Slog
News & ArtsFriday, September 23, 2011
Politics The Poorest Counties in Washington State
Posted by Eli Sanders on Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 1:36 PM
Yesterday, Charles posted about the poorest states in America. ("They are all hard core red states," he noted.")
Also yesterday, the Washington State Budget & Policy Center released a graph showing the Washington counties with the highest rates of poverty. Saying poverty has skyrocketed in Washington State—where nearly 890,000 people now live below the federal poverty line—the center broke down the geography of our state's poorest people this way:
- Washington Budget & Policy Center
A majority of those Washington counties with above-average poverty rates voted for John McCain in 2008 and George W. Bush in 2004.
3
Um... Could we please see that with all Counties (instead of cherry picked to tell the story they want to hear)?
Also. King County = Rural?... so then there are no Urban counties in this state?
Also. King County = Rural?... so then there are no Urban counties in this state?
7
So the question arises, are the counties that voted Republican in 2008 better off now than they were in '08?
8
@4 Bush fucked the economy up badly enough for the four years after he was gone and then some. Of course, if you're relying on companies that we've been shoveling money at the past four years to actually create any jobs (instead of paying their executives multimillion dollar salaries regardless of performance, or putting the money to work in the Big Casino on Wall Street), I'm afraid you're going to be waiting awhile.
9
@7: I don't know. Think they'd have been better off under President McCain? Or would be under President Perry?
12
@4 FTW
(That's some cracker jack reporting Eli! Your Bush Derangement Syndrome must be flaring up...)
Speaking of the deranged…
Hey! Did ya all hear?... Apparently Obama built an intercontinental railroad when no one was looking.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washingt…
He truly is amazing!
(That's some cracker jack reporting Eli! Your Bush Derangement Syndrome must be flaring up...)
Speaking of the deranged…
Hey! Did ya all hear?... Apparently Obama built an intercontinental railroad when no one was looking.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washingt…
He truly is amazing!
13
In, um, 2004 (and in 2000) the poor rednecks voted Republican because poor rural rednecks care first and foremost about keeping their guns. They don't give two shits about nearly anything else when it comes to elections. It's all about voting Republican to preserve their right to own & carry.
Which still makes the case that they vote against their better self-interests in almost every other civic area because they sure loves them their guns so much.
Which still makes the case that they vote against their better self-interests in almost every other civic area because they sure loves them their guns so much.
14
Oh please ladies, it's the Indians and Mexicans in these counties that drag the numbers down. Sure, cut them off.
17
opposing gun rights in this country is a loser for democrats. they sacrifice huge swaths of rural america for an occasional symbolic farce of a policy change, most of which are short lived anyway.
18
@All: You're right, I screwed up. A majority of the counties with above average poverty rates voted for John McCain in 2008, not George W. Bush in 2008. D'oh.
But: In 2004, a majority of the counties with above average poverty rates voted for... George W. Bush.
Updated the post to reflect this.
But: In 2004, a majority of the counties with above average poverty rates voted for... George W. Bush.
Updated the post to reflect this.
19
If it came down to it, I'd rather be a poor rural Republican than a rich urban Democrat. Less stress, prettier surroundings.
20
@19: Seriously, it's just the problem is which of the Republican candidates will best help you achieve your dream of poverty.
21
Had to use numbers from 2009 (which may be more relevant to Bush’s 2008 run (who Knew!)) but it did use the voting results from the 2008 Obama / McCain race (being unable to find any records for the 2008 Obama / Bush race) here’s how poverty breaks out then:
Democrat leaning counties had an average poverty rate of 13.67% with a high of 25.6% (Whitman County (Poorest in the state!)) and a low of 7.8% (Island County (nothing but urban sprawl)).
Republican leaning counties had an average poverty rate of 16.53% with a high of 22% (Kakima County) and a low of 11.3% (Benton County).
