Earlier this week, Representative Strom Peterson introduced House Bill 1938, which proposes a comprehensive process to redesign our state flag.
This bill closely aligns with the ideas I outlined a few months ago. Both proposals aim to replace our current flag, a design often criticized for its complexity, lack of relevance, and uninspired “seal-on-a-solid-color” format, with something more representative of who we are as a state today.
While the bill and my idea share a common purpose, they differ in execution. The legislative bill favors oversight by the Washington Arts Commission, while my proposal places leadership with the Secretary of State, which currently serves as the custodian of all our state symbols. In balance, it’s probably better for the arts community to lead the charge.
The Relative Privation Fallacy: Why Symbols Matter
As of this writing, I am only one of two people signed up to testify in favor of the bill. The balance is largely on the con (by almost 20).
I expect the strongest argument against this bill is that we have bigger problems and that revisiting our flag wastes the Legislature’s time. This is a classic example of the Relative Privation Fallacy, also known as the “Not as Bad as” fallacy or “Appeal to Worse Problems.”
This happens when someone argues that a problem shouldn’t be addressed because there are bigger or more serious problems elsewhere. It dismisses legitimate concerns by comparing them to other issues, rather than addressing them on their own merits.
For example:
- “You need to eat the food on your plate; there are starving children in other countries.”
- “How can you complain about the Seahawks’ running game when there’s visible homelessness?”
While prioritization is important, this argument falsely suggests that working on one issue means ignoring all others. In reality, multiple issues can (and should) be addressed simultaneously. It also rejects the idea that we can have nice things.
We all know that symbols matter. Without much prompting, we can all think of negative controversies about symbols.
If symbols didn’t matter, we wouldn’t worry about racists in Ohio waving Nazi flags on overpasses? No one would fly a Trump flag from their truck while honking annoyingly through downtown Olympia (This happens more often than you’d think) if symbols didn’t matter.
We can also think of positive relationships with flags:
When we went to the moon, we planted a flag.
Our national anthem is a song about a flag.
Establishing a broad-based, open, and public process to create a new flag that represents the entire state does not mean we’re ignoring all the other issues facing us.
Our Flag: Historically Uninspired and Not Our Own
Right now, Washington’s flag is uninspired. It was not the result of a broad public process but rather something we arrived at late, 34 years after statehood.
While state flags existed before the 1890s, it wasn’t until the Chicago World’s Fair that the state flag craze really took off. By the time Washington chose its flag in 1923, only four other states didn’t have one.
But arriving at things late is part of our history. We’re also in the habit of letting national symbols and decisions dominate us. A 1913 effort to establish a state flag commission was nixed because we didn’t want to overshadow the national flag.
Even the current design of the flag, adopted in 1915 and made official in 1923, reflects the fact that we didn’t even really choose our own name.
When the bill to create the new territory reached Congress in 1853, they overruled our local preference. Kentucky Representative Richard H. Stanton proposed an amendment to change the name from “Columbia” to Washington, in honor of George Washington. Stanton argued that naming the territory after a national hero would better reflect the nation’s (not the territory’s) ideals and unity. No one, it seems, suggested to Stanton that if he liked Washington so much, he should volunteer to change Kentucky’s name. Despite the lack of input from the people who actually lived in the region, Congress approved the amendment, and the territory was officially named Washington.
The imposition of “Washington” highlights a recurring theme in the region’s history: the tension between local autonomy and federal authority. While the name honors a national figure, its origins reflect a moment when the voices of the people living in the region were overlooked.
I’m not saying we need to go as far as changing the state’s name (that would be crazy! looks around), but we don’t need to underline it with a state flag.
You could almost say we’re fiercely ambivalent about the name and symbolism of our state. Because they were largely chosen by outsiders, we don’t focus on how our symbols could actually be important to us.
There’s a deep, hidden-in-plain-sight reason for this ambivalence. While Oregon and California became states before the Civil War, Washington maintained a “failure to launch” status for decades.
Washington spent more time as a territory than any other state in the lower 48. This extended period of territorial governance profoundly affected our development and identity. Unlike other territories that quickly transitioned to statehood, Washington’s path was slower and more complicated, shaped by geographic isolation, economic challenges, and political neglect.
