# data[].attributes.headline
Small City, Big Problems, Too Little Too Late?

# data[].attributes.subject
Small City, Big Problems, Too Little Too Late?

# data[].attributes.body
For a long time Seattle wanted to remain a 'small city.' Well that's just not the case anymore and they're attempting to play catch up. Something you never want to attempt when it comes to infrastructure. Horrendous traffic, exorbitant rent, higher costs to own a home, gentrification, etc. Sure we're a liberal city but there are some very serious hurdles we face moving forward. Over the quarter I'd like to highlight a few of these and provide some insight into how we might go about making an more equitable future for Seattle.
-Michael

# data[].attributes.body
Washington I-1000

If I-1000 initiative, people’s characteristics like race, sex, color, age, national, origin, etc. will use as factors when considering people for education and employment opportunities.
I realized this is a serious problem that is I-1000 really reasonable? Will it effect people’s equal right opportunity.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Washington Initiative 1000, the Affirmative Action and Diversity Commission Measure, was not placed on the ballot in Washington as an Initiative to the Legislature, a type of indirect initiated state statute, on November 5, 2019. The measure was approved by the legislature.

Referendum Measure 88

A veto referendum was filed on April 29, 2019, that would require Initiative 1000, which was approved by the legislature on April 28, 2019, to instead be placed on the 2019 ballot in Washington for a statewide vote of the people for their approval or rejection.

Initiatives to the 2020 legislature

Tim Eyman filed multiple versions of an initiative relating to restoring the ban on affirmative action and preferential treatment as initiatives to the 2020 legislature. Larry Jensen also filed an initiative to the 2020 legislature seeking to overturn I-1000 and restore the ban on affirmative action and preferential treatment.

Initiative 1000 allowed affirmative action without the use of quotas in the state of Washington. This means that characteristics such as race, sex, color, ethnicity, national origin, age, sexual orientation, disability, or veteran status can be used as factors when considering a person for education or employment opportunities. I-1000 bans preferential treatment, meaning those characteristics could not be the sole or deciding factor when considering a person for education or employment opportunities. The measure created the Governor's Commission on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion which is responsible for ensuring compliance with the measure, and is required to issue an annual report on the progress of state agencies in achieving the measure's goal of "guaranteeing every resident of Washington state equal opportunity and access to public education, public employment."

Affirmative action refers to the steps taken by employers and universities to increase the proportions of historically disadvantaged minority groups at those institutions. Historically, affirmative action nationwide has taken many different forms, such as strict quotas, extra outreach efforts, and racial and gender preferences. However, racial quotas in university admissions were banned in a 1978 United States Supreme Court case, Regents of the University of California v. Bakke. To read more about affirmative action in Washington, click here.

Yes on I-1000, also known as the One WA Equality Campaign, led the campaign in support of the measure. The committee reported $209,655.68 in contributions as well as $214,204.45 in expenditures. The campaign also reported outstanding debts totaling $1.34 million.

Washington Asians for Equality led the campaign in opposition to I-1000. Other opponents included Tim Eyman, who sponsored Initiative 200 of 1998, which prohibited affirmative action policies.

Measure design

Washington Initiative 200, approved by voters in 1998, banned discrimination and preferential treatment based on certain characteristics, such as race, sex, and age. Initiative 1000 explicitly allows the state of Washington to implement affirmative action laws and policies while continuing to ban discrimination and preferential treatment. It also defines preferential treatment and affirmative action so that banning one and allowing the other is compatible.

Characteristics included in affirmative action and preferential treatment

I-200 banned discrimination and preferential treatment based on the following characteristics:

I-1000 added the following characteristics to the law:

Sexual orientation

The presence of any sensory, mental, or physical disability

Honorably discharged veteran or military status

I-1000 also allows the state to "remedy discrimination against, or under-representation of, disadvantaged groups as documented in a valid disparity study or proven in a court of law."

Definitions

Under I-1000, preferential treatment is prohibited. I-1000 defines preferential treatment as using one of the characteristics listed above as the sole factor for selecting a lesser-qualified candidate over another.

However, affirmative action is allowed under I-1000. I-1000 defines affirmative action as using one or more of the characteristics listed above (except sexual orientation) as factors when considering a person for education or employment opportunities.

I-1000 defines the terms as follows:

Affirmative action: "A policy in which an individual's race, sex, ethnicity, national origin, age, the presence of any sensory, mental, or physical disability, and honorably discharged veteran or military status are factors considered in the selection of qualified women, honorably discharged military veterans, persons in protected age categories, persons with disabilities, and minorities for opportunities in public education, public employment, and public contracting. Affirmative action includes, but shall not be limited to, recruitment, hiring, training, promotion, outreach, setting and achieving goals and timetables, and other measures designed to increase Washington's diversity in public education, public employment, and public contracting."

Preferential treatment: "The act of using race, sex, color, ethnicity, national origin, age, sexual orientation, the presence of any sensory, mental, or physical disability, and honorably discharged veteran or military status as the sole qualifying factor to select a lesser qualified candidate over a more qualified candidate for a public education, public employment, or public contracting opportunity."

Governor's Commission on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion

The measure also created the Governor's Commission on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, which is responsible for ensuring compliance with the measure and is required to issue an annual report on the progress of state agencies in achieving the goals under the measure.

The stated intent of the measure was to "guarantee every resident of Washington state equal opportunity and access to public education, public employment, and public contracting without discrimination based on their race, sex, color, ethnicity, national origin, age, sexual orientation, the presence of any sensory, mental, or physical disability, or honorably discharged veteran or military status.... accomplished by restoring affirmative action into state law without the use of quotas or preferential treatment; defining the meaning of preferential treatment and its exceptions; and establishing a governor's commission on diversity, equity, and inclusion."

Text of measure

Ballot title

The ballot title for this initiative would have appeared as follows:

Ballot summary

The ballot summary for this initiative would have appeared as follows:

The full text of the measure can be read below. Struck-through text was deleted and underlined text was added:

A Chinese translation of the full text of Initiative 1000 was provided to Ballotpedia by Bruce Huang, an English/Mandarin/Cantonese/Sichuanese Linguist. Click here to read this translation.

Yes on I-1000, also known as the One WA Equality Campaign, led the campaign in support of the measure. Notable supporters include Washington Governor Jay Inslee (D) and the NAACP.

Supporters

Organizations

Following is a list of organizations that have endorsed the Yes on I-1000 campaign.