That 2.86 point spread IS pretty damning…
Democrat leaning counties had an average poverty rate of 13.67% with a high of 25.6% (Whitman County (Poorest in the state!)) and a low of 7.8% (Island County (nothing but urban sprawl)).
Republican leaning counties had an average poverty rate of 16.53% with a high of 22% (Kakima County) and a low of 11.3% (Benton County).
That 2.86 point spread IS pretty damning…
22
I understand the thesis you are trying to support. It is not a bad argument to point out red state/county dependence on the government hand that they spurnn. But please clarify if the poverty level used in this chart is adjusted for the cost of living in different areas. Arguably a certain income in Seattle might be considered a poverty level but that same real income could provide a comfortable lifestyle in another, perhaps rural, county.
23
Stockholm syndrome, coupled with congenital conservative-brain disorder has to be the explanation.
26
To be fair people, a lot of poor people in these places voted for Dems. And many can't vote because they are not here legally, like in Yakima.
27
Okay, re-ran the numbers for the better known 2004 Bush / Kerry (Ha!... Ya that must have seemed like a good idea at the time) race. Still used the 2009 census data for poverty by county. It did not help your argument:
Democrat leaning counties had an average poverty rate of 13.29% with a high of 19.3% (Grays Harbor) and a low of 8.4% (Kitsap County).
Republican leaning counties had an average poverty rate of 15.85% with a high of 25.6% (Whitman County) and a low of 7.8% (Island County).
That 2.56 point spread is even less damning…
If anything, the biggest carry away here is that the richest and the poorest county (each rural) are swing counties that tend to vote together.
Which really sinks your boat.
Nice try Eli.
Democrat leaning counties had an average poverty rate of 13.29% with a high of 19.3% (Grays Harbor) and a low of 8.4% (Kitsap County).
Republican leaning counties had an average poverty rate of 15.85% with a high of 25.6% (Whitman County) and a low of 7.8% (Island County).
That 2.56 point spread is even less damning…
If anything, the biggest carry away here is that the richest and the poorest county (each rural) are swing counties that tend to vote together.
Which really sinks your boat.
Nice try Eli.
28
@27 nails it. The Stranger Staffers spend gobs of time extrapolating correlations to preach to the choir about how horrible Republicans are. But are their conclusions (excruciatingly predictable) really that interesting or newsworthy?
29
@27, 28: The original post is all about how poverty has increased substantially in the previous years. Not to give any credence to the conclusion of the original post (I think it's reductive and arbitrary to try and make these types of correlations), but comparing 2004 to 2009 is pretty useless given the idea that a lot has changed since then.
30
You especially, @28, spend gobs of time apologizing for a political philosophy that considers you a freak, an aberration, or a willful sinner at best, and if they had no opposition would probably prefer to lock you up or put you to death. How do you justify that in your own mind, let alone to a broader audience?
31
Eli,
These are just a demographic questions but don't those counties have large Hispanic & Native American populations? Would those two groups tend to be poorer than their "white" neighbors and wouldn't they vote Democratic?
These are just a demographic questions but don't those counties have large Hispanic & Native American populations? Would those two groups tend to be poorer than their "white" neighbors and wouldn't they vote Democratic?
34
@30 - Raindrop believes that as long as he has money and power, the rules don't apply. If it works for Mary Cheney, fuck the rest of humanity, amirite?
36
@31
You are getting warmer... Might I suggest comparing median income of qualified voters to election results by county. And then, as a side bar, percentage of population above the age of 18 legally qualified to vote by county and percentage of legally qualified voters that voted by county.
I would propose that possibly many of these “poor” and “red” rural counties are poor because they have a higher percentage of Illegal Aliens (can’t vote) and Native Americans (don’t vote). And the VOTING population is more conservative, in part, as a reaction to that. Perhaps, contrary to what Eli would like us to believe, it’s not the beneficiaries of welfare that vote against the champions of welfare, but the benefactors of welfare that vote against the champions of welfare, and that the more beneficiaries there are, the more likely the benefactors are to vote against being forcibly compelled to be even more benevolent.
