High-centered: Redistricting adds up to tied-up feeling

David Ammons

Originally published September 29

OLYMPIA -- Washington's once-a-decade ritual of redrawing political boundaries is in full swing, showing every sign that it will perpetuate the state's political drift.

It's not that the citizen Redistricting Commission members are wimps. Rather, the bipartisan process created by the voters is custom-designed to create close elections in competitive districts that swing back and forth between the two parties. The ultimate example is the 49-49 tie in the state House, two elections in a row.

This underscores the bigger story arc: Washington has no majority party, the Legislature is tied up and timid, and voters are sticking with incumbents, mostly centrists, and then using citizen initiatives to circumscribe their power.

Divided control has become the rule rather than the exception, sometimes making it tough to get anything done and adding a layer of instability and unpredictability to a process that is already difficult, analysts say.

For red-meat partisans, it's irritating. Both sides long for a clear majority, won after campaigns that highlight clear political differences.

For voters and candidates, though, the trend to hug the political middle and the checks and balances of the era are at least comfortably familiar. No long bombs, nothing very controversial, no new spending programs. Very '90s.

For political scientists, Washington is an intriguing textbook example of a swing state where many of the races are competitive and the parties either switch off being in charge or are forced to share power.

'So bloody even'

Stuart Elway, an independent pollster and political scientist who has watched Washington politics for 25 years, says that after a decade of the two parties taking turns in the majority, the pendulum has ended up right in the middle.

"It's dead even. It's just astounding," he says.

"Things are so bloody even," said Mary Lane, spokeswoman for state Republicans.

Elway added up the votes cast in all the state's legislative races last fall: a virtual tie. The 98-member House was again cursed with a 49-49 tie and the Senate couldn't get any closer -- a 25-24 Democratic edge, with one of the Democrats, maverick Tim Sheldon, sometimes giving Republicans a temporary majority.

Those tight margins reflect the average American voter's ambivalence, wedded to neither party and more than happy to split tickets, Elway says.

The White House race was basically a tie, Washington's Senate race ended in a virtual dead heat and Maria Cantwell's surprise victory in the absentees produced a 50-50 tie in the Senate. The U.S. House has only a tiny GOP margin.

"It just reflects where society is," with neither party having clear majority status and independents swinging back and forth, depending on the year, the issues and the candidates, Elway said. "Even partisans don't vote a straight ticket."

Lines in the sand

Party leaders and analysts also point to two other big reasons why political control is so uncertain and why Washington's brand of politics seems to be so middle of the road: redistricting and the blanket primary.

Unlike most states, where legislative and congressional districts are political spoils divvied up by the party in power in the Legislature and the governor's mansion, in Washington the task is delegated to a bipartisan citizen commission.

Two Democrats and two Republicans, appointed by the four legislative leaders, draw the plans. Neither side can "roll" the other side, because the maps must be approved by at least three of the four commissioners.

The forced compromise means both major parties will have an equal number of desirable, winnable districts in Congress and the Legislature, and the rest will be tossup or competitive races.

The panel went public with commissioners' draft plans last week -- and neither party had any major complaints with the other side. Commissioners said the sheer demographics and the tossup voting habits in many areas made it unexpectedly hard to draw advantageous boundaries.

"Mostly, it's subtle changes" the commissioners have proposed, said state GOP Chairman Chris Vance. "Neither side can get away with doing anything ridiculous, so they don't even try."

Still, he's wistful for the days of more sharply defined campaigns and clear majorities.

"At some point, there must be a dominant party, with a clear majority and a clear minority, for the process to work," Vance said. "We don't have that today."

Democratic state Chairman Paul Berendt is increasingly critical of the redistricting process.

"The maps are drawn up by the representatives of the four caucuses in the Legislature and have nothing to do with the geopolitical makeup of the state of Washington," he said. "Super-competitive districts across the state are not good for public policy.

"This is a huge problem if you believe in legislators working together for solutions," Berendt said. "Due to having overly competitive districts, legislators are constantly looking over their shoulders and being worried about taking tough votes because of what might be coming at them in the next election."

Both chairmen also blame milquetoast politics on the state's long tradition of the blanket primary, in which voters do not register by party and can vote for any candidate for any office.

"We have a system that encourages zigzag voting," said an exasperated Berendt. "What you get are people who are nominated who try to aim at dead center or try to stand for nothing so they can please everyone.

"No one wants to hear it, but that is a huge part of why we're in this mess."

Reshuffling

Some changes might be afoot:

- The Democratic, Republican and Libertarian parties are in federal court, asking for abolition of the blanket primary. They rely on a U.S. Supreme Court ruling in a California case last year that seemed to doom Washington's primary system. That ruling said parties cannot be forced to allow nonmembers to help pick their nominees -- the very point of the popular blanket primary.

Lawmakers have been loath to change the system and the state hasn't given up on keeping it. But changes seem more likely than not. Berendt and Vance say freewheeling campaigns between true-blue party loyalists could get the state off dead center.

Next stop is a court hearing in March.

- Terrorist attacks on America could affect politics, campaigns and governing in significant ways, say party insiders and independent analysts, although they're not exactly sure how.

"I think Sept. 11, 2001, could be the kind of event that reshuffles and redefines American politics," Vance said.

The stock market crash of 1929, for instance, ended Republicans' devotion to pure laissez-faire economics and the attack on Pearl Harbor ended the party's isolationism, he said.

- Redistricting could unexpectedly lead to some changes in political makeup. Who knows?

Berendt predicts the commission system itself might be scrapped if the new legislative boundaries produce more ties in the House.

- Time and tides could change the picture, of course. A single state House race in Snohomish County could break the tie and give the Democrats a 50-48 edge, at least until the election next year, when Republicans think they will win one or both houses.

A reminder from recent history: The same district boundaries were used to create big Democratic majorities in 1992 and a GOP landslide just two years later. The lines aren't everything.

And these footnotes amid the gloomy assessments:

- Political scientists like Todd Donovan of Western Washington University think competitive, unpredictable races are a good thing, and keep voters engaged. Elway says it's the parties, not the voters, who are out of touch and out of the vital center.

- Some centrists, including New Democrats and Mainstream Republicans, are convinced that the best policies are to be found in the middle.

- Some optimists say it's a good thing to have all those checks and balances and to force the two parties to work together.

- And, finally, the less-government, lower-taxes crowd is perfectly happy with gridlock and do-little government.

David Ammons is the AP's state political writer and has covered the statehouse since 1971. He may be reached at P.O. Box 607, Olympia, WA 98507, or at dammons@ap.org.

"At some point, there must be a dominant party, with a clear majority and a clear minority, for the process to work. We don't have that today."

-- Chris Vance, GOP state chairman

"Due to having overly competitive districts, legislators are constantly looking over their shoulders and being worried about taking tough votes because of what might be coming at them in the next election."

-- Paul Berendt, Democratic state chairman

The Olympian Copyright 2001

back to main Census 2000 index