Probably our best historian, Robert Ficken, argued that this prolonged territorial status fostered a sense of ambivalence among Washingtonians. Cut off from the rest of the country by the Rocky Mountains and lacking significant infrastructure, the territory was historically dominated by outside economic forces, generally from Chicago or California.
Ficken highlights that the push for statehood only gained serious momentum after the completion of the trans-Cascadian railroad in the 1880s. The railroad connected Washington to itself and the rest of the nation. Before this, the region’s internal isolation made it difficult to grow on our own without outside investment or assert our political voice.
If so many decisions were made outside of Washington State for us, why would we care?
State name? I’m sure there are bigger fish to fry.
Dumb state flag? Why do we need one? If we need one, who cares what it looks like? It makes sense that we’ve internalized not wanting anything nice of our own.
A Flag for the Future
So, the strongest argument for keeping the current flag is that it exists (we don’t need to expend any effort), that it’s old (seemingly historic), and that it accurately features the person our state is named after (Get it, Washington?). But even our state’s name was not our own choice. The flag serves as a reminder of that, but it doesn’t tell us anything about who we are today.
HB 1938 is not just a rejection of our current flag; it is an opportunity.
It gives us the chance to engage the public in a meaningful way and to choose a symbol that truly represents Washingtonians. Our state deserves a flag that is not just something we inherited, but something we can be inspired by.
Let’s seize this moment to create a flag that reflects the beauty, diversity, and spirit of Washington. After all, symbols matter, and so do we.
I don’t see any reason to change of state flag. Being named after the first President is an honor and nothing to hide. If he had slaves, that was history. Times have changed, but reflecting on our history be it good or bad is something that we need to do.
Spend your time while there in Olympia resolving the issue of gangs and the exploding crime problem amongst the young.
So basically, “look at the perceived problems that Brown people cause. Leave the white status symbols alone.” Got it.
Clearly, you did not read the article, nor the previous article about why this state’s history is so problematic.
There are people addressing the issues caused by systemic racism, a system you clearly benefit from, and the flag issue is the one this person chose.
Other than maintaining systems upholding white supremacy, what are you doing to be civically engaged.
If this flag doesn’t represent your own idea of good looking then go ahead and get out of Washington! You crazy people don’t care about what the citizens of Washington think! We want law enforcement, bad people in jail/prison. Lower taxes. Our legislators to Stop spending money they don’t have! Good schools without all the fluff that kids don’t need. The flag was here long before you and taxpayers don’t need or want any money or time spent changing it, at least not until the state budget is balanced!
If we were ever going to change our state flag, this seems like the right moment in history to do so. I don’t see changing the flag as a rejection of our past, but as an embrace of who we are and who we want to be as a state. This isn’t a pro-secession article, and not liking our current flag shouldn’t mean we have no right to live here. The other comments I’ve read appear to be examples of the Relative Privation Fallacy, so to rebut them further would just be a rehash of the arguments made in the article already—the idea that we would have to balance the entire state budget before taking up this issue is silly. If a bill like this inspires more civic engagement from people, then it’s a good discussion to be having.
Changing the flag requires changing the symbol on every sign, plaque, website, form, document, letterhead, and every other physical object that bears that symbol. It is an enormous undertaking! One that will require an enormous amount of time and taxpayer funds. This is a wedge issue that needs to be shelved until the political temperature can be brought below the boiling point in this current climate.
One could also argue that it would warrant the continued paying of Washington state residents who work for the government – or perhaps even the hiring of more people. In a time when Washingtonians jobs are under threat, wouldn’t it be better to have this project, amongst many others, around to help some of our citizens keep their jobs?
This is the wrong time to focus on this issue! Put this on the shelf. Changing the state flag will cost the state, and hence, the taxpayers greatly! Changing every sign, every website, every form and document, every piece of letterhead that bears the symbol of the state flag is an enormous undertaking, and a waste of valuable taxpayer dollars that the state can not afford at this time! Priorities matter! Get them straight!
History matters.