In short, it’s easier to convince 90% of the population to “take care of” 10% than to convince 75% to “take care of” 25%. It’ll be damn near impossible to convince 10% to “take care of” 90% (which is where the Liberals want things headed) but then, once you pass the 50% tipping point, you don’t have to convince anymore. At that point the mob can compel.
You are getting warmer... Might I suggest comparing median income of qualified voters to election results by county. And then, as a side bar, percentage of population above the age of 18 legally qualified to vote by county and percentage of legally qualified voters that voted by county.
I would propose that possibly many of these “poor” and “red” rural counties are poor because they have a higher percentage of Illegal Aliens (can’t vote) and Native Americans (don’t vote). And the VOTING population is more conservative, in part, as a reaction to that. Perhaps, contrary to what Eli would like us to believe, it’s not the beneficiaries of welfare that vote against the champions of welfare, but the benefactors of welfare that vote against the champions of welfare, and that the more beneficiaries there are, the more likely the benefactors are to vote against being forcibly compelled to be even more benevolent.
In short, it’s easier to convince 90% of the population to “take care of” 10% than to convince 75% to “take care of” 25%. It’ll be damn near impossible to convince 10% to “take care of” 90% (which is where the Liberals want things headed) but then, once you pass the 50% tipping point, you don’t have to convince anymore. At that point the mob can compel.
37
@31 I was a bit curious about something similar, so I took the 2010 census numbers, removed the percentage under 18, and then compared my estimated adults to 2010 registered voters. The data is from census.gov and vote.wa.gov if you want to check my work. Sorted by percent of estimated adults unregistered.
Franklin . 50,884 . 25,349
Whitman . 37,925 . 19,128
Adams . 11,817 . 5,998
Grant . 61,404 . 33,532
Yakima . 167,586 . 99,568
Kittitas . 33,550 . 20,193
Grays Harbor . 56,490 . 35,791
Douglas . 27,747 . 18,172
Okanogan . 31,128 . 20,510
Walla Walla . 45,261 . 30,183
Pierce . 598,804 . 410,081
Benton . 127,704 . 88,498
Mason . 47,892 . 33,344
Chelan . 54,412 . 37,972
Clark . 313,918 . 219,616
WASHINGTON . 5,137,549 . 3,601,268
Snohomish . 537,141 . 377,739
King . 1,519,893 . 1,069,791
Cowlitz . 76,910 . 55,265
Skagit . 89,079 . 64,138
Spokane . 361,898 . 261,250
Ferry . 5,882 . 4,280
Lewis . 57,648 . 41,972
Asotin . 16,844 . 12,270
Whatcom . 159,102 . 116,581
Kitsap . 194,377 . 143,796
Island . 63,040 . 47,782
Pacific . 17,113 . 12,988
Thurston . 195,000 . 149,024
Skamania . 8,587 . 6,570
Pend Oreille . 10,037 . 7,824
Clallam . 58,123 . 45,611
Klickitat . 15,685 . 12,415
Columbia . 3,258 . 2,590
Wahkiakum . 3,238 . 2,644
Stevens . 32,909 . 26,931
Garfield . 1,856 . 1,537
Lincoln . 8,160 . 6,983
Jefferson . 25,212 . 21,746
San Juan . 13,262 . 11,606
Franklin . 50,884 . 25,349
Whitman . 37,925 . 19,128
Adams . 11,817 . 5,998
Grant . 61,404 . 33,532
Yakima . 167,586 . 99,568
Kittitas . 33,550 . 20,193
Grays Harbor . 56,490 . 35,791
Douglas . 27,747 . 18,172
Okanogan . 31,128 . 20,510
Walla Walla . 45,261 . 30,183
Pierce . 598,804 . 410,081
Benton . 127,704 . 88,498
Mason . 47,892 . 33,344
Chelan . 54,412 . 37,972
Clark . 313,918 . 219,616
WASHINGTON . 5,137,549 . 3,601,268
Snohomish . 537,141 . 377,739
King . 1,519,893 . 1,069,791
Cowlitz . 76,910 . 55,265
Skagit . 89,079 . 64,138
Spokane . 361,898 . 261,250
Ferry . 5,882 . 4,280
Lewis . 57,648 . 41,972
Asotin . 16,844 . 12,270
Whatcom . 159,102 . 116,581
Kitsap . 194,377 . 143,796
Island . 63,040 . 47,782
