What do Kroger, Eli Lilly, and Walmart have in common? These races for WA Legislature
A lot of the buzz this election year is focused on federal or statewide races, but some key races for the Washington Legislature are bringing in piles of cash – including from some big-name companies.
These donations come as Democrats, who already control the Legislature, target positions they think they can flip this fall, with the ultimate aim of gaining a supermajority in both the House and Senate. Republicans, meanwhile, aim to hold their ground.
The two most expensive races this year are a pair of Republican-controlled state Senate seats – one in the 10th legislative district, in and around Whidbey Island, and the other in the 14th district, in the Yakima area. These two races, and their outcome in November, will help shape how lawmakers tackle major issues during the legislative session in 2025, from the state budget to key housing policies.
The money
As of late October, the Whidbey Island race is the most expensive legislative contest so far this year.
Supporters for Republican incumbent Sen. Ron Muzzall have poured more than $1.4 million into his re-election campaign – directly, or via independent spending on his behalf, according to state data.
Muzzall’s Democratic challenger, Island County Commissioner Janet St. Clair, has received around half that amount in direct contributions and outside support.
Local backers on either side have spent large, but Muzzall has also racked up several out-of-state contributions – including a wide range of major corporations, from pharmaceutical companies and drug makers like Eli Lilly, to grocers and retailers like Kroger, Anheuser Busch, Walmart, and DoorDash.
Some of the major companies that have contributed to Muzzall have also contributed to other Republicans in the state – including longtime Sen. Curtis King, who is seeking re-election in the 14th legislative district in the Yakima area.
The Senate race in the 14th district is the second most expensive legislative race this year. King’s Democratic challenger, Maria Beltran, is just behind his overall campaign fundraising, according to state data.
It’s not unusual for big companies to give to legislative candidates, according to Bernard Glavin, deputy research director for Open Secrets, the nonpartisan campaign finance transparency group.
“The bigger the company, the more resources they’re going to have dedicated to looking out for their agenda at whatever level it may be,” Galvin told KUOW.
Across the country, dozens of major companies have collectively spent millions of dollars on legislative candidates so far this year, data from Open Secrets shows. That doesn’t necessarily mean they’re spending millions in Washington: The state caps direct campaign contributions from individual people and businesses – up to $1,200 per candidate per election.
In the 14th, outside groups have independently spent more than $700,000 in the race to boost Beltran’s campaign – which is far more than what her campaign has received in direct contributions. The bulk of that total has come from a progressive leaning PAC tied to labor and union organizations.
Why it matters
There are a few reasons why these two state Senate races are getting so much attention: Democrats want to pick up more seats to eventually gain a supermajority in the Legislature, and flipping these two positions could help them meet that goal, or in the meantime, advance policy proposals that have recently stalled in the more moderate Senate.
Even though Democrats currently hold 29 seats in the 49-member Senate and 58 seats in the 98-member House, they consider Muzzall’s Whidbey Island seat as flippable and see new opportunity to make gains in the Yakima area.
Republicans, meanwhile, want to ensure that doesn’t happen, and that their party’s influence in the chamber isn’t diminished.
Muzzall and King both hold important positions in Olympia: Muzzall is the GOP’s ranking member on the Senate’s agriculture committee, and King is the ranking member on the transportation committee, which has a central role in the state’s budget process. Both of the Republican incumbents also sit on the powerful rules committee that decides which pieces of legislation come up for votes on the Senate floor.
Muzzall’s district (the 10th) is one of only two in the entire state represented by both parties in the Legislature. Muzzall is a Republican, but the district’s representatives in the House are both Democrats.
Democrats also indicated earlier this year that they would make the 10th a main focus of election season, in an effort to get a supermajority in the Legislature by 2026.
“In the last four years, we’ve flipped the two House seats,” state Democratic Party Chair Shasti Conrad said in an interview earlier this year, noting the importance of the 10th district this fall. She added that a supermajority is one of her aims as party chair.
“I believe what I’m seeing," Conrad said. "We’re right there.”
And though the Yakima area has been a reliably Republican stronghold, the 14th district currently looks a lot different than it did last election cycle, a result of the state’s chaotic – and contentious – redistricting process that was finalized earlier this year.
A judge approved new boundaries that civil rights groups say will no longer dilute the voting power of the Latino community in and around the area. Republicans have condemned the changes as an illegal gerrymander, but the new boundaries are in effect this election after months of back and forth in the courts last year.
Despite it being an area where Republicans are favored to win, Democrats are optimistic, backing three Latina women in the 14th to run for positions in the Legislature with a particular focus on Beltran’s Senate run.
While Democrats have held control of both sides of the Legislature and the governor’s office in Olympia for nearly a decade, winning a supermajority would give Democrats the ability to make changes to the state’s constitution.
The party wants to lower the threshold for communities to pass school bond measures, potentially making it easier for local communities to raise money to pay for school construction costs. Right now, the state constitution requires that those bond measures gain 60% approval to pass, which is a high bar many places have failed to meet. Democrats also want to put abortion rights into the state constitution.
Changing the state’s constitution requires two-thirds support in each chamber – a requirement Democrats can’t meet unless they win more positions or get Republicans to back their proposals. So far, that hasn’t happened.
Even if Democrats don’t win a supermajority this year, the Legislature is poised to look very different after this fall’s elections. Several lawmakers decided not to run for re-election this past year or chose instead to run for other offices at the local, state, or federal level.
The turnover could mean more opportunity for lawmakers who support specific policies that were unpopular among more moderate legislators – especially if that turnover continues with more progressive Democrats winning this fall.
One example: rent stabilization. A bill to slow rising rent costs for tenants across the state died earlier this year after passing the House, but failing to get support from just three Democrats in the Senate. Janet St. Clair, the Democratic challenger in the 10th district, said she’s glad the original version of the rent stabilization bill didn’t pass – but she says she’s supportive of exploring the concept if she’s elected to the Senate.
For now, it’s unclear how the money in both the 10th and 14th district’s Senate races will ultimately translate to votes. Despite the lopsided money picture, St. Clair was within three percentage points of Muzzall in the August primary – and that included another Democrat on the ballot.
The race didn't look as close in the 14th. Democrat Beltran earned nearly 42% of the vote in the primary, well behind King’s 58%, and there was not another Democrat on the ballot in August.
Voting for the general election is already underway. Ballots are due in the mail or a local dropbox Nov. 5.