Citing only two states of 50 to have changed theirs isn’t a resounding reason for Washington to proceed with the same.
If history didn’t matter then why not arbitrarily change all state flags every 10, 20, 40 years… to represent THAT period in a state’s history?
Peoples change with emmigration and with regard to social evolution/devolution and norms.
What doesn’t change is history – no matter how hard some try.
Agreed. If we change your Washington State flag the next thing we’ll do is be changing the American flag to a crescent Moon ⭐ star communism . Leave things alone pay attention to more important things it’s just a distraction and a decoy..
Changing Washington’s flag will lead to changing America’s flag? Thats only a small jump…
What drivel, uninspired, unoriginal, politically spun nonsense. There is no flag that these virtue signallers could make that would be better. Leave it be until we are in nonpartisan times. (Which may be never).
There’s no wonder why there’s never a writers name attached. Feckless.
What’s the matter with the flag not enough color, maybe a rainbow in the background , drag queens to represent the state’s standing on DEI and LGTBQ+…
Our flag is fine, let’s move on
you leftist commie sack of shit go kill yourself
I wonder what grade the language arts teacher gave the student for this.
Have the three sponsors of this Bill nothing else better to do while in Office?
Reasoning behind the legislature Bill submitted finds that the Washington state flag often faces criticism for its poor design and lack of relevance to the state’s identity? CRITICISM? The sponsors of this Bill are so concerned about changing OUR State flag because, heaven forbid there’s criticisms about The State of Washington flag! Get off that HIGH horse! Our State flag is unique, it’s green color goes with the motto of OUR State! Focus on other issues, rather replacement of The Washington State flag!
Troll
Leave the flag alone.
One of the sentiments I see in responses here is that things should be “left alone.”
I don’t understand this feeling.
In the 60’s, did people sit at home and “leave things alone”? Or were they creating new businesses, moving places, starting projects, etc. Were the moon landings necessary? Or should they have just stayed home and not bothered with any of that?
What about the 70’s?
80’s? 90’s?
People had some crazy ideas in the 90’s, look at some of the products that businesses sold. Look at the development of computers, phones, and internet. Should we have just stuck with sending paper letters and talking on phones stuck to the wall for the next 500 years?
Sure we all have nostalgic feelings about the past, but the history of life on earth is change. You can waste the next 30 years of your life fighting and hating on change, or you also could get excited about some of the new things that are happening. I just think the hate and vitriol towards ideas is so harmful – to yourself and to others. If you don’t like an idea, you can of course vote with the ballot or with your wallet. But putting down people for trying to improve on one thing amongst hundreds of other things that can ALSO be improved is counterproductive. You could choose an issue that you care strongly about and make change in that area instead.
Peace.
I assume your parents named you at or shortly after birth… have you since changed your name to one you believe more accurately reflects how you want to represent yourself?
If not your arguments are not geniune
Hello. I actually did legally change my first, middle, and last names to those of my choosing. I hated all of those names.
I no longer keep in touch with the people who gave them to be because they are toxic and hateful.
I’m going with, change the flag, but only if it truly reflects the state.
However, since the vast majority of white people I have known here are racists, the flag reflects you all perfectly. Maybe add a swatstica or a put a klan hood on the president. Other than that, it represents all of you perfectly.
Before you tell me to go back to where I came from. I am Indigenous. So, you leave and take your ugly flag with you.
If you’re going to go on to a small blog of someone who you don’t happen to agree with politically and take the time (although not enough of it, evidently) to comment, you should have some actual (i.e. constructive, or at least semi-civil) criticism. None of this garbage please. Get over yourselves. The easiest thing to do is tear other people down, but it’s not remotely productive, and it makes you look like idiots.
Anyway, on the topic of what Emmett was actually saying in this article, as a couple people have said, it might not be the best time, what with state budget restrictions. I also see why people might like the flag, it has a nice color for sure, and Washington is a generally well-liked figure. As such, any move to change it would need to come with some broad appeal while not pandering to any group, a combination that a commission would hopefully produce. I don’t know if now is the moment for that, though, unless the flag was changed symbolically but not in actuality replaced everywhere until some later date.