Pacific . 17,113 . 12,988
Thurston . 195,000 . 149,024
Skamania . 8,587 . 6,570
Pend Oreille . 10,037 . 7,824
Clallam . 58,123 . 45,611
Klickitat . 15,685 . 12,415
Columbia . 3,258 . 2,590
Wahkiakum . 3,238 . 2,644
Stevens . 32,909 . 26,931
Garfield . 1,856 . 1,537
Lincoln . 8,160 . 6,983
Jefferson . 25,212 . 21,746
San Juan . 13,262 . 11,606
39
A caveat about Whitman County is that it has a large contingent of transient residents comprised mainly of college students who are usually a) un- or under-employed and/or b) registered to vote in their home county, if at all.
40
This article is based on nothing. Only a bare majority of the high-poverty (over the median level) counties voted for McCain:
Obama counties above the mid-line:
Cowlitz
Grays Harbor
Clallam
Whatcom
McCain-voting counties above the mid-line:
Yakima
Grant
Lewis
Spokane
Franklin
It's not much of a pattern, really. Even the rural frame isn't really correct, with the 9 counties over the average including 3 of the top 10 counties by population, and all of those counties being above the median state in population (ranking from 4th to 19th out of 39 counties overall.)
Obama counties above the mid-line:
Cowlitz
Grays Harbor
Clallam
Whatcom
McCain-voting counties above the mid-line:
Yakima
Grant
Lewis
Spokane
Franklin
It's not much of a pattern, really. Even the rural frame isn't really correct, with the 9 counties over the average including 3 of the top 10 counties by population, and all of those counties being above the median state in population (ranking from 4th to 19th out of 39 counties overall.)
41
@34: The number of gays and lesbians that vote Republican are larger than you think, because they would never discuss it with their liberal friends. These are the folks that understand an essential lesson in politics, that it can’t be a single issue. I’ve acknowledged many times about the bigots in the GOP, that there are far more than in the Dems. I obviously don’t share their anti-gay sentiments. But I do share their sentiments when it comes to the role of government and economics. So does the former always have to negate the latter?
Progress in anti-discrimination, acceptance, and same-sex marriage has been on a delightful upward trajectory for several decades now, through both Republican and Democratic administrations. One would think that this progress, and issues of government and economics would be orthogonal. And indeed they are. There is nothing about sexual orientation that dictates political and economic philosophy.
Progress in anti-discrimination, acceptance, and same-sex marriage has been on a delightful upward trajectory for several decades now, through both Republican and Democratic administrations. One would think that this progress, and issues of government and economics would be orthogonal. And indeed they are. There is nothing about sexual orientation that dictates political and economic philosophy.
42
Your beloved "orthogonal" fantasy, @41, ignores what I said above--that the GOP if unopposed would doubtless criminalize gay sex, unwind all progress in partner and family benefits and recognition, quarantine you if HIV-positive, and otherwise erase you if you continue to proclaim your mere existence. Saint Ronald virtually ignored the AIDS epidemic for his entire administration.
At least admit you are riding the coattails of liberals on all gay-rights issues. If you really believe your "orthogonal" shibboleth, you'll do so without waffling. We are often disappointed that the dominant party in government at the moment hasn't done everything we'd like in the area of equal rights; the difference is that if Republicans didn't exist the Dems wouldn't be trying to squash us like bugs.
