Is Washington’s state flag a relic of days gone by and should it be redesigned?

The question won’t be answered this year after a bill in this year’s Legislature proposing a committee to explore the idea failed to clear committee before a Feb. 21 deadline.

Rep. Strom Peterson, D-Edmonds, said he sponsored HB 1938 after receiving an email from a constituent who raised issues with the flag’s design. If eventually enacted, the bill would establish a redesign committee consisting of the director of the state arts commission, two legislators from each party, the secretary of state, historians, cultural leaders, tribal members, and Washington residents.

Committee members would consider updating the flag to reflect the state’s diverse identity, history, and culture. The state seal or other symbols of the state would not be altered, Peterson said.

As a New Mexico native, Peterson compared Washington’s flag to New Mexico’s award-winning design. He said Washington’s solid green background and central state seal lacks aesthetic value, and he questioned the historical relevance of George Washington as a state symbol. The flag’s intricate design also makes reproduction difficult and the text hard to read, he said.

Anti-George?

The proposal met with some opposition.

Rep. Hunter Abell, R-Inchelium, said the bill is an attempt by Democratic legislators to remove the former president from the flag.

“The shift to do away with our history, our past, who we were as a nation and how we’ve grown through the good times and bad, is insulting,” said Abell in a public statement. “It makes me wonder if this is the beginning of an effort to change the name of our state.”


On a video posted on X (formerly known as Twitter) Rep. April Connors, R-Kennewick, started a movement #SaveGeorge, imploring people to vote against the bill that will “cancel George.”
Peterson has clarified that the bill proposal is not an attempt to erase the former president from Washington.


“That’s just the farthest thing from the truth,” Peterson said.

Graphic designers and printmakers testified in support of the bill, citing the history of the former president as a slave owner. However, Washington residents like Ryan Jewell, who opposed the bill, argued that there are more important issues to address during the session.

“The state is named after the man on the flag,” Jewell said. “What would symbolize our identity better than a seal of the greatest president of all time in my opinion.”


Diversity

While Peterson agrees that there are more pressing issues to address in the legislative session, he argues the bill still holds value.

“That’s what we do in the Legislature,” Peterson said.  “We have such a diversity in the state, this could be a great way to engage people in state government and what they think should be reflected, I don’t mean [just redesigning] our flag, but in our policies and discussion.”

Washington originally was going to be named Columbia when it was separated from the Oregon Territory, but a Kentucky congressman objected, saying that name was too similar to the District of Columbia, the nation’s capital. He suggested the new territory be named for the nation’s first president instead.

If and when enacted, the people of Washington would vote on whether to approve a new design.