Washington State Labor Council (WSLC)

Washington State Democratic Central Committee (WSDCC)

Democrats for Diversity and Inclusion (DDI)

El Centro De La Raza

Tabor 100

Greater Seattle Business Association (GSBA)

NAACP

Faith Action Network (FAN)

Washington State Civil Rights Coalition

Tacoma/Pierce County Collective

National Association of Minority Contractors (NAMC)

Martin Luther King County Labor Council

University of Washington President Ana Marie Cauce wrote, "I-200 puts the University of Washington at a competitive disadvantage when seeking to hire the best faculty and staff to lead our University. It also hampers our ability to attract and enroll the strongest students from underrepresented backgrounds, who are so highly sought after by other universities because having a diverse student body creates a richer learning environment for all students. I-200 sends the message that the UW, and Washington as a whole, does not welcome or value diversity, and when we lose out on attracting these desirable teachers, researchers, innovators and administrators, it is our students and our state that pay the price. I-200 also makes it harder to compete for the highest achieving underrepresented minority students in Washington state."

Opposition

Washington Asians for Equality said: "I-200 [passed in 1998] prohibits public institutions from discriminating or granting preferential treatment based on race, sex, color, ethnicity or national origin. I-200 does not end outreach programs, it does not end affirmative action based on helping people who are lower income or economically disadvantaged. [...] Initiative 1000 (I-1000) intends to repeal I-200, and brings back preferential treatment. [...] I-200 is for anti-discrimination. I-1000 is for discrimination!"

Campaign finance

See also: Campaign finance requirements for Washington ballot measures

The campaign finance information on this page was last updated according to the most recent reports available on May 10, 2019.

Ballotpedia identified one committee registered in support of the measure: One WA Equality Campaign. The committee reported $209,655.68 in contributions and $214,204.45 in expenditures. The campaign also reported outstanding debts totaling $1.34 million. The top contributor to the committee was the Puyallup Tribe of Indians which gave $25,000.

Ballotpedia had not identified any committees registered with the Washington Public Disclosure Commission (PDC) to oppose I-1000. If you are aware of a committee registered to oppose this measure, please email editor@ballotpedia.org.

Below are the donors who gave $10,000 or more to the One WA Equality Campaign.

Opposition

Ballotpedia had not identified any committees registered to oppose I-1000 with the Washington Public Disclosure Commission (PDC). If you are aware of a committee registered to oppose this measure, please email editor@ballotpedia.org.

Methodology

To read Ballotpedia's methodology for covering ballot measure campaign finance information, click here.

Background

Affirmative action

Affirmative action in Washington refers to the steps taken by employers and universities in Washington to increase the proportions of historically disadvantaged minority groups at those institutions. Historically, affirmative action nationwide has taken many different forms, such as strict quotas, extra outreach efforts, and racial and gender preferences. However, racial quotas in university admissions were banned in a 1978 United States Supreme Court case, Regents of the University of California v. Bakke. To read more about affirmative action in Washington, click here.

Washington Initiative 200 of 1998

See also: Washington Initiative 200, Ban Preferential Treatment and Discrimination in Public Employment, Education, and Contracting Initiative (1998)

Washington I-200 appeared on the ballot for the election on November 3, 1998. The question was put on the ballot as an Initiative to the Legislature, proposing to ban preferential treatment and discrimination in public education, employment and contracting based on sex, race, and ethnicity. Voters approved the amendment by over 300,000 votes (58.22 percent to 41.78 percent) making Washington the second state to enact such a measure. The approved ballot measure added new sections (1, 2, and 3) to Chapter 49.60 of Washington's state code.

Affirmative action bans in other states

As of 2019, seven states banned race-based affirmative action at all public universities. In Arizona, California, Michigan, Nebraska, and Oklahoma, all bans were passed by voters at the ballot box. In Florida, Governor Jeb Bush created the ban through executive order. In New Hampshire, the legislature passed a bill banning the consideration of race.

The following constitutional amendments prohibited discriminating against or granting preferential treatment to any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting:

The Oklahoma measure was referred to the ballot by the state legislature while the California, Michigan, and Nebraska measures were initiated by citizens.

The Arizona Proposition 107 of 2010, a legislatively referred amendment, banned affirmative action programs in the state that were administered by statewide or local units of government, including state agencies, cities, counties, community colleges, and school districts.

Path to the ballot

The state process

In Washington, the number of signatures required to qualify an indirectly initiated state statute-called an Initiative to the Legislature in Washington-for the ballot is equal to 8 percent of the votes cast for the office of governor at the last regular gubernatorial election. Initial filings for indirect initiatives cannot be made more than 10 months before the regular session at which their proposal would be presented to lawmakers. Signatures must be submitted at least 10 days prior to the beginning of the legislative session in the year of the targeted election.

The requirements to get an Initiative to the Legislature certified for the 2019 ballot:

The secretary of state verifies the signatures using a random sample method. If the sample indicates that the measure has sufficient signatures, the measure is certified to appear before the legislature. If the legislature does not approve the measure, it is certified to appear on the ballot. However, if the sample indicates that the measure has insufficient signatures, every signature is checked. Under Washington law, a random sample result may not invalidate a petition.

Details about this initiative

Nathaniel Jackson submitted this initiative on July 31, 2018. Nathaniel Jackson and Estela Ortega filed similar versions of the measure, Initiatives #981-999, which the sponsors did not circulate petitions for.

A ballot title and summary were issued for Initiative 1000 on August 22, 2018.

Tim Eyman filed a challenge to the ballot title in Thurston County Superior Court. A hearing was expected to take place on October 9, 2018.

The Washington secretary of state's office confirmed to Ballotpedia that sponsors of Initiative 1000 submitted signatures on January 4, 2019.

On February 7, 2019, the measure was certified to the legislature after enough signatures were found to be valid. Proponents submitted 395,938 signatures. Using a random sample method, the secretary of state's office found that 76 percent of the signatures were valid.

Legislative approval

The state legislature approved I-1000 on April 28, 2019, largely along party lines with all votes in favor coming from Democratic legislators. I-1000 was approved in a vote of 56-42 in the House and 26-22 in the Senate. In the House, one Democrat, Brian Blake of District 19b, joined all House Republicans in voting no. Two Senate Democrats, Mark Mullet of District 5 and Tim Sheldon of District 35, joined the 20 Senate Republicans in voting no. Senator Guy Palumbo (D-1) was excused from voting.

External links

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Washington Initiative 1000, Affirmative Action and Diversity Commission Measure (2019) - Ballotpedia

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Washington Initiative 1000, the Affirmative Action and Diversity Commission Measure, was not placed on the ballot in Washington as an Initiative to the Legislature, a type of indirect initiated state statute, on November 5, 2019. The measure was approved by the legislature .

# data[].attributes.body
Washington I-1000
If I-1000 initiative, people’s characteristics like race, sex, color, age, national origin will use as factors when considering people for education and employment opportunities.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Washington Initiative 1000, the Affirmative Action and Diversity Commission Measure, was not placed on the ballot in Washington as an Initiative to the Legislature, a type of indirect initiated state statute, on November 5, 2019. The measure was approved by the legislature.

Referendum Measure 88

A veto referendum was filed on April 29, 2019, that would require Initiative 1000, which was approved by the legislature on April 28, 2019, to instead be placed on the 2019 ballot in Washington for a statewide vote of the people for their approval or rejection.