At least admit you are riding the coattails of liberals on all gay-rights issues. If you really believe your "orthogonal" shibboleth, you'll do so without waffling. We are often disappointed that the dominant party in government at the moment hasn't done everything we'd like in the area of equal rights; the difference is that if Republicans didn't exist the Dems wouldn't be trying to squash us like bugs.
43
Is raindrop a biological male? Please can anyone confirm the answer to my question? Please!? Please!? Please!?
45
I knew Lewis County, my home county would be on the list! Someone said that rural folks vote Republican because of the gun rights - that is true, but another reason is abortion. I find that funny because we've had plenty of Republican presidents since 1972, and at no time have any of them even addressed the issue.
46
Cowlitz county might be a little backwards in some respects, but they are a good union county. They also kicked out the anti Laramie Project demonstrators when they came to town, which brought tears to my eyes.
47
I love how people blame Bush for today's problems (he fucked up but ...) .... when Obama has been doing THE EXACT SAME THINGS, almost, a few changes, but otherwise, they're like brothers.
48
@21, 27: Where in the fuck are you getting that poverty number for Whitman County? That's wheat and university country, and that number smells like three day old fish to me. Prove it, motherfucker.
49
Also, if Obama-supporting Whitman County were so poverty-stricken, why isn't it at the tippy top of that graph? In fact, why isn't it on that graph at all?
You gotta be kidding me, indeed.
You gotta be kidding me, indeed.
50
@41, it's not just that the Rs are anti-gay. It's that the kind of thinking that leads them to be anti-gay has other repercussions. The lack of critical thinking. The occasionally violent bluster. The desire to elevate Christianity over other forms of religion and discourse.
@47, I think I see what you are getting at. But Obama has taken a lot of flak in these quarters, and not just for a lack of leadership on LGBTQ issues. I think he's squandered opportunities to make changes help folks weather the economic cycle. I also think a lot of people (myself included) wanted a firebrand, a dynamo, someone who would get up in there and kick some ass. We got someone who wanted to build consensus. Which is probably better in the long term, IF he can actually make some progress in that way. But it doesn't appear to help in the short term. I'm as guilty as anyone about having a short attention span and wanting instant gratification.
@47, I think I see what you are getting at. But Obama has taken a lot of flak in these quarters, and not just for a lack of leadership on LGBTQ issues. I think he's squandered opportunities to make changes help folks weather the economic cycle. I also think a lot of people (myself included) wanted a firebrand, a dynamo, someone who would get up in there and kick some ass. We got someone who wanted to build consensus. Which is probably better in the long term, IF he can actually make some progress in that way. But it doesn't appear to help in the short term. I'm as guilty as anyone about having a short attention span and wanting instant gratification.
54
Obozo turned out to be as big a bankster corporatist whore as Bush. But that doesn't matter to the libtard cult of personality where ideology trumps everything else.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Hating People Doesn't Make Them Thinner by Jen Graves
-
Los Angeles Gay Bar Bans Bachelorette Parties Until Marriage Equality Is Attained by David Schmader
-
Fill in the Blank by Grant Brissey
-
This Reminds Me of the Great Calculator Scare of the Late '70s/Early '80s by David Schmader
-
Idiot Tries to Defend Bigoted Anti-Gay-Marriage Preacher on Anderson Cooper by Paul Constant
-
Six Moms with Too Much Time on Their Hands and a Shitty Website Decide to Fight Gay Superheroes by Paul Constant
-
What the Hell Is Wrong With Seattle's Pride Parade? by Dominic Holden
-
The Saturday Morning News by Unpaid Intern
-
Why Mayor McGinn's Wife Canceled Her Family's Seattle Times Subscription by Eli Sanders
-
The Sunday Morning News by Unpaid Intern
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (54) RSS