OLYMPIA, Wash. — Party platforms are typically lengthy documents intended to define political values, not enact law.

But language adopted by the Washington State Democratic Party is drawing scrutiny from Republicans, some Jewish community leaders, and even some Democrats who say they were left out of the conversation.

The debate centers on two planks in the party’s newly approved platform: one supporting continued work on a state reparations study and another linking a recent rise in antisemitism, in part, to actions by the Israeli government.

Stephen Reed, a spokesperson for the Washington State Democratic Party, said the platform is developed every two years by delegates selected from communities across the state.

“They develop the platform. They write all the planks. They debate the planks,” Reed said.

Last month, the Washington State Democratic Party announced that more than 1,000 delegates at its 2026 convention in Spokane unanimously adopted language supporting reparations for descendants of victims of U.S. chattel slavery. The party described the move as the first such addition to a state Democratic Party platform.

The approved language says Democrats support “the study and implementation of reparative action, remedies and reconciliation” for descendants. The party also said Democrats had previously passed a 2024 resolution urging Washington leaders to create and fund a statewide study on reparations, which is currently underway and being managed by the Department of Commerce. A final report with recommendations is due in June 2027.

Reed said the party’s platform does not settle the question of whether Washington should provide direct payments as reparations, noting that other proposals include offering free college tuition to descendants.

But it is the platform’s language on antisemitism that has prompted criticism from both inside and outside the party. The approved platform states: “There has been a dramatic resurgence in antisemitism in recent years on all sides of the political spectrum, due in part to actions taken by the Israeli government. History shows us the dangerous repercussions suffered when collective action to combat antisemitism and promote understanding is not taken. We must ensure that the Jewish community is protected from misinformation, harassment, and violence.”

It is unclear whether the Washington State Jewish Democratic Caucus was consulted before the language was adopted. The Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle criticized the provision.

“By ascribing the rise of antisemitism in the United States, even partially, to the actions of the Israeli government, the Washington State Democratic Party has rationalized, and given cover to, the actions of antisemites rather than full-throatedly condemning them. At a time where the Jewish community, which makes up only 2% of the U.S. population, is the target of nearly 70% of religion-based hate crimes, we urge the Washington State Democratic Party to do everything in its power to reduce antisemitism rather than justify it,” Solly Kane, president and CEO of the Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle, said in a statement to KOMO News.

The State GOP, which is no stranger to incorporating national public policy into its regional platform either, criticized the Democrats.

“I read the Washington State Democratic Party platform, and it’s a banquet of trust-fund leftist nonsense,” Washington GOP Chair Jim Walsh said. “A lot of it is just not grounded in any real policy issue facing Washington families.”

Walsh said the platform contains “very little coherent stuff about tax reform or safe communities or improving K-12 schools,” while highlighting what he called “a very bizarre commitment to reparations for slavery.”

Asked why the Washington Republican Party’s 2024 platform includes language calling for limiting federal funding for programs that support critical race theory or The 1619 Project and for ending birthright citizenship, Walsh said, “We’re talking about not spending public resources. That means forcing taxpayers to pay for programs of various controversial sorts.”

“There is really no moral equivalence here,” he added.

Reed said he personally interprets the Democratic platform’s language as criticism of the Israeli government, not of Jewish people.

“I take this language personally to mean that the government of Israel is engaging in actions that are making Israel less safe, that are causing untold harm in the Palestinian community, especially among civilians,” Reed said. “That simply isn’t the right behavior for an ally of the United States.”

Reed acknowledged that the language has prompted concern and debate. He said the party has a Jewish caucus and that party officials tried to provide proposed platform language to caucuses before the convention, but he conceded the process may have fallen short.

“We did our best, and we hear that we may have come up short in those outreach efforts to give them enough time to digest everything,” Reed said. “If we fell short, we apologize to those communities.”

Reed said party platforms are designed to show voters where the party’s grassroots stand, even when the issues are complicated, controversial, or beyond the scope of state government.

“It’s a statement of values,” Reed said. “This lets Washingtonians know where the Democratic Party’s grassroots are, how they’re thinking, and the values they’re going to bring.”

2025

Offseason Changes

Donald Trump’s plans to build a skyline-altering arch in the nation’s capital won initial approval Thursday from a key federal commission, but its members put off a decision on whether a federal law that limits building heights should be applied to this project.

Despite overwhelming public opposition, the National Capital Planning Commission voted to approve preliminary site and building plans for the 250ft (76m) arch the Republican president wants to build on a traffic circle at the Virginia end of the Memorial Bridge from Washington.

The project, one of several being pursued by Trump in his quest to reshape parts of the nation’s capital to his liking, moved a step closer to reality with the vote.

Staff had recommended in its report on the project that the commission grant such approval and request a series of changes so the arch would comply with the Height of Buildings Act. The suggested changes included redistributing the heights among the main structure of the arch, the habitable roof, where an observation deck is planned, and the statues that would top it.

But commissioners, led by chair Will Scharf, voted to continue deliberations on whether the law indeed applies.

The staff report said the commission has long applied the law in its approval process. Scharf said the applicant, which is the interior department, had, as requested, provided a legal analysis that he said makes a “compelling argument” that the law “is not binding on the federal government”.

The interior department oversees the federal land where the arch would be built.

Eight of the 12 commissioners, including Scharf and two others appointed by Trump, voted for preliminary approval. One was against, and the remaining three commissioners voted present.

“This is a complex project,” Scharf said before the vote. He said a vote on final approval could come at the agency’s next meeting, in September.

All 12 commissioners listened to a summary of the staff report and its recommendations, and heard from several dozen people who had signed up to testify about the project.

As the commissioners met, construction continued at the White House on a $400m ballroom Trump is building there and crews draped tarps over the stone columns at the north entrance to the mansion, where work is being done to scrape off layers of paint.

Some of those who testified against Trump’s project opposed building a celebratory arch so close to Arlington national cemetery. Others suggested it would be more appropriate for a neighborhood near the Capitol and sporting venues.

Opponents say the arch is too big and would disrupt the carefully designed view between the Lincoln Memorial and Arlington national cemetery that was meant to symbolize the reunification of the north and the south after the civil war.

The arch would be more than twice as tall as the Lincoln Memorial, which is 99ft (30m) tall, and close to half the height of the Washington Monument, at about 555ft (169m) tall.

Concerns about vehicular traffic and pedestrian safety also were expressed on Thursday. Others insisted that Congress must approve the arch – a position Trump disagrees with.

The US Commission of Fine Arts, a separate federal agency, approved the design for the arch in May. The National Capital Planning Commission oversees construction on federal land in the city and began reviewing the arch plan in June.

Trump had said last year that the arch could be paid for with unused funds from the hundreds of millions of dollars he said he has raised from corporations, donors and other wealthy people to pay to build a new $400m ballroom at the White House.

But, as it turns out, some public money will be used for the ballroom project, as well as the arch. The White House has not released a cost estimate for the arch.