Initiatives to the 2020 legislature

Tim Eyman filed multiple versions of an initiative relating to restoring the ban on affirmative action and preferential treatment as initiatives to the 2020 legislature. Larry Jensen also filed an initiative to the 2020 legislature seeking to overturn I-1000 and restore the ban on affirmative action and preferential treatment.

Initiative 1000 allowed affirmative action without the use of quotas in the state of Washington. This means that characteristics such as race, sex, color, ethnicity, national origin, age, sexual orientation, disability, or veteran status can be used as factors when considering a person for education or employment opportunities. I-1000 bans preferential treatment, meaning those characteristics could not be the sole or deciding factor when considering a person for education or employment opportunities. The measure created the Governor's Commission on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion which is responsible for ensuring compliance with the measure, and is required to issue an annual report on the progress of state agencies in achieving the measure's goal of "guaranteeing every resident of Washington state equal opportunity and access to public education, public employment."

Affirmative action refers to the steps taken by employers and universities to increase the proportions of historically disadvantaged minority groups at those institutions. Historically, affirmative action nationwide has taken many different forms, such as strict quotas, extra outreach efforts, and racial and gender preferences. However, racial quotas in university admissions were banned in a 1978 United States Supreme Court case, Regents of the University of California v. Bakke. To read more about affirmative action in Washington, click here.

Yes on I-1000, also known as the One WA Equality Campaign, led the campaign in support of the measure. The committee reported $209,655.68 in contributions as well as $214,204.45 in expenditures. The campaign also reported outstanding debts totaling $1.34 million.

Washington Asians for Equality led the campaign in opposition to I-1000. Other opponents included Tim Eyman, who sponsored Initiative 200 of 1998, which prohibited affirmative action policies.

Measure design

Washington Initiative 200, approved by voters in 1998, banned discrimination and preferential treatment based on certain characteristics, such as race, sex, and age. Initiative 1000 explicitly allows the state of Washington to implement affirmative action laws and policies while continuing to ban discrimination and preferential treatment. It also defines preferential treatment and affirmative action so that banning one and allowing the other is compatible.

Characteristics included in affirmative action and preferential treatment

I-200 banned discrimination and preferential treatment based on the following characteristics:

I-1000 added the following characteristics to the law:

Sexual orientation

The presence of any sensory, mental, or physical disability

Honorably discharged veteran or military status

I-1000 also allows the state to "remedy discrimination against, or under-representation of, disadvantaged groups as documented in a valid disparity study or proven in a court of law."

Definitions

Under I-1000, preferential treatment is prohibited. I-1000 defines preferential treatment as using one of the characteristics listed above as the sole factor for selecting a lesser-qualified candidate over another.

However, affirmative action is allowed under I-1000. I-1000 defines affirmative action as using one or more of the characteristics listed above (except sexual orientation) as factors when considering a person for education or employment opportunities.

I-1000 defines the terms as follows:

Affirmative action: "A policy in which an individual's race, sex, ethnicity, national origin, age, the presence of any sensory, mental, or physical disability, and honorably discharged veteran or military status are factors considered in the selection of qualified women, honorably discharged military veterans, persons in protected age categories, persons with disabilities, and minorities for opportunities in public education, public employment, and public contracting. Affirmative action includes, but shall not be limited to, recruitment, hiring, training, promotion, outreach, setting and achieving goals and timetables, and other measures designed to increase Washington's diversity in public education, public employment, and public contracting."

Preferential treatment: "The act of using race, sex, color, ethnicity, national origin, age, sexual orientation, the presence of any sensory, mental, or physical disability, and honorably discharged veteran or military status as the sole qualifying factor to select a lesser qualified candidate over a more qualified candidate for a public education, public employment, or public contracting opportunity."

Governor's Commission on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion

The measure also created the Governor's Commission on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, which is responsible for ensuring compliance with the measure and is required to issue an annual report on the progress of state agencies in achieving the goals under the measure.

The stated intent of the measure was to "guarantee every resident of Washington state equal opportunity and access to public education, public employment, and public contracting without discrimination based on their race, sex, color, ethnicity, national origin, age, sexual orientation, the presence of any sensory, mental, or physical disability, or honorably discharged veteran or military status.... accomplished by restoring affirmative action into state law without the use of quotas or preferential treatment; defining the meaning of preferential treatment and its exceptions; and establishing a governor's commission on diversity, equity, and inclusion."

Text of measure

Ballot title

The ballot title for this initiative would have appeared as follows:

Ballot summary

The ballot summary for this initiative would have appeared as follows:

The full text of the measure can be read below. Struck-through text was deleted and underlined text was added:

A Chinese translation of the full text of Initiative 1000 was provided to Ballotpedia by Bruce Huang, an English/Mandarin/Cantonese/Sichuanese Linguist. Click here to read this translation.

Yes on I-1000, also known as the One WA Equality Campaign, led the campaign in support of the measure. Notable supporters include Washington Governor Jay Inslee (D) and the NAACP.

Supporters

Organizations

Following is a list of organizations that have endorsed the Yes on I-1000 campaign.

Washington State Labor Council (WSLC)

Washington State Democratic Central Committee (WSDCC)

Democrats for Diversity and Inclusion (DDI)

El Centro De La Raza

Tabor 100

Greater Seattle Business Association (GSBA)

NAACP

Faith Action Network (FAN)

Washington State Civil Rights Coalition

Tacoma/Pierce County Collective

National Association of Minority Contractors (NAMC)

Martin Luther King County Labor Council

University of Washington President Ana Marie Cauce wrote, "I-200 puts the University of Washington at a competitive disadvantage when seeking to hire the best faculty and staff to lead our University. It also hampers our ability to attract and enroll the strongest students from underrepresented backgrounds, who are so highly sought after by other universities because having a diverse student body creates a richer learning environment for all students. I-200 sends the message that the UW, and Washington as a whole, does not welcome or value diversity, and when we lose out on attracting these desirable teachers, researchers, innovators and administrators, it is our students and our state that pay the price. I-200 also makes it harder to compete for the highest achieving underrepresented minority students in Washington state."

Opposition

Washington Asians for Equality said: "I-200 [passed in 1998] prohibits public institutions from discriminating or granting preferential treatment based on race, sex, color, ethnicity or national origin. I-200 does not end outreach programs, it does not end affirmative action based on helping people who are lower income or economically disadvantaged. [...] Initiative 1000 (I-1000) intends to repeal I-200, and brings back preferential treatment. [...] I-200 is for anti-discrimination. I-1000 is for discrimination!"

Campaign finance

See also: Campaign finance requirements for Washington ballot measures

The campaign finance information on this page was last updated according to the most recent reports available on May 10, 2019.

Ballotpedia identified one committee registered in support of the measure: One WA Equality Campaign. The committee reported $209,655.68 in contributions and $214,204.45 in expenditures. The campaign also reported outstanding debts totaling $1.34 million. The top contributor to the committee was the Puyallup Tribe of Indians which gave $25,000.

