Washington’s venerable Redistricting Commission process is disintegrating. Partisanship is threatening to draw us into the same gerrymandering we see across the country. However, a simple fix to state House elections can save our commission and offer voters maximum representation, while at the same time protect established voting rights law.
Our state has used an independent redistricting commission since 1991, after voters passed a constitutional amendment creating a fair process for legislative reapportionment. This change actually originated in Olympia by legislators weary of decades of controversy over district boundaries. Washington is one of only seven states that redistricts by commission. The magic of the Washington Redistricting Commission was how it gave the minority party leverage in negotiating new maps. This prevented the roughshod partisan gerrymandering we see in most states.
Voting rights laws are usually a good way to challenge exclusive voting systems protecting political elites, and I supported the Washington Voting Rights Act, which passed in 2018, testifying in Olympia multiple times over the numerous sessions it took to finally pass.
Ironically, ruling Olympia Democrats have reasserted leverage over redistricting by way of the federal Voting Rights Act (VRA).
Redistricting is performed once a decade following the completion of the decennial U.S. Census.
The commission’s proceedings for the 2021 round of redistricting were chaotic and controversial. Much of the drama around the production of the new map came through the threat of VRA litigation.
On Jan. 19, 2022, days after the official state legislative map was produced, Democratic Party-aligned identity politics groups filed a federal VRA action against the Redistricting Commission in the case of Palmer v. Hobbs.
The complaint in Palmer alleged that the commission’s map diluted Latino voting strength in the Yakima Valley’s 15th Legislative District. To support this claim, the complaint included evidence of racism under the old map for elections in the Yakima Valley. Because no vote had yet to be held in the freshly minted 15th District, plaintiffs also relied on expert testimony, based on political science models, to allege Latinos were disenfranchised.
As the case proceeded, there was an actual election in November 2022 for all three seats in the 15th District. In that state Senate race, Republican Nikki Torres won 67% of the vote, easily beating her Democratic opponent. Torres is Latina, with an extensive civic record that includes serving as president of the Tri-Cities Hispanic Chamber of Commerce and election to the Pasco City Council.
For people concerned about Latino voting strength, Torres’ win was a piece of evidence that the Redistricting Commission did its job. Nevertheless, on Aug. 10, 2023, United States District Court Judge Robert Lasnik ruled against the 15th District’s composition.
Lasnik’s ruling looked not at Torres’s ethnicity, but her political party preference, holding that, “Party labels help identify candidates that favor a certain bundle of policy prescriptions and choices, and the Democratic platform is apparently better aligned with the economic and social preferences of Latinos in the Yakima Valley region than is the Republican platform ...”
This ruling should be surprising to the Latinos of the Yakima Valley who voted for a GOP candidate. That said, it should not be surprising to political observers who have seen more and more Latinos assert their political independence from the Democratic Party with each election.
Based on this logic alone, the Palmer ruling certainly needs another look. Unfortunately, Democratic Attorney General Bob Ferguson is not appealing.
The ruling ordered the Redistricting Commission to reconvene and draw maps featuring new boundaries for the 15th. While Republicans were willing to reconvene and negotiate a new map, Olympia Democrats publicly refused to reconvene the commission — betting on a new and more sympathetic map from the court.
Aware of this deadlock, Lasnik recently ordered the parties to “meet and to confer with the goal of reaching a consensus on a legislative district map that will provide equal electoral opportunities for both white and Latino voters in the Yakima Valley ...” If there is no agreement on a new map, the subsequent order also calls for the appointment of a special master, nominated by the parties, to redraw 15th Legislative District boundaries.
Our state Constitution has already established the Redistricting Commission as the arbitrator in these matters. By appointing a special master to rewrite the map, the District Court’s order destroys our redistricting process as we effectively no longer have a state commission. Where Washington used to be a national model for fair redistricting, it is now a cautionary tale for reformers. Another approach is needed, or every decade we’ll see our maps redrawn by litigation.
Fortunately, Professor Michael Latner, a political scientist from California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, has recently endorsed a solution that resolves the VRA’s proportionality concerns while also respecting the work of our Redistricting Commission.
Top 2 PRO (https://top2pro.org/) is one such voting system accommodating minority representation. This is a simple statutory change that does not alter the 2021 commission maps. The proposal applies the same system we currently use in primary elections — but in the general election. Rather than electing one representative per exclusive position, the top two vote-getters are elected to represent the two state House seats within a district.
With Top 2 PRO, in November, each voter will cast one vote for one of the various candidates on the ballot, but this vote will help elect the first and second-place winner.
How will this change anything? An analysis of the 2022 state House election under Top 2 PRO rules suggests that over half of the legislative districts will send bipartisan delegations to Olympia. We’ll see suburban Republicans and rural Democrats again. There is also space on the November ballot for independents and third parties. Latino candidates — with any party they “prefer” on the ballot — can win election. Evidence in the various VRA cases in our state proves this. Proportional representation for our state House districts will allow voters to decide who best represents us by way of equal electoral opportunities.
Proportional representation systems like Top 2 PRO are used in about one hundred jurisdictions in our country, and are firmly established in federal VRA case law. Applying a system of proportional representation offers a reasonable remedial plan to not only settle the controversy, but also prevent future litigation. By adopting this proposal, the District Court can break the deadlock and settle the Palmer case —all without discrediting our Redistricting Commission process.
