Referendum 71 Approve/Reject by County

Washington State is a diverse state in many respects – diverse people, places, ideas, everything. Diversity is at the core of everything we are taught in school, in the images we see in local media, and in the history of our state itself. This diversity is an asset to our state and our region as a whole by providing all our citizens with a rich sense of background and unity, because while we are diverse, we are also all rooted in our region’s common heritage in nature and independence.

So why am I about to argue against the political diversity of our state and region when I say that Eastern Washington and Western Washington should split ways? Well, it might seem like an odd point-of-view, but it is indeed an important aspect to consider we think about what is best for the citizens of our state.

The above map was taken from the website of the Washington State Secretary of State’s web site. It shows which way each particular county voted on Referendum 71 by plurality of the total number of votes in each county. For those of you that don’t know (or for any out-of-state readers), Referendum 71 is a referendum sent to the voters to “Approve” or “Reject” the state’s new “Everything-but-Marriage” law. This law, passed by the Washington State Legislature and signed by Governor Gregoire earlier this year, grants those in domestic partnerships all the benefits of marriage without actually calling it “marriage.” (The legislature thought this would pacify most right-wingers against “same-sex marriage,” but apparently they were wrong.) The new law not only gives rightful benefits to gay couples in committed and loving relationships, but also to senior citizens and any other couple in a domestic partnership situation. The law was brought to referendum by a group named Protect Marriage Washington, which led a rather suspect signature drive to put the new everything-but-marriage law on the ballots for the voters to decide. This group obscured the purpose of this new law, and painted it as “homosexuals trying to gain the right to marry” in order to drum up support from the anti-equality right-wing base in Washington State. While there is much I could say about this new law, Protect Marriage Washington, and Referendum 71 in general, that is for another post.

As of this posting date, Referendum 71 is passing by a slim margin, but passing nonetheless. Washington is to be commended as the first state in the country to grant almost-marriage abilities to gay couples by a popular referendum. However, as the above image illustrates, there is clearly a political divide between East and West in our state. And by no means am I basing this conclusion on only one issue. Eastern Washington has always had the reputation of being staunchly conservative in comparison to Western Washington’s generally progressive liberal political ideals. This stereotype is proven by voting statistics in past elections: Gregoire’s gubernatorial wins over Rossi in 2004 and 2008, Maria Cantwell’s win over Mike McGavick in 2006, Patty Murray’s win over George Nethercutt in 2004, and many other elections in years past for both referenda and elected officials. As you can see, the East is much “redder” than the West. While it is beneficial to have political differences in different areas to provide balance and cause for rational discourse, it is clear that, due to the severity of the political leanings of both sides of our state, Washington is politically schizophrenic.

And it’s not just politics that separate our state. The West benefits from tourism, manufacturing, service, and high-tech industry, while the economy in the East is dominated by agriculture. Western Washington has large cities like Seattle, Tacoma, Everett, Bellevue, and Bellingham, while Eastern Washington is chock full of small towns and agrarian communities (Spokane and maybe Pullman being the exceptions). The West is rainy, green, and coastal, and the East is dry and full of grassy plains the likes of which you would see in the middle of the country or canyons like you would see in the Southwest. Both halves of the state have things to offer and are very beautiful regions in and of themselves, but both halves are very different.

Both sides of the state would benefit from a split. Western Washington would be free to be progressive and liberal, while the East could freely embrace the conservative values it always votes for overwhelmingly in state elections. Presidential elections would be aided by this ideological split, for Democrats would no longer take all of Washington’s electoral votes because of the West’s dominance in population and congressional districts, and the East would be free to give its electoral votes to Republican candidates, as is the trend in elections. The West would be free to pass transportation levies for mass transit and freeway maintenance in its large cities, and such tax burdens would not need to be placed on citizens in the East who don’t use these systems on a regular basis. Separating the state is no different from the age-old policy of gerrymandering for congressional districts, and this policy would demonstrably help both sides of the state move forward. The Legislature and other NGO’s should take a hard and definitive look at effects that would result from such a split of our state, and take such matters seriously.

For further reading and more points of view on this topic: Check out the Wikipedia article for the “State of Lincoln” here, see a Seattle Times article about separating here, or one from the Spokane Spokesman-Review here and here.