Ballotpedia had not identified any committees registered with the Washington Public Disclosure Commission (PDC) to oppose I-1000. If you are aware of a committee registered to oppose this measure, please email editor@ballotpedia.org.

Below are the donors who gave $10,000 or more to the One WA Equality Campaign.

Opposition

Ballotpedia had not identified any committees registered to oppose I-1000 with the Washington Public Disclosure Commission (PDC). If you are aware of a committee registered to oppose this measure, please email editor@ballotpedia.org.

Methodology

To read Ballotpedia's methodology for covering ballot measure campaign finance information, click here.

Background

Affirmative action

Affirmative action in Washington refers to the steps taken by employers and universities in Washington to increase the proportions of historically disadvantaged minority groups at those institutions. Historically, affirmative action nationwide has taken many different forms, such as strict quotas, extra outreach efforts, and racial and gender preferences. However, racial quotas in university admissions were banned in a 1978 United States Supreme Court case, Regents of the University of California v. Bakke. To read more about affirmative action in Washington, click here.

Washington Initiative 200 of 1998

See also: Washington Initiative 200, Ban Preferential Treatment and Discrimination in Public Employment, Education, and Contracting Initiative (1998)

Washington I-200 appeared on the ballot for the election on November 3, 1998. The question was put on the ballot as an Initiative to the Legislature, proposing to ban preferential treatment and discrimination in public education, employment and contracting based on sex, race, and ethnicity. Voters approved the amendment by over 300,000 votes (58.22 percent to 41.78 percent) making Washington the second state to enact such a measure. The approved ballot measure added new sections (1, 2, and 3) to Chapter 49.60 of Washington's state code.

Affirmative action bans in other states

As of 2019, seven states banned race-based affirmative action at all public universities. In Arizona, California, Michigan, Nebraska, and Oklahoma, all bans were passed by voters at the ballot box. In Florida, Governor Jeb Bush created the ban through executive order. In New Hampshire, the legislature passed a bill banning the consideration of race.

The following constitutional amendments prohibited discriminating against or granting preferential treatment to any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting:

The Oklahoma measure was referred to the ballot by the state legislature while the California, Michigan, and Nebraska measures were initiated by citizens.

The Arizona Proposition 107 of 2010, a legislatively referred amendment, banned affirmative action programs in the state that were administered by statewide or local units of government, including state agencies, cities, counties, community colleges, and school districts.

Path to the ballot

The state process

In Washington, the number of signatures required to qualify an indirectly initiated state statute-called an Initiative to the Legislature in Washington-for the ballot is equal to 8 percent of the votes cast for the office of governor at the last regular gubernatorial election. Initial filings for indirect initiatives cannot be made more than 10 months before the regular session at which their proposal would be presented to lawmakers. Signatures must be submitted at least 10 days prior to the beginning of the legislative session in the year of the targeted election.

The requirements to get an Initiative to the Legislature certified for the 2019 ballot:

The secretary of state verifies the signatures using a random sample method. If the sample indicates that the measure has sufficient signatures, the measure is certified to appear before the legislature. If the legislature does not approve the measure, it is certified to appear on the ballot. However, if the sample indicates that the measure has insufficient signatures, every signature is checked. Under Washington law, a random sample result may not invalidate a petition.

Details about this initiative

Nathaniel Jackson submitted this initiative on July 31, 2018. Nathaniel Jackson and Estela Ortega filed similar versions of the measure, Initiatives #981-999, which the sponsors did not circulate petitions for.

A ballot title and summary were issued for Initiative 1000 on August 22, 2018.

Tim Eyman filed a challenge to the ballot title in Thurston County Superior Court. A hearing was expected to take place on October 9, 2018.

The Washington secretary of state's office confirmed to Ballotpedia that sponsors of Initiative 1000 submitted signatures on January 4, 2019.

On February 7, 2019, the measure was certified to the legislature after enough signatures were found to be valid. Proponents submitted 395,938 signatures. Using a random sample method, the secretary of state's office found that 76 percent of the signatures were valid.

Legislative approval

The state legislature approved I-1000 on April 28, 2019, largely along party lines with all votes in favor coming from Democratic legislators. I-1000 was approved in a vote of 56-42 in the House and 26-22 in the Senate. In the House, one Democrat, Brian Blake of District 19b, joined all House Republicans in voting no. Two Senate Democrats, Mark Mullet of District 5 and Tim Sheldon of District 35, joined the 20 Senate Republicans in voting no. Senator Guy Palumbo (D-1) was excused from voting.

External links

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Washington Initiative 1000, Affirmative Action and Diversity Commission Measure (2019) - Ballotpedia

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Washington Initiative 1000, the Affirmative Action and Diversity Commission Measure, was not placed on the ballot in Washington as an Initiative to the Legislature, a type of indirect initiated state statute, on November 5, 2019. The measure was approved by the legislature .

# data[].attributes.headline
Spike in white supremacy movement in the pacific northwest, extremism, and social media

# data[].attributes.subject
Spike in white supremacy movement in the pacific northwest, extremism, and social media

# data[].attributes.body
There is a spike in white supremacy and the far right movement in the pacific northwest. What is interesting is that the pacific northwest is generally considered to be a very liberal and progressive area of the United States. So I want to investigate the question on why there would be a spike in this area with a focus on how extremism in one political direction may cause extremism in another. A lot of the people who are part of this movement are millennial, and I find that very fascinating because that isn't the general stereotype associated with Millennial. I want to further look at social media and how it has been used as a tool for white supremacy, and then specifically how it affects the pacific Northwest.

--Arjun

Two articles:

link 1: https://www.seattlemag.com/knute-berger-column/progressive-northwest-white-supremacists-think-its-perfect-place-sow-hatred

link 2:

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
White supremacy, far-right politics spike in Idaho and the Pacific Northwest

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
At least 9 hate groups were identified along the Idaho-Washington border in 2018.

# data[].attributes.body
Many Seattleites are unaware that there is a growing problem regarding human trafficking in Seattle. The media coverage around these issues are little to none, so many people don’t think about human trafficking as a major issue here. Due to this lack of awareness we need to spread the news and make people aware that this is happening in our city.

Washington is a hotspot for human trafficking due to the fact that it’s one of the top ports in the US, it’s close proximity to Canada, and it’s long range of rural areas. Although it's a sensitive topic, I think it's important that we become aware of these problems so that we are able to take necessary preventative measures to stop human trafficking.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
What is human trafficking?

Federal law defines severe human trafficking as:

Sex trafficking in which a commercial sex act is induced by force, coercion or in which the person induced to perform such an act is under 18.

The recruitment, transportation, harboring, provision, or obtaining of a person for labor or services (link to "labor" tab), through the use of force, fraud or coercion, for the purposes of subjecting that person to involuntary servitude, peonage, debt bondage or slavery.

Human trafficking is the fastest growing criminal industry in the world today. This form of modern day slavery is tied with arms as the second largest international criminal industry - behind drug dealing.

