Harger: WA’s 2026 elections are here and the biggest fight isn’t between Democrats and Republicans, it’s between Democrats and Democrats

Hours after a Washington State Standard reporter laid out on KIRO Newsradio how unworkable it would be to redraw the state’s congressional maps to favor Democrats, Governor Bob Ferguson posted his answer on X.

“President Trump put out the call to rig the system in order to maintain the Republican majority in Congress, and red states are answering,” Ferguson wrote. “I support efforts to level the playing field. In Washington state, we would need a two-thirds majority in both the House and Senate to change our redistricting process. If we get that supermajority, I would not only support a redistricting effort, I would lead it.”

So what’s a supermajority? In the state Senate, that’s 33 of 49 seats. In the House, it’s 66 of 98. Democrats currently hold 30 Senate seats and 59 House seats. To get to a supermajority, they’d need to pick up three more in the Senate and seven more in the House this November. Why does that number matter? Because two-thirds is the magic threshold for some serious things. It’s what you need to override a governor’s veto. It’s also what you need to send a constitutional amendment to the voters. Right now, Washington’s congressional maps are drawn by a bipartisan commission. Change that process, and the maps end up in the hands of whichever party runs the legislature. Get to two-thirds, and you can rewrite the rules. That’s the math Ferguson is talking about when he says he’d lead the redistricting effort.

The governor of Washington just said he would personally lead that effort if his party wins the votes. He framed it as “level the playing field.”

Tennessee Republicans just split Memphis into three congressional districts during a special session to eliminate the state’s last Democratic-held seat. Ferguson now says he wants to do the same thing here. He’ll call it something nicer. The map will look the same. Gerrymandering, it turns out, is one of the few truly bipartisan traditions left in American politics. The tools are the same. Only the geography changes.

That post is the schism in real time. The progressive wing isn’t quietly hoping for a supermajority anymore. The governor is announcing what he’ll do with it. And the moderate wing of his own party, the one that used to be the mainstream, is the one most alarmed by what comes next.

Jerry Cornfield on Washington redistricting, gerrymandering, and the 2026 election: two elections, one party cracking, a November referendum

Jerry Cornfield covers state politics for The Washington State Standard. He joined “Seattle’s Morning News” this week and framed the cycle clearly, hours before Ferguson posted.

“There are two elections, and there really are two elections,” Cornfield said. “The primary is a defining election for the two parties to figure out who they want to represent them.”

Then November. “We’ll get a sense of a bit of a referendum on the direction of the majority Democratic Party’s policies and approach to leading the state,” Cornfield said.

On the prospect of redistricting, Cornfield was blunt.

“You’re going to have a congressional district where Seattle and Spokane are in the same district in order to achieve any more Democrat seats,” Cornfield said. “I don’t know how that would work.”

Cornfield laid out the absurdity. Ferguson, in posting later that day, didn’t dispute it. He volunteered to lead it.

Christine Gregoire warned Washington Democrats they have a spending problem. Her own party didn’t want to hear it

Former Gov. Christine Gregoire, a Democrat who served from 2005 to 2013, spoke at the Association of Washington Business 2026 Summit in Vancouver earlier this month. She was asked whether the legislature understands the economic impact of its own policies.

Her answer: “No.” Then she got specific.

“I left office with a budget of $33 billion, and the budget today is $80 billion,” Gregoire said. “I think that’s a little bit too much of a growth. And yet how we find ourselves at the end of every legislative session now is in the hole and projected to be in the hole.”

Her diagnosis: “I would suggest to you we don’t really have an income problem. We have a spending problem.”

The room applauded. What makes it matter is who said it. Gregoire isn’t a Republican. She’s a two-term Democratic governor who, when the recession hit, proposed cuts deeper than either party wanted. She governed during hard times and made unpopular decisions because the math required it.

Now she’s watching her own party stack “one more tax, one more rule, one more regulation” and warning that the people paying those taxes are leaving.

“When they leave, they stop paying capital gains,” Gregoire said. “When they leave, they stop giving significantly to philanthropy, which would otherwise be necessary by government. So, do you understand, do you see the consequences of what you’re doing? And the answer is no.”

These weren’t controversial positions when Gregoire was in office. They were governing principles. Now they’ll get you labeled as “out of touch.”

Online critics rushed to dismiss Gregoire. They didn’t answer her question about Washington’s $80 billion budget

The response from the left was immediate. On Reddit, commenters rushed to provide context that doubled as dismissal.

“Gregoire left office in 2013,” one user wrote. “The Supreme Court found that the way the state was funding schools was unconstitutional. This accounts for 40% of the growth. We also expanded Medicaid under the ACA. Healthcare inflation has been far outpacing CPI.”

Another called her remarks “nonsense,” comparing them to “saying my budget 15 years ago should be plenty now.”

Another argued that when you account for population growth and inflation, the increase is only 25%. One user pointed out that Washington’s GDP is roughly 70% higher than it was in 2013, saying the budget growth “wasn’t as outrageous as the article’s title made it seem like.”

