There is no perfect way to draw district maps for congressional and legislative elections. Partisanship is an inherent concern, and critics always will be able to find faults among the boundary lines.
But in the never-ending quest for fairness, one tactic in particular should be avoided: Allowing partisans who have a vested interest in the process to unilaterally draw the maps.
That is what has happened — or is happening — in the Yakima Valley. It is a situation that reflects the worst possible approach to an unavoidably contentious process.
To summarize: In August, a federal judge ordered one legislative district redrawn to amplify the political voice of Latino voters. This is a reasonable decision; plaintiffs made a compelling case that the area’s sizable Latino population has long been disenfranchised.
The decision is laudable but implementation has been harrowing, with those who launched the legal challenge devising five proposed maps. As news outlet Washington State Standard reports: “Each of the five options … would move multiple GOP legislators and hundreds of thousands of residents into new districts. None displace a Democratic lawmaker.”
The Standard further explains: “One proposed map would make changes as far away as King County. It would move House Minority Leader Drew Stokesbary and Sen. Phil Fortunato, both Auburn residents, from the 31st District into the 5th District where they’d be running for seats now held by Democrats.”
Clearly, this is problematic. Efforts to fix concerns about a single district should not impact nearly one-quarter of the state and the situation reflects ongoing national concerns about gerrymandering.
As The Columbian has explained editorially: “Imagine an area with 25 voters who lean Republican and 25 who lean Democratic, selecting five representatives. By packing one district with 10 voters of similar persuasion, the other four districts can all support the party that drew the map. Even though the total votes are equal, the result is a 4-1 advantage in terms of representation — and a threat to American democracy.”
The Brennan Center for Justice reports that, as of July 2023, lawsuits had been filed in 27 states charging that congressional and legislative maps are racially or politically biased.
Washington has mostly avoided such partisan enmity. While most states designate legislatures to draw political maps — allowing the majority party to enhance its advantages — Washington uses a bipartisan commission to adjust boundaries every 10 years following updated census numbers.
The system is imperfect; critics claim that party representatives work to preserve “safe” districts, limiting the number of potential swing districts. But, to paraphrase a famous Winston Churchill quote about democracy, Washington has the worst form of redistricting … except for all the others.
That system is undermined, however, when the plaintiffs in a lawsuit draw new legislative boundaries. Senate Minority Leader John Braun, R-Centralia, said of the case involving the Yakima Valley: “This is a complete gerrymander. It’s just an effort to use the courts as rough cover to pick up a district in Eastern Washington without doing a thing to help the Latino community.”
Eventually, one can imagine, states will use computer models to create districts of roughly equal populations with regard to major boundaries such as rivers and highways. But until then, the process is subject to human fallibility — a situation that demands watchdogs raise concerns and courts err on the side of fairness rather than partisanship.