The U.S. Dept. of Justice estimates that between 14,500 and 17,500 people are trafficked into the country each year.

History of the Anti-Human Trafficking Movement

In the mid-1990s, Susana Remerata Blackwell, Helen Clemente and Anastasia King, three immigrant women of color, came forward to share stories of mail order-brides/foreign brides being beaten, exploited and murdered. The then State Representative Velma Veloria, Dr. Sutapa Basu, Executive Director of the UW Women's Center, and Emma Catague, Community Organizing Program Manager at Asian & Pacific Islander (API) CHAYA (formerly Women and Family Safety Center), together set out to examine and end this emerging pattern, which was going unaddressed.

In 2001, under Dr. Basu's leadership, the UW Women's Center hosted the first ever anti-human trafficking conference in the state, which was attended by over 300 participants and where the issues around human trafficking within Washington State were brought forth, including the recognition of bride trafficking. In 2003, then Representative Velma Veloria sponsored the historic House Bill (HB) 1175. With the support of her colleagues in both Chambers of the State Legislature, Washington set the stage for the local and national anti-trafficking movement by becoming the first State in the nation to criminalize human trafficking. Since then, 50 States have replicated and instituted similar bills, launching a national movement.

It's Happening Here in Washington

Washington's Task Force Against Trafficking of Persons reports our state is a hotbed for the recruitment, transportation and sale of people for labor. The report indicates several factors make Washington prone to human trafficking:

International border with Canada

Abundance of ports

Vast rural areas

Dependency on agricultural workers

Seattle is part of a trafficking circuit that can include Honolulu, Las Vegas, New Orleans, Portland, Vancouver (Clark County), Yakima and Canada.

The report also notes that trafficking has occurred in 18 Washington state counties.

Victims range from "mail-order" brides to sex workers to domestic workers and children.

Local victims have come as far as Russia, the Philippines, China and Mexico.

Working together to fight this crime

In 2003, Washington was the first state to pass a law criminalizing human trafficking and we have the most stringent law in the country.

Under the law, it's a serious felony to recruit, harbor, transport or obtain any person for labor or services using force, fraud or coercion. That includes sex trafficking and other forms of forced labor, from domestic servitude to sweatshop work.

Unfortunately by 2008, no known charges had been filed under the law. The Attorney General's Office became involved in this issue through work on domestic violence. At the AG's Office, we learned the law wasn't being used because victims of human trafficking were not being recognized as such. Rather, they were being seen as victims of other crimes, such as domestic violence and sexual assault.

AGO Human Trafficking Roundtable

In April 2008, the Attorney General's Office convened a roundtable of legislative, law enforcement and social services leaders well-versed in the issue of human trafficking to determine ways to integrate efforts.

Our work is ongoing but we continue to seek a comprehensive approach to victims services, addressing:

Language barriers

Lack of awareness of services

Fear and suspicion of law enforcement

Acknowledgment

The Attorney General's Office would like to provide a special thank you to the following national, state and local government and organizations. They have generously provided us with advice, research assistance, resources, and given us permission to link to their materials.

News

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Federal law defines severe human trafficking as: Sex trafficking in which a commercial sex act is induced by force, coercion or in which the person induced to perform such an act is under 18.

# data[].attributes.body
I find gentrification is directly related to the decrease of culture and community in targeted groups and find the process of gentrification interesting. Most people have heard of gentrification but not many know how prevalent it is right here in cap hill. I think it will be interesting to delve into this and learn more about our impact on the communities and their impact on the environment.
-Vandela

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In the 1980s, I came to Seattle every summer as a child. My mother's church had its sister church on 16th and Fir in the Central District. My next experience of the Central District was when I moved to Seattle in 1990. I lived in a six-bedroom house where I was renting a room with my one-year-old son for $300 a month.

In 2008, my mother became homebound, and doctor's orders were that she no longer live alone. We made the decision to rent a house together. That year the economy crashed in the US. Car lots in Seattle were closing down faster than the current cranes climb the skies.

In Seattle, landowners were having a hard time renting houses, so costs plummeted. My mother and I scored a five-bedroom house in Greenwood. It was so good during those years. Life was affordable, doable, and hopeful. In 2012, I noticed a shift. My landlord raised my rent $100. I was shocked at first.

That year I also had an art exhibit at EMP. The theme was gentrification in the CD. At the time, I understood what it meant theoretically, but looking back, I had no idea about the impact that was to come. In 2015, I severed my Achilles tendon, I lost my job, my mother went into a nursing home, and I had to figure out what I was going to do. I survived for about five months until my landlord raised the rent $150, after consistently raising it $100 for several years.

My daughter grew up here, was born here, all her friends and family are here. I started looking at housing outside of Washington. Then I got a phone call. My name had come up on the waitlist for artist housing. I had forgotten that I had even signed up-after all, it had been six-and-a-half years since I placed my name on that list, and I had done it as a bucket list kind of thing. I was so lucky and blessed to have been offered that opportunity.

Last year, I was on 16th and Fir working on an art project. It took me about an hour before I realized we were where a corner store owned by an African family had been when I was a child. I used to take breaks from my church across the street and run in to buy candy. It took me another two hours to realize that in the entire time we had been working, not once did I see an African American person walk by. Then I noticed in the same building, right next door, a young white couple was moving in. They looked at me as if I didn't belong there. I was shocked.

Then my dearest friends began leaving Seattle. I started counting how many of my friends left or were about to leave and became very sad. It's funny-you don't realize how important your community is until it's gone. Sometimes it's hard to stay here because so much has shifted. Being able to drive from the north end of downtown Seattle to the south end in 10 minutes, eating a meal for under $10, and knowing where you're at without strange buildings popping up out of nowhere are all things of the past. Some would say this about the Central District.

Now I work for the HCAACD (Historic Central Area Arts & Cultural District), and the only reason I am there is because artist housing saved my family from being gentrified right out of Seattle. The best part about being at the HCAACD is that I get to advocate for African/African American artists, and that means helping to preserve African/African American legacy, place, and vitality.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Gentrification and Displacement in Seattle Neighborhoods | ARCADE | Dialogue on Design

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In the 1980s, I came to Seattle every summer as a child. My mother's church had its sister church on 16th and Fir in the Central District. My next experience of the Central District was when I moved to Seattle in 1990.

# data[].attributes.body
The wildfires in the Northwest is becoming hard for the federal agencies to respond to the damages the occur in the region. The climate change is not the reason that starts the fire; however, it helps expand the fire across the area. These issues affect the people living near the wildland fires since they are forced to evacuate their homes in order to prevent any humanitarian issues. Legislators have been looking for several solutions that reduces these catastrophes, such as decreasing the "overall carbon emissions."
-Mohammed

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
When wildfires broke out and blanketed much of Washington State with a thick layer of smoke earlier this year, the typically bright blue skies of summer in Seattle contained a peach-orange sun-and some of the worst air quality in the world.

