Washington: Reunifying Reservations
Washington: Reunifying Reservations
Racial justice is front and center in Washington's redistricting process.
Topline Takeaways
Washington’s independent redistricting commission drew the state’s new districts, with support from the state Supreme Court, after just barely missing the deadline.
While several districts see substantial boundary changes, none saw significant partisan shifts.
Washington’s redistricting process has been praised for its outreach to local tribes of indigenous peoples to ensure equal representation at the ballot box.
Who’s In Control?
Washington uses an independent redistricting commission to draw its new districts. The process is still somewhat political as the party leaders in both state houses each select one member. The four members then select one final “tie-breaker” member who is not affiliated with either party.
The process has been rocked by controversy from the start. The commission just barely missed its November 15 deadline to pass new districts which means the duty is transferred to the state Supreme Court. Since the commission finished their job on the morning of November 16, they opted to forward their agreed upon districts to the court for consideration. After two weeks, the court approved the commission’s maps instead of drawing their own.
“[W]e conclude it is not necessary for the court to assume responsibility for adoption of redistricting maps under the present circumstances.”
District Breakdown
The map’s biggest change is along the Canadian border: WA-1 is shrunk down from it’s old shape, stretching from the eastern suburbs of Seattle all the way to the Canadian border, to only include suburbs of Seattle and Everett. To compensate, WA-2 is now a more contiguous, compact district that holds the entirety of Skagit and Whatsom counties. The changes shift both districts to lean slightly more Democratic. (Overall, the new districts didn’t produce any dramatic partisan shifts.)
Reunifying Reservations
Washington has the second most federally recognized Native American reservations at 27 (outnumbered only by California). Roughly 3% of all Washington residents identify as Native American. The state holds a checked history (along with the rest of the country) with how it’s routinely disenfranchised indigenous peoples. For example, when the 15th Amendment was ratified in 1870, allowing all American citizens to vote regardless of race, Washington’s state constitution still barred “Indians not taxed” from voting. The language wasn’t officially repealed from the state constitution until 1983.
“The jurisdictions, primarily out West, that have been employing these took their lessons from the Deep South over the years as white Southerners tried every trick in the book to try to diminish the voting power of Blacks.”
One key way legislators have continued this race-based voter suppression is by splitting reservations across districts, effectively “cracking” their voting bloc as members of a single tribe are forced to vote in separate elections. Many tribal members have reported the ways this cracking decimates voter turnout as they’re unable to send a unified message to all of their members and are forced to divide their attention across separate political constituencies.
To remedy the ills of the past, the Washington Redistricting Commission designed a formal consultation process for Native American tribes to ensure that their voices were heard in redistricting. This helped create a much more inclusive process that respected the direct wishes of tribal members.
“For time immemorial this was their land, but they were divided in a way that did not allow them to have representation or a voice over what happens and the policies that impact their land. We value our relationship with tribal governments and tribal councils. So that creates a foundation for this likely being one of — if not the first state — to have a process like this.”
-April Sims, one of the four members on the state’s redistricting commission
The biggest winner from this cooperative approach is the Yakama tribe. The Yakama Nation Reservation spans over 2,100 square miles and holds roughly 32,000 residents. Previously the reservation was split across two congressional districts: most of the reservation fell in WA-4 but the entirety of its southern border was represented by WA-3. Tribe members submitted comments relaying how this “cracking” of their reservation diluted their representation in Congress. They also shared the ‘softer’ boundaries of the reservation: areas where their fellow tribe members have settled that lie beyond the BLM’s recognized boundaries. The commission respected their wishes by creating a more expansive WA-4 that stretches south all the way to the Oregon border and allows the Yakama tribe to vote together.
The process also allowed the Colville Reservation to voice its desire to be split across two districts, a viewpoint that commissioners were vocally surprised to hear. While some individual tribe members echoed concerns similar to the Yakama tribe, the Colville Business Council (the reservation’s governing body) came out in favor of keeping the reservation split between WA-4 and WA-5, as it had been in the last redistricting cycle. Leaders cited the ability to pull the ears of multiple congresspeople as a key asset.