Professional Documents
Culture Documents
(Asian Pacific Americans for Civic Empowerment (Win/Win, the Washington Bus, and Washington Student
register voters in the International District) Association registering voters at the UW)
0%
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
1
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/no-voter-turnout-wasnt-way-down-from-2012/
The chart below looks at the vote share of POC and youth voters over the past seven years. As expected,
their vote share is the highest in high-saliency elections (Presidential elections) and lowest in low-
saliency elections (odd-year elections). Though we see a lull from 2013 2015, the spike in 2016 shows
2
http://www.nytimes.com/elections/2012/results/president/exit-polls.html
3
Due to various data challenges, single women was not included in the analysis.
4
Good voter data only goes back to 2010
4% 4%
2% 2%
0% 0%
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
The chart below shows the breakdown of all new voter registrations in Washington in 2016. Of the
300,000+ new voter registrations last year, over 70% were POC and youth registrants.
Non-NAM;
88,242 Latino;
29,669
API;
Unknown Race; 24,954
7,102
Black; 10,909
Urban/Rural Divide
There is a significant correlation in the election results that highlight the urban/rural divide in
Washington State, with evidence from two separate data points: the difference in support for Hillary
Clinton versus Jay Inslee, and the change in support for Jay Inslee from 2012 to 2016. These data points
show that wealthy, urban regions in the state tend to support Hillary Clinton at much higher rates than
Jay Inslee, while at the same time, supporting Jay Inslee at a much higher rate in 2016 than in 2012. The
opposite is true for more rural, lower-income regions of the state: these regions supported Jay Inslee at
a much higher rate than Hillary Clinton, while at the same time, supporting Jay Inslee at a lower rate in
2016 than in 2012. While this correlation is strong, we cant be sure what it means exactly. That said, it
is consistent with a national narrative around Clintons weakness (and/or Trumps strength) with rural
and lower-income voters. This could also mean that Inslee has more traction in rural communities, or
lack of traction in wealthy communities. A combination of all four is also possible.
Though Inslees support increased by 3% across the state, there were six LDs in the state where Inslee
actually lost support from 2012. The chart below looks at these LDs, all of which are in Western
Washington, and three of which voted for Inslee in 2012. This isnt an anomaly seen only in Republican,
Eastern Washington districts; four of these districts are in rural parts of Western Washington and two
districts - 29 and 38 - are both in in urban, lower income areas in Tacoma and Everett, respectively.
Compare the chart above with the chart below, which highlights the districts where Jay Inslees
performance improved the most since 2012. These districts show signs of becoming more Democratic,
and with the exception of the 40th LD, all districts are urban districts in King County.
The correlation in the two charts above echoes the sentiment of the Clinton/Inslee difference
referenced earlier. Rural and lower-income districts are becoming more Republican, while urban
wealthy districts are becoming more Democratic.
Below, you see the city of Yakima zoomed in, showing how segregated the Latino community is from the
white population in the city. Win/Win partners proposed consolidating the largely Latino community in
east Yakima city with the largely Latino community in the southern portion of the county.
The city of Yakima is zoomed in on the map below, again, showing how communities of color were
gerrymandered into two separate districts.
Conversely, the chart below looks at cities in the state with at least 5,000 registered voters that had the
highest support for Trump.
With the growing urban/rural divide in Washington State, its important to follow the trends and re-
adjust the assumptions around Democratic support in any given district. Looking at all races in any given
district over time can help us better understand which districts are becoming more Democratic and
which districts are trending Republican. As data in the earlier section suggests, some legislative districts
are becoming more Republican, and some are becoming more Democratic. When only looking at
swing districts in the state, a few LDs stand out.
Candidates matter
If one were to only look at the number of Democrats elected to the state legislature as a measure of
how Democratic a district is, it would tell a misleading story. Voters are very capable of voting for both
Democratic and Republican candidates on the same ballot. A prime example of this ticket splitting can
be seen in the LD 47 in 2014, when the voters overwhelming elected Republican Joe Fain at 63%, while
in the same election, overwhelmingly electing Democrat Pat Sullivan by nearly 56%. In addition, there
are eight LDs in the state that currently have both a Republican and Democrat representatives: 5, 19, 28,
30, 35, 44, 45, and 47. When comparing the number of Democrats elected to the state legislature with
the support for statewide/federal candidates, five outlying districts emerge.
Under-performing Districts
Three districts in the state seem to be under-performing in electing Democrats to the state legislature:
10, 30, and 42. Despite voting for every Democratic candidate for Governor, US House, US Senate, and
President since 2008 by at least 52% of the vote, on the legislative level, LD 30 has elected only six
Democrats (counting Mark Miloscia as a Democrat in 2010) and five Republicans since 2010. On the
other end of the scale, LD 10 and 42 have supported statewide Democratic candidates with 47% and
48% respectively, results that put them in a lean-Republican category. However, neither district has seen
a Democrat elected to the legislature while ten Republicans have served since 2010. Districts 10, 30, and
42 are more Democratic than they appear on the surface, theyve just been under-performing,
potentially because of strong Republican candidates and/or weak Democratic candidates.
Over-performing Districts
There are two LDs in the state that seem to be over-performing in electing Democrats to the state
legislature: 19 and 24. Despite supporting statewide candidates at a relatively modest rate, 46% and
51%, respectively, districts 19 and 24 have overwhelming elected Democrats to the state legislature.
Since 2010, the 19th LD has elected nine Democrats and one Republican, and the 24th LD has elected 10
Democrats and no Republicans. These districts are more Republican than they appear on the surface,
Swing LDs
Average Democrats Elected Republicans Elected
Strength Within Group
LD Democratic to State Legislature to State Legislature
(Sub-Category)
Support Since 2010 Since 2010
41 59% 1: Lean Democrat 9 2
45 57% 1: Lean Democrat 8 2
30 55% 1: Lean Democrat 6* 5
24 51% 1: Lean Democrat 10 0
47 52% 2: Pure Swing 4 6
28 51% 2: Pure Swing 5 6
44 49% 2: Pure Swing 6 4
5 50% 3: Lean Republican 2 8
42 48% 3: Lean Republican 0 10
10 47% 3: Lean Republican 0 10
17 46% 3: Lean Republican 2 8
19 46% 3: Lean Republican 9 1
35 46% 3: Lean Republican 5* 5
25 45% 3: Lean Republican 1 9
26 45% 3: Lean Republican 3 8
*Mark Miloscia (2010) and Tim Sheldon (2010, 2014) are counted as Democrats despite caucusing with Republicans
Conclusion
There is hope coming out of the 2016 election if we can build on the record high voter participation
rates and positive trends coming from Latino and Asian Pacific Islander communities and within areas
outside of King County. We believe that the work of Win/Win's partner organizations are doing on the
ground and in community is having an impact in addressing the ongoing disparities we see in
underrepresented communities. As we look ahead, a continued focus on organizing and mobilizing
among these communities will be key to creating a representative democracy in Washington.
Additionally, exploring opportunities for coordinated action, candidate development, and community
engagement in the small but very democratic cities could provide key opportunities in changing the
electoral map over the long-term.