Please sign Washington's first slavery reparations study
The Legislature has passed Engrossed Substitute Senate Bill (ESSB) 5167, a $78 billion biennial budget bill which includes just $300,000 to fund Washington's first study on reparations for descendants of victims of U.S. chattel slavery. Gov. Bob Ferguson, we realize you possess line-item veto power, but please preserve this funding in your budget.
This funding creates the Charles Mitchell and George Washington Bush Study on Reparative Action, named in honor of two Black pioneers who faced pre- and post-civil war racism in the early Northwest. Charles Mitchell was a Black child who was enslaved in Washington territory and won his freedom by escaping to Canada in 1860, documenting slavery's early existence on Washington soil. George Washington Bush was one of the earliest permanent Black settlers in the Washington territory. This study will examine the impact of slavery on all Washington citizens and propose concrete recommendations to the governor, the legislature and the U.S. Congress.
This study is not just about history. This study is about our future. I stand with a new generation of young Washingtonians who do not want to just survive in life. We want to thrive!
We have witnessed the results of federal reparations for other ravaged communities. Japanese Americans received reparations in the 1980s for their World War II internment. Indigenous nations received reparations