In response, some residents took unusual measures-such as using fans to blow smoke back toward Canada, whence it had come. Or throwing rocks at the smoke. Though intended to elicit laughs, these actions indicate how helpless Washingtonians have felt about the thick gray clouds from the so-called megafires that have burned more than 100,000 acres of their state this year.

"Fire is no stranger to the Evergreen State, historically," says Reese Lolley, director of forest restoration and fire for The Nature Conservancy in Washington. Lightning set off blazes in the Northwest's great conifer forests, and Northwest tribes have extensively used fire for shaping the land.

But the fires of today are larger and more difficult to control than those of the past-and scientists point to climate change as a culprit. Although "climate change doesn't start fires," as Angus Duncan, chair of the Oregon Global Warming Commission, points out, it extends the fire season and amplifies damage by supplying dry, fire-prone forests. In the Pacific Northwest, impacts from climate change can also come in the form of " wet drought." The phenomenon is triggered when warmer winter temperatures cause precipitation to fall as rain rather than snow, diminishing the high-altitude snowpack. By the time spring comes, the moisture that would have stayed trapped until then on frozen mountainsides has all but disappeared, denying the state a critical source of surface water and forcing it to endure a long, dry summer. A 2016 report published by the National Academy of Sciences showed that these impacts of human-caused climate change doubled the cumulative forest fire area between 1984 and 2015, when an additional 10.4 million acres burned.

Adding to the growing forest fire risk, as Duncan notes, is the fact that wildland ecosystems have been poorly managed for a century or more, subject to massive selective logging of their large, fire resistant trees. Heavy grazing has also changed natural vegetation in ways that can make fires more destructive to the landscape. And people have built homes and developments farther into flammable landscapes-complicating firefighters' response efforts. Expanding roads and the use of off-road vehicles deeper into the backcountry has also increased fire starts in some places.

In Washington alone, an estimated 4.1 million acres burned from 2000 to 2017, according to the state's Department of Natural Resources (DNR). The human toll has been grave, with lives and homes lost and millions spent on suppression and recovery. A recently released study notes that thousands of illnesses and premature deaths may occur due to particulates released into the air by U.S. fires.

Wildland fires are a "rolling disaster," according to Hilary Lundgren of Washington Fire Adapted Communities Learning Network, a coalition of 13 communities sharing knowledge on what works (and what doesn't) in terms of wildfire prevention, preparedness, response, and recovery.

"We're sharing best practices and our fantastic failures," Lundgren says. "This is hard. Fires are a natural part of our ecosystem, which relies on fire as part of its life cycle. We're taking the next step in creating a cultural and social shift to adapt to the reality and natural frequency of fire."

Nurturing Forest Resiliency

In some ways, the billows of wildfire smoke capturing public attention have helped heighten awareness of the need for climate action in Washington and beyond. "The catastrophic implications of climate change are hard to convey, but when there are visible, tangible, and immediate effects, it can move people," Duncan says.

On the other hand, the blazes have given any kind of fire on the landscape an exclusively bad name. "We don't want an overreaction that would redefine all forest fires as bad," Duncan says. Clamping down could lead to fire suppression efforts that have proved damaging over the long haul, ultimately making wildlands more prone to major conflagration. As an NRDC report on the health hazards of wildfire smoke notes, prematurely putting out small fires that could have cleared away undergrowth leaves some forests clogged with highly flammable small trees and shrubs. Unnecessarily suppressing them can increase the risks of subsequent fires being bigger and harder to control.

To keep this forest growth in check, ecologists also advise setting prescribed fires under carefully controlled conditions, usually in the spring and fall outside the wildfire window. Not only does prescribed fire reduce risk of out-of-control wildfire, proponents say; it also created healthier, stronger, and more diverse forests that can better withstand threats like insects and disease.

In 2016 the Washington State Legislature passed House Bill 2928, the Forest Resiliency Burning Pilot project, which began a program of prescribed burns. The prescribed burn teams work with air quality regulators to minimize smoke levels and the respiratory impacts on surrounding communities. Duncan notes that the forest and fire managers who are implementing these burns while grappling with increasing human settlement, the impacts of decades of fire suppression, and climate change, "are doing impossible jobs."

Thinning or Profiting?

Near areas of human habitation, forestry science suggests both prescribed fire and complementary tree thinning. But the latter can be problematic when "thinning" is conflated with commercial logging. Timber harvesting releases more carbon emissions than megafire smoke, according to one recent study conducted in the Pacific Northwest. Yet the U.S. Forest Service's budget is augmented by timber sales-and the agency is often motivated to make timber projects attractive to commercial timber producers.

It is profits, of course, that motivate timber producers, even when they operate in the name of forest health. When asked to thin danger zones by removing small, quick-ignite saplings and other potential "fuel," the companies sometimes also request to harvest a number of trees that are of marketable size. Ironically, those tend to be the trunks strong enough to withstand a blaze.

Duncan points out that federal efforts to restore forest health should prioritize healthy management practices-not clear-cutting. Wise long-term preservation and management of temperate forests from California to Alaska, and beyond, also aid in the battle against climate change. After all, th e forests absorb as much as 30 percent global of carbon emissions.

Adapting to Fire

Minimizing fires has long been the responsibility of local, state, or federal authorities. But new approaches also increasingly rely on building codes and homeowners, Lolley notes. Some vulnerable Pacific Northwest homeowners are making concerted efforts to prevent fire's spread-whether by choice or because state laws and fire insurance policies require adaptations.

In the central Oregon town where Duncan makes his home, regulations require owners to perform what's called "defensive space" maintenance. This involves such measures as raking up pine needles within 40 to 50 feet of a house and removing small trees that could "ladder" fire into the tops of larger trees. Meanwhile, in several communities in eastern Washington, local fire departments, conservation districts, and collaborative coalitions will conduct free, in-depth inspections to assess a home's risk of burning. They may suggest modifications as simple as moving a woodpile away from the home or as complex as replacing a roof. In some circumstances, state aid can help with costs.

Convincing communities of the necessity of these preparations can be difficult, Lundgren says. But they are essential-as is a road map of actions to take to recover after a fire, such as coordinating with local organizations to designate spokespeople and donation managers, and creating disaster plans that accelerate community healing.

While some fires will qualify for federal aid, others won't. "The loss in rural communities may not be significant at the scale necessary to qualify for assistance," Lundgren says, "but loss is loss."

Three years after Washington's raging Okonogan Complex fire, nonprofits, businesses, community members, and volunteers are still erecting frames for houses and replacing lost belongings from garden hoses to teddy bears. They're also building a tourist-friendly map of the "fire shaped landscape " that resulted from the big burn.

The Bigger Picture

In response to recent megafires, the Washington DNR is taking the long view and has already developed a 20-Year Forest Health Strategic Plan for eastern Washington. The plan takes an "all lands, all hands" multi-partner approach and includes "landscape prescriptions" for watershed mosaics of private, state, and federal lands and support for homeowners in reducing risks.

