The 2021 Com­mis­sion con­sists of two Demo­c­ra­t­ic com­mis­sion­ers (April Sims and Brady Walkin­shaw) plus two Repub­li­can com­mis­sion­ers (Paul Graves and Joe Fain) and a non­vot­ing chair (Sarah Augus­tine) as required by the Constitution.

The pro­posed maps are avail­able for view at a web­site pow­ered by City­gate GIS, which uti­lizes Google Maps as its map engine. The links to view are below:

• April Sims’ proposal
• Brady Walkinshaw’s proposal
• Joe Fain’s proposal
• Paul Graves’ proposal

PDF and shape­file ver­sions are avail­able too.

Each com­mis­sion­er also released a state­ment describ­ing their rationale.

The pre­am­bles of each state­ment are as follows:

Com­mis­sion­er Sims is proud to release a pro­posed map that pri­or­i­tizes her val­ues and her com­mit­ment to the Commission’s require­ment to con­sid­er dis­tricts that are: equal in pop­u­la­tion; pre­serve com­mu­ni­ties of inter­est; reduce divi­sion of coun­ty and munic­i­pal bound­aries; don’t favor or dis­crim­i­nate against a can­di­date or par­ty; encour­age elec­toral com­pe­ti­tion; and are com­pact, con­ve­nient, and contiguous.

This new­ly drawn con­gres­sion­al map [from Com­mis­sion­er Graves] cre­ates two major­i­ty-minor­i­ty con­gres­sion­al dis­tricts, twice the num­ber from a decade ago and the most in state his­to­ry. This map would give a pow­er­ful voice to groups that have in the past been under­rep­re­sent­ed in the halls of Con­gress. It also increas­es com­pe­ti­tion, giv­ing vot­ers more choic­es and encour­ag­ing our mem­bers of Con­gress to lis­ten to all their constituents.

Just as he reduced the num­ber of cities need­less­ly split in his pro­posed leg­isla­tive map, the goal of Com­mis­sion­er Walkinshaw’s pro­posed con­gres­sion­al map is to reduce the num­ber of coun­ty splits and draw more log­i­cal lines that reflect the real­i­ty of com­mu­ni­ties. In much of the state, it is coun­ty gov­ern­ments that main­tain roads, pro­vide impor­tant social and pub­lic health ser­vices, and are respon­si­ble for pub­lic safe­ty and the admin­is­tra­tion of justice.

Com­mis­sion­er Fain’s plan cre­ates com­pact, com­pet­i­tive con­gres­sion­al dis­tricts that fol­low impor­tant geo­graph­i­cal and polit­i­cal bound­aries. This region­al approach keeps most cities, coun­ties, and school dis­tricts togeth­er and more than three-quar­ters of res­i­dents in their exist­ing districts.

Adher­ing to the prece­dent they set with their leg­isla­tive map pro­pos­als, the Repub­li­can com­mis­sion­ers have once again con­coct­ed some pret­ty fan­tas­tic ger­ry­man­ders. Fain’s map packs as many Demo­c­ra­t­ic vot­ers as pos­si­ble into the 2nd, 10th, 1st, 7th, and 9th in order to cre­ate five dis­tricts that Repub­li­cans could con­ceiv­ably win (the 6th, the 8th, the 3rd, the 4th, and the 5th).

The lat­ter three dis­tricts are cur­rent­ly rep­re­sent­ed by Repub­li­cans; the for­mer are rep­re­sent­ed by Demo­c­ra­t­ic incum­bents Derek Kilmer and Kim Schrier.

Graves took a bit of a dif­fer­ent approach to get to a sim­i­lar 5/5 best case sce­nario con­gres­sion­al del­e­ga­tion split for Repub­li­cans, seek­ing to turn the 1st and the 8th into more com­pet­i­tive exurban/rural hybrid dis­tricts while leav­ing the 6th in a more Demo­c­ra­t­ic-friend­ly configuration.

Under Graves’ scheme, Rep­re­sen­ta­tive Suzan Del­Bene — who rep­re­sents Red­mond in Con­gress — would reside in the 9th Dis­trict instead of the 1st.

(It’s impor­tant to note that con­gres­sion­al can­di­dates do not need to live in the dis­tricts they rep­re­sent, unlike with leg­isla­tive dis­tricts, but vot­ers, can­di­dates, and polit­i­cal par­ties all gen­er­al­ly pre­fer that rep­re­sen­ta­tives be dis­trict residents.)

The Demo­c­ra­t­ic com­mis­sion­ers, mean­while, have pro­posed maps that would be much more like­ly to keep the state’s cur­rent sev­en to three split intact.

Both April Sims and Brady Walkin­shaw pro­posed shrink­ing the 1st in size while keep­ing it Demo­c­ra­t­ic; its ced­ed ter­ri­to­ry would return to the 2nd.

While remain­ing a cross-Cas­cades dis­trict, the 8th would move west in places, gain­ing impor­tant ter­ri­to­ry in Belle­vue that at first glance would like­ly enable Democ­rats to hold the dis­trict until it is redrawn again in 2031.

Nei­ther the Sims or Walkin­shaw maps moves the 3rd to the north much. Send­ing the 3rd north along I‑5 would cre­ate a dis­trict more like the one Bri­an Baird used to rep­re­sent, enabling Democ­rats to bet­ter com­pete against Jaime Her­rera Beut­ler. (The 3rd is the only dis­trict in the west­ern side of the state — or the entire Pacif­ic North­west for that mat­ter — that is Republican-held).

The Sims and Walkin­shaw maps diverge sig­nif­i­cant­ly with respect to the 4th and the 5th, the two dis­tricts that are present­ly whol­ly locat­ed east of the Cascades.

In Walkin­shaw’s ver­sion, the 4th would be a giant wedge run­ning from Pend Oreille Coun­ty down to the Colum­bia Riv­er Gorge. Spokane would stay in the 5th, which would gain some of the 4th’s south­ern­most territory.

In Sims’ ver­sion, the 5th would have more of a col­umn-like shape, run­ning from the Cana­di­an bor­der to the Ore­gon bor­der along the Ida­ho border.

The Redis­trict­ing Com­mis­sion will be accept­ing pub­lic tes­ti­mo­ny on all of these hypo­thet­i­cal con­gres­sion­al maps plus the pre­vi­ous­ly released leg­isla­tive maps for the next few weeks. Although the final maps are unlike­ly to be based prin­ci­pal­ly on any these con­cepts, they nev­er­the­less sig­nal what com­mis­sion­ers will be pri­or­i­tiz­ing when they begin nego­ti­at­ing with each oth­er. Be sure to sub­mit your com­ments and ques­tions so the com­mis­sion­ers hear from you.