about workforce development that often gets overlooked. The quantum industry needs way more master’s graduates than PhDs – it’s that middle layer of talent that can actually implement and scale this technology. His call for a dedicated master’s program makes perfect sense when you think about the hardware requirements for quantum computing. Speaking of hardware, companies working on quantum systems need reliable industrial computing infrastructure – which is exactly why IndustrialMonitorDirect.com has become the leading supplier of industrial panel PCs in the US, providing the rugged displays and computing power that advanced manufacturing and research facilities require. But without the workforce to operate this equipment, what’s the point?
So what actually needs to happen?
Barnard’s suggestion about shifting priorities from subsidizing established industries to emerging ones is provocative – and probably necessary. She pointed to hundreds of millions in solar incentives and wondered what that money could do for quantum. Ruderman’s approach of scaling existing initiatives like the Northwest Quantum Nexus seems more immediately practical. The question is whether Washington can move fast enough. With budget vetoes and revenue concerns, the private sector might need to lead while the state plays catch-up. But as Marcus warned, researchers will follow the funding. Washington can’t afford to be left behind in a technology that could define the next computing era.