Meanwhile, in Oregon, legislators are considering measures that would help mitigate the main culprit of raging wildfires: climate change. A new Carbon Policy Office is considering how carbon sequestration in state forests can play an offset role in reducing energy and industrial greenhouse gas emissions. A "carbon cap and invest" bill similar to one passed in California has also been under consideration by Oregon's state legislature to decrease overall carbon emissions. "Oregon forests alone contain the equivalent of 10 or 11 billion tons of carbon dioxide," Duncan says.

On the Washington State ballot this November, Initiative 1631-also known as the Protect Washington Act -proposes collecting a pollution-reduction fee from "large emitters, based on the carbon content of fossil fuels and electricity . . . sold or used within this state." Among other actions, funds will be earmarked to boost the climate-change resiliency of state forests. If the initiative passes, it will be a national first in putting a direct price on carbon.

In the meantime, adaptation, unfortunately, will remain necessary. "This is the new normal," Lundgren says.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
In the Pacific Northwest, Testing Out New Wildfire Defenses on the Front Lines

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
When wildfires broke out and blanketed much of Washington State with a thick layer of smoke earlier this year, the typically bright blue skies of summer in Seattle contained a peach-orange sun-and some of the worst air quality in the world.

# data[].attributes.headline
PNW's Decrease in Salmon Genetic Diversity

# data[].attributes.subject
PNW's Decrease in Salmon Genetic Diversity

# data[].attributes.body
I think this report of a decrease in genetic diversity for the Chinook Salmon species is important as a reflection of climate change. These fish are trying and failing to be able to keep up with environmental changes and the adaptations that must be made for stream habitat loss and overfishing. With a loss of genetic diversity I think it is very possible to consider endangerment of the species in the near future. If this is happening for a "common" species like a salmon, I can't imagine the ways our other animals will/are affected as well.
-Jessica

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Chinook salmon, an iconic species in the Pacific Northwest, have lost up to two-thirds of their genetic diversity over the past 7000 years, researchers report. The finding underscores a long-held concern that future salmon populations are imperiled by a combination of stream habitat loss, overfishing, dams, and the release of millions of fingerlings from hatcheries-even as the fish try to respond to climate change and ocean acidification.

"It's a fascinating report," says Matthew Sloat, a fisheries ecologist with the Wild Salmon Center, a nonprofit salmon conservation group in Portland, Oregon. "The main conclusion is not terribly surprising," he says, but "it does confirm a long-standing guess that there has been a broad loss of genetic diversity in the [Columbia River] Basin."

Genetic diversity is often key to enabling a species to adapt to changing environmental conditions. In salmon, for example, some individuals or populations might carry genes that make them less susceptible to new diseases or warming seas, enabling the species to survive the loss of other genetic strains.

In Chinook salmon, part of the diversity loss is undoubtedly the result of an overall decline in Chinook populations. From the late 1880s through the early 1920s as much as 11 million kilograms of Chinook were harvested each year. That number has dropped to about 2 million kilograms per year today. But roughly half of these fish originate in hatcheries that release fingerlings that are far more genetically similar than wild populations. Other factors have also contributed to the loss of diverse wild salmon populations, including destruction of stream habitats, water diversions for agriculture, and the construction of more than 400 dams across the Columbia River Basin and its main tributary, the Snake River. The dams prevent salmon from reaching more than half of the river system's spawning habitat.

To quantify just how much genetic diversity Chinook have lost, researchers at Washington State University (WSU) in Pullman and the University of Oklahoma (OU) in Norman turned to ancient DNA. Working with several Native American tribes, they collected a trove of 346 samples of vertebrae from archaeological sites at Native American garbage piles, or middens, some dating back 7000 years. They then analyzed each sample's mitochondrial DNA, which is typically more abundant-and thus easier to recover-from archaeological samples than nuclear DNA. Initially they looked for genetic markers that indicated the vertebrae came from Chinook salmon, says Bobbi Johnson of WSU, who carried out the analysis as part of her doctoral work. Next, they measured how much the DNA varied within the archaeological samples, in order to determine the number of distinct lineages in each regional population. In a final step, they compared the diversity in past lineages with that found in 379 contemporary salmon samples.

The work confirmed that "there was a lot of genetic diversity present ... prior to when Europeans arrived," Johnson says. Chinook DNA from archaeological samples from the Spokane River, for example, revealed that the river once contained six separate lineages of Chinook, which is more than any single fishery stock held in the contemporary samples. In all, the study, published today in PLOS ONE, revealed that Columbia River Chinook have lost two-thirds of their genetic diversity, whereas the diversity of Snake River fish has declined by one-third.

It is not clear exactly what accounts for the difference between the two basins, or the overall decline. One likely factor has been the dams, but the researchers were unable to retrieve enough salmon DNA from samples archived just prior to the installation of dams to nail down the impact.

The diversity loss could be problematic as fish populations try to adapt to changing river and ocean conditions brought on by climate change and ocean acidification. "The abundance, health, and resilience of salmonids is driven by local adaptations" to specific environmental conditions, says Guido Rahr, Wild Salmon Center's president and CEO. The question now, says Brian Kemp, an ancient DNA expert at OU and one of the study's team members: "Is the environment changing faster than these [salmon] can keep up?"

doi:10.1126/science.aas9695

Bob is a news reporter for Science in Portland, Oregon, covering chemistry, materials science, and energy stories.

More from News

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Pacific Northwest salmon are in big genetic trouble

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Chinook salmon, an iconic species in the Pacific Northwest, have lost up to two-thirds of their genetic diversity over the past 7000 years, researchers report. The finding underscores a long-held concern that future salmon populations are imperiled by a combination of stream habitat loss, overfishing, dams, and the release of millions of fingerlings from hatcheries-even as the fish try to respond to climate change and ocean acidification.

# data[].attributes.body
Seattle homeless management has always been one of the tough challenges facing the city. Of the more than 800 homeless people surveyed, 3% said they came to Seattle to experience homeless services/benefits. One in four people said they grew up here, but nearly one in three said they had been homeless in less than five years. The root cause of vagrancy is poverty. Studies have shown that a large proportion of adult vagrants have been homeless since childhood. At the same time, rich people may also be homeless. In the Los Angeles homeless study, homeless people can even be predicted. When single men, Afro-Americans, low wages, unstable jobs and high-mobility workers are available, they will face homelessness when they lose their jobs at an old age.
-Jiajing Huang

# data[].attributes.body
Professor Schoettmer here. This part of the assignment is graded as part 1 of the scaffold project. There seemed to be a bit of confusion about that, so I thought I would clarify.

