HB 1938
In CommitteeHouse
State flag redesign
Creating the Washington state flag redesign committee.
This status may be delayed. See Action History below for the latest updates.
How does a bill become law?
- Introduced: The bill is filed and assigned a number.
- Committee: A subject-matter committee holds hearings, takes public testimony, and decides whether to advance the bill.
- Floor Vote: The full chamber (House or Senate) debates and votes on the bill.
- Opposite Chamber: The bill repeats the committee and floor vote process in the other chamber.
- Governor: The Governor reviews the bill and decides whether to sign or veto it.
- Signed: The bill has been signed into law.
AI Analysis
This bill creates a committee to lead a public process for redesigning the Washington state flag, which critics say is outdated and poorly designed. The committee must select a new design by July 2028 and submit it to voters for approval in the next general election.
- Establishes the Washington State Flag Redesign Committee to lead the process of designing a new state flag.
- Requires the committee to adopt a final flag design by July 1, 2028, through a unanimous vote, after soliciting public input and reviewing submissions.
- Mandates broad public engagement—including outreach to schools, tribes, and community groups—and public forums or surveys to gather feedback and design ideas.
- Requires the committee to submit a final report—including the proposed new flag design, its meaning, and next steps—to the legislature and governor by August 1, 2028.
- Specifies that the new flag design must be approved by voters in a statewide referendum before taking effect, per existing law (RCW 1.20.010(3)).
Who is affected
- General public — Will be invited to submit flag design ideas and provide feedback through public outreach efforts, including schools, community groups, and online platforms.
- Tribal leaders (affiliated tribes of Northwest Indians) — Will help guide the design process through representation on the committee, ensuring tribal perspectives and histories are respectfully incorporated.
- Designers and cultural leaders (appointed by Washington State Arts Commission) — Will provide artistic and technical expertise on flag design principles, including simplicity, symbolism, and visual appeal.
- Washington State Arts Commission — Will coordinate committee operations, provide administrative support, and host public engagement activities.
- State Legislature and Secretary of State — Will be responsible for placing the committee’s recommended flag design on the ballot for voter approval in the next general election.
Pro/Con Analysis
Stronger case for benefits
Potential Benefits (3)
Mandates inclusion of tribal representatives and citizen representatives from all regions of the state, giving historically marginalized Indigenous communities and non-metropolitan residents formal influence over a core symbol of state identity—promoting more equitable representation in public symbolism.
Rights & LibertiesPeopleRef: Sec. 2(2)(h), (i)Requires outreach to schools and invites student input, potentially fostering civic engagement and pride in state history and design literacy among K–12 students—especially if schools incorporate the process into civics or art curricula.
EducationPeopleRef: Sec. 2(4)(a), (b)Requires voter approval via referendum before adoption, ensuring the final flag design reflects the will of the people rather than being imposed by political or bureaucratic elites—enhancing democratic legitimacy of the symbol.
Public SafetyLean peopleRef: Sec. 2(4)(e)
Potential Concerns (3)
The requirement for a unanimous committee vote to select a final design creates a high bar for consensus, potentially delaying or preventing adoption of any new flag—leading to continued uncertainty and possible public frustration, especially if the committee deadlocks over symbolic or political disagreements.
Local GovernmentRef: Sec. 2(4)(e)The bill does not include any provisions for protecting public safety during the flag redesign process—e.g., ensuring the new design does not resemble emergency vehicle markings, law enforcement insignia, or military unit flags—potentially creating confusion in high-stakes scenarios where visual identification matters.
Public SafetyRef: Sec. 2(4)(a)The bill mandates public outreach but does not require accessible formats (e.g., multilingual, disability-inclusive, low-bandwidth digital tools), limiting meaningful participation from non-English speakers, rural residents with limited internet, and people with disabilities—despite the stated goal of broad engagement.
Local GovernmentRef: Sec. 2(4)(b)
Who Is Most Affected
Tribal communities gain formal influence over a state symbol for the first time, potentially leading to greater cultural recognition and inclusion in public identity—but only if their input is genuinely respected and implemented, not merely tokenized.
Rural and non-metropolitan residents gain designated representation on the committee and outreach efforts, but may still face barriers to participation due to limited access to digital platforms or public forums held in urban centers.
Art and design professionals gain a platform to contribute expertise, but the final design must pass political and democratic hurdles—meaning artistic vision may be compromised for consensus or symbolism over aesthetics.
State agencies (especially Arts Commission and Secretary of State) gain new responsibilities but no additional funding—potentially stretching existing staff and resources without compensation for added workload.
General public gains an opportunity to shape a unifying symbol, but may be disappointed if the final design fails to resonate due to consensus constraints or political compromises.