A More Perfect Union
By WA Representative. Rob Chase
For decades I have been interested in a new state of East Washington State; from the crest of the Cascade Mountain Range to the North Idaho State Line. Even if the State Legislature passed the requirement of Article 4 Sec. 3 of the Federal Constitution to form a new state; we would probably have to wait for the admission of a blue state like Puerto Rico, or Guam, before the U.S. Congress would consider it.
Some critics assume at a glance that we are talking about secession, or establishing a Theocracy, neither of which is true. Despite critics, it was never about secession from the Union or a Theocracy. Neither option is possible in a guaranteed Republic for each state. We want Representation at the State level, which we do not have. Currently, every Statewide official in Washington State is a Democrat, as is the vast majority of the State Legislature, and Judiciary.
There are micro-schisms in America at the state level. Denser urban populations vote blue, and rural areas vote red. Washington joins similar movements across the Country in Oregon, Illinois, California, and New York States, where denser blue urban areas dominate state government. The eastern part of Oregon wants to join Idaho, and the southern part of Illinois wants to join Indiana. I am not sure how California wants to split up, except, that rural areas likewise want their freedom from the urban areas. We did contact Idaho about joining them like East Oregon is trying to do, except they do not want the blue city of Spokane in their state. I don’t blame them; with the City of Boise growing a deeper purple.
That being said, I took a closer look at the New York State scenario. They simply want to form autonomous regions within the State. There would be three autonomous regions: Staten Island, Montauk (greater New York City), and the rest of the State being called the Allegheny Region. Each region could do whatever it wanted at the State level. However, everything Federal would remain the same. Not completely perfect, but it is a good step toward the goal of representation.
As a state legislator from east Washington in Washington State, I wondered how the New York effort could be adapted to my state. I introduced HB 2085 just before the end of the session in April of this year:
BillNumber=2085&Year=2025&Initiative=false
The bill only requests funding to establish a task force to come up with a report to the Legislature on how this could be made possible, not whether the state as a whole wants it, or not. That is a good start and gets the discussion going. The plan is to divide the state into two autonomous sections. The Puget Sound Region, and the Columbia Region, wherein each region would have its own regional: Governor, Legislature, Judiciary, and Regional Constitution. The Federal Government remains intact with the current Senators and Congressmen, highways, riverways, reservations, etc. The Columbia Region would consist of Washington Counties east of the Cascades and north of the Columbia River to the Pacific Ocean.
We have nicknamed the bill, “WIN WIN for Washington”. In the Columbia Region, we would be represented by our natives, and the Puget Sound Region would get to keep its excess monies. With Boeing, Microsoft, and Amazon, King County with Seattle has financially subsidized state taxes for most of the other counties in the state.
Regionalization would result in savings to the Puget Sound Region of several $Billion annually, which they could dedicate to fixing their Ferry System and reducing Highway gridlock in the Seattle Metropolis. They can keep their monies and we can obtain more localized representation per the graphics of our last two U.S. Senator races. In 2022 the unofficial Columbia Region overwhelmingly supported Republican Tiffany Smiley.
and in 2024
Republican Raul Garcia.
Actually, we wouldn’t be much different than Idaho if we did forfeit these revenues, and many of my friends have moved to Idaho in recent years. I also believe many; small to medium size businesses would relocate to the potentially lower tax, lower regulation Colombia Region. I am sure rural Regional expenditures would be more value added.
There are lawful justifications for forming regions within a state:
Federalist No. 40 “It is the precious right of the people to “abolish or alter their governments as to them shall seem most likely to affect their safety and happiness.” – Madison
WA State Constitution Article I, section 1 “All political power is inherent in the people, and governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, and are established to protect and maintain individual rights.”
National Environmental Policy Act (P.L. 91-190, 42 U.S.C. Sec. 4321 et seq., as amended) (defines) the human environment as consisting of ecological, aesthetic, historical, cultural, social, and health elements of life in the communities.
I have heard many good ideas on how to form a Region that would only fund value-added legislation, but I will only publicly say I want to be represented by my neighbors. I will continue to work to make this legislation a reality in my lifetime, and if successful, it could be a beacon of hope to other states in this red/blue predicament.
In unity there is strength, and at the same time, diversity begs representation.
With Regional representation in the United States, we will have a more perfect union.