# data[].attributes.body
A recent federal report found that Seattle has the largest homeless population outside of Los Angeles and New York. This is an important problem to me because, as a local, I encounter and see lots of homeless people everyday. Tents and tarps line the side of the highway and there is no end in sight. There are a several reasons why the homeless population in the Seattle area is so large (as shown in the article attached) but as a local, I have not seen much initiative to fix the problem. -Vi

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Every year in the weeks after the One Night Count of homelessness, surveyors head into King County's shelters, camps and streets with clipboards and sleeves of socks to persuade a representative sample of homeless people to talk.

They ask such things as where they're from and their sexual orientation. They also ask homeless people to diagnose their houseless state, choosing from a range of causes, from eviction to mental illness to an argument with a family member.

Years ago, this was a "check all that apply" question, said Peter Connery, vice president of Applied Survey Research, the California-based company that administers the survey for King County. But that produced a "muddle" of answers, so they changed the question to, "What do you think is the primary event or condition that led to your homelessness?" The final bits of data are just now trickling in from this year's survey, whose results will be released in May, Connery said.

It's also a question Seattle Timesreaders frequently ask. Continuing our Ask Project homeless series, we picked one such question - "What is the estimated breakdown of people who are primarily homeless because of economic reasons, drugs and alcohol, mental health, or other reasons?"

It's a hard question even for homeless people to answer, but it's also one researchers are exploring.

That survey Connery oversees provides a simple but incomplete answer to that question, because no one is ever homeless for one reason.

But when asked to pick, the biggest reasons people cited last year were losing a job, alcohol or drug addiction, and eviction.
The common denominator
This question is often on students' minds at Seattle Pacific University, where a local tent city is hosted on and off. Karen Snedker, a sociologist at SPU who studies homeless camps, tries her best to answer it.

"What I often tell my students is, there are different pathways - economics, housing, mental health, substance abuse - but the common denominator is poverty," Snedker said.

Adults who are homeless report higher rates of being homeless as a child, studies show. It's not impossible for richer people to fall into homelessness, although wealth can help people weather these storms or move in with family.

But poverty is just the starting point for homelessness. It's always poverty and something else, argues Thomas Main, a political scientist and author of "Homelessness in New York City: Policymaking from Koch to de Blasio."

"It's tricky to say things like, 'Oh, this person became homeless because of mental illness or alcoholism' but somebody else became homeless because they couldn't afford the rent. ... You can be alcoholic or mentally ill and housed, right?" Main said. "It's a mistake to say either the problem is caused by individual disabilities or it's caused by structural problems. It's always a mix."

In Seattle, for instance, people with mental illness and drug dependency used to have somewhere to stay, in ultracheap places like the famous Ozark Hotel, a single-room-occupancy hotel on Westlake Avenue.

Today, many of those rooming houses are gone. The Ozark burned down in 1970, and other hotels like it were deemed fire hazards and shut down. Combined with gentrification, an estimated 15,622 housing units disappeared in the downtown area between 1960 and 1980. They and other cheap housing were replaced over the next decades with much more expensive places to live in downtown. But the homeless people stayed.

Researchers often look at homelessness more like a condition with risk factors, many of which go back to childhood. One study from Seattle released in 2002 found roughly half of homeless youth had been physically abused and almost a third had been sexually abused.

Researchers can even predict homelessness by looking at some of these risk factors. Los Angeles' Economic Roundtable looked at records of more than a million homeless people - nearly everyone who was homeless in L.A. County over 15 years - and tried to predict homelessness in an upcoming report.

They found that risk of becoming consistently homeless is worse for single men, African-Americans, and workers in low-wage or inconsistent jobs with high turnover. Workers at temp agencies were the most at risk. The chance of becoming homeless gets worse if people lose a job when they're older, at least up to 55.

Around 8 percent of the working poor who lose a job in L.A. become persistently homeless, said Daniel Flaming, president of Economic Roundtable, a nonprofit think-tank.

"These are people who've maybe been working-class people throughout their lives, and the economy leaves them behind," Flaming said.

When King County's new homelessness survey comes out in May, systemic issues like poverty and childhood abuse won't explicitly show up in the results. Homeless people, Snedker said, don't often talk about those issues when they talk about homelessness; they usually talk about their own personal failings.

"It gives them agency," Snedker said. "'If I got myself into this, I can get myself out.' Because that's what you're deprived of when you're homeless."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Every year in the weeks after the One Night Count of homelessness, surveyors head into King County's shelters, camps and streets with clipboards and sleeves of socks to persuade a representative sample of homeless people to talk. They ask such things as where they're from and their sexual orientation.

# data[].attributes.body
Seattle and Tacoma currently have a combined total of 70 cases of murdered and missing indigenous women, and that's only the cases that have been reported. Native activists are currently working with Washington legislators to create policies that will address this issue but it's been ignored for too long. Soon, Washington state patrol will begin to collect data and report how to better allocate resources to report and identify MMIW
-Claire

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Western Washington has an alarming number of missing and murdered indigenous women. Researchers found Seattle has 45 cases, the most in the country. Tacoma has 25 cases.

In a new report titled 'Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls,' Seattle-based Urban Indian Health Institute collected data from 71 urban cities across 29 states. Researchers found 506 cases of missing and murdered native woman and girls in America.

Change has to start somewhere with someone, and that is why Earth-Feather Sovereign, a member of the Colville Confederated Tribes, tells her story.

"I was missing for about five days, and I was 14-years-old," she said. "I was stolen by a gang, and they wanted to sex traffick me in Hawaii."

She says gang members ultimately decided to return her to her home.

Data shows her case is one of many.

The findings are gaining attention in the other Washington where U.S. Senator Maria Cantwell spoke about it Wednesday.

"This report is the evidence that we need that the problem is more than real. It is horrifying," said Cantwell.

Researchers Annita Lucchesi and Abigail Echo-Hawk worked on the report, which states the cases of murdered and missing indigenous women and girls are likely much higher because they found agencies only provided partial data with inconsistent reporting practices.

Lawmakers say they have a duty to act. They are working to pass a federal bill called Savanna's Act in an effort to improve the way data is collected.

Earth-Feather Sovereign worked with Washington state lawmakers to push for a bill that passed. It will soon require the Washington State Patrol to study and report to the Legislature on ways to increase resources for reporting and identifying missing Native American women.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Seattle has most cases of missing and murdered indigenous women in the country

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Western Washington has an alarming number of missing and murdered indigenous women. Researchers found Seattle has 45 cases, the most in the country. Tacoma has 25 cases. In a new report titled 'Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls,' Seattle-based Urban Indian Health Institute collected data from 71 urban cities across 29 states.

# data[].attributes.body
Hi everyone,
Mark Bautista here. I find that the Opioid crisis in America is a particularly important issue. This documentary from PBS, though three years old, is still powerful and relevant today, as it focuses on Seattle's growing homelessness epidemic and how it correlates to heroin/opioid abuse. As we are students in Seattle, I figure that we can identify that this is a social and public health issue in our city that has to be rectified.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Watch full-length episodes of PBS documentary series FRONTLINE for free. Chasing Heroin - A searing, two-hour investigation of America's heroin crisis.