Washington candidates spin contrasting economic narratives

Spending as a culture war issue

In a recent Crosscut/Elway poll of likely Washington voters, those who identified as Republicans were three times as likely to report the economy as a top concern. Meanwhile, Democratic-identified voters were nearly seven times as likely to list abortion as a major issue. As Election Day nears, both parties have leaned into those priorities, which they view as winning issues, respectively.

The Republican messaging against “wasteful spending” has put some in the position of opposing federal economic stimulus programs broadly, even voting against significant increases in federal dollars for their home districts. 

Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers of Eastern Washington supported relief efforts under Trump, but has since voted against even routine government funding. She was the only Washington Republican to oppose the Consolidated Appropriations Act, a bipartisan effort which garnered 155 Republican votes in March. Notably, it included $22 million in projects proposed by her office – the second-highest earmark total of any representative in the state, according to a New York Times analysis.

McMorris Rodgers told Crosscut she voted against the annual budget bill because the price tag was too high – but was unable to point to any specific provisions she opposed.

“I have concerns about the overall increase in spending, record increases in spending that we are seeing from this administration,” McMorris Rodgers said, before pivoting to a criticism of a different bill, the Inflation Reduction Act.

McMorris Rodgers has also escalated her opposition to federal spending in the year since Spokane County hired her brother, Jeff McMorris, to oversee the distribution of more than $100 million in American Rescue Plan money. She said her brother’s experience has not influenced her view of ARPA, she said, calling it “not COVID relief, but just more spending.”

Despite the characterization of ARPA as big-government bloat muscled through on a party-line vote, Republican officials have overseen much of the spending at the local level. Police and jails have been some of the major beneficiaries of ARPA dollars, both in Washington and nationally.

In contrast to Larkin’s inflation ads, Schrier has positioned federal investments in services and infrastructure as bipartisan victories, touting buy-in from local Republicans and highlighting police spending. But other Democrats, such as Murray, have recently sought to reinforce their legislative achievements with appeals to key social issues like abortion access or voting rights.

Travis Ridout, a political advertising researcher at Washington State University, said the hardline positions being dug out on federal spending – even among representatives who benefit from it – partly reflect broader partisan divides.

Campaigning on local issues and bringing resources back to a district may have worked years ago, but gerrymandering has resulted in fewer truly competitive districts, meaning that boosting turnout among the party’s base often matters more than peeling off theoretical swing voters. And that means playing to hot-button national issues.

“It means talking about abortion or the ‘scourge’ of immigration or whatever it is, as opposed to, I brought price supports for farmers in our district, or I got this road repaved,” Ridout said. “If all I need to do is make sure that my people show up to vote, then maybe it doesn’t make sense to talk about actually passing legislation. Maybe I just need to make people mad.”