Some of the points are fair. The McCleary decision forced billions in new education spending. Medicaid expansion wasn’t optional if you wanted federal matching funds. Infrastructure ages whether you budget for it or not.

But notice what’s missing from the pushback. Nobody addressed Gregoire’s central point: that the budget ends every session in the hole. Nobody explained why a state collecting record revenue still can’t balance its books. Nobody engaged with her warning that the people paying the taxes are leaving. They explained the spending. They didn’t explain why it still isn’t enough.

That’s the rupture. A two-term Democratic governor says the party has a spending problem, and the first instinct from her own side isn’t to wrestle with the argument. It’s to explain why she’s out of touch.

Cornfield’s read: “She said the quiet part out loud for the Democrats who are trying to steer the state in a slower, more practical direction.”

He added that Gregoire is “trying to say, ‘Look, folks, I’ve been there, I’ve seen this. You need to take a pause and think about the policies you’re pursuing.'”

The progressive wing isn’t pausing. Cornfield noted the legislature “isn’t in the mood to cut right now.” Ferguson, as of this week, isn’t talking about course correction. He’s talking about redrawing maps to lock in more seats.

A decade ago, “we have a spending problem” was something a Democratic governor could say on the record without anyone questioning her party registration. Today, it gets you compared to the other side. That shift tells you more about where the Democratic Party has moved than anything on a candidate filing form.

WA’s 2026 primary: three congressional races and five Supreme Court seats will test which Democrats voters want

Cornfield flagged three congressional races worth watching. In the 3rd District of southwest Washington, Democratic Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez, a moderate, is seeking a third term with eight opponents, including a Democratic challenger to her left.

“That will be an interesting barometer,” Cornfield said. That primary will tell you whether Democrats want electability or purity.

The 4th District in central Washington, where Republican Rep. Dan Newhouse is retiring, has 11 candidates, with at least two Republicans claiming endorsements from President Donald Trump. The 5th District in eastern Washington has 12 candidates challenging Republican Rep. Michael Baumgartner, including six Democrats and five independents.

Then the Washington Supreme Court. Five of nine seats are on the ballot.

“Voting for Supreme Court Justice is difficult,” Cornfield said. “They’re going to be looking at their resumes … and they’re just going to be guessing what their philosophies are.”

With the millionaires’ income tax headed for a constitutional challenge, those five seats could determine the future of tax policy in Washington for a generation.

WA’s middle voters aren’t angry. They’re tired. And tired voters are unpredictable

Democrats sense a blue wave. Cornfield acknowledged the climate supports that. But he added a caveat.

“The population is in an interesting mood right now,” Cornfield said. “With inflation being what it is, the war, the frustrations that are just in general, it’s hard to know what those voters in the middle of the political spectrum, if they turn out, where they’re going to make their choices.”

Progressive Democrats are confident. Moderate Democrats like Gregoire are waving a yellow flag. Republicans are trying to find candidates who can compete without self-destructing. And the voters who actually decide elections, the ones who don’t go to rallies or post on social media, they’re watching the grocery bill, the gas price, and the budget that went from $33 billion to $80 billion while the party in charge kept calling it an investment.

They’re not angry, exactly. They’re tired. And tired voters are unpredictable ones.

The WA income tax repeal initiative will land on the ballot. Then watch what they put on the label

Let’s Go Washington is gathering signatures for an initiative to repeal Washington’s new millionaires tax on earnings above $1 million. They need roughly 309,000 valid signatures by July 2. They’re aiming for 400,000.

Even the legislators who wrote the tax expect it to qualify.

“Yes. That’s the short answer,” Cornfield confirmed. “Even the folks who wrote the bill think it’s going to happen.”

The real battle starts after.

“Once they get the signatures and I’m pretty confident it’ll be certified, then they fight over that one line that shows up on the ballot,” Cornfield said. The Public Investment Disclosure: the fiscal impact statement that millions of voters will read before making their decision.

Here’s what to watch for. When the income tax passed, Democrats sold it as funding for free school breakfasts and lunches for every K-12 student in Washington. Governor Ferguson called it “a policy particularly close to my heart.” School meals cost roughly $100 million a year, a fraction of the $3 billion the tax is projected to raise. But that’s the program they put on the poster.

So when the fiscal impact statement is drafted, expect the repeal to be framed as taking school lunches away from children. Not as repealing a $3 billion tax that voters never approved, and the constitution arguably doesn’t allow. Not restoring the tax structure that 11 previous votes chose to protect. As taking food from kids.

That’s the fight. Not over policy. Over language. Over which story voters hear first.

Gregoire warned her party about this kind of thing.

“We’re answering it by stacking one more tax, one more rule, one more regulation,” she asked before saying, “Do you understand, do you see the consequences of what you’re doing?”

The answer, apparently, is still no.

Charlie Harger is the host of “Seattle’s Morning News” on KIRO Newsradio. You can read more of his stories and commentaries here. Follow Charlie on X and email him here. 

Follow @https://twitter.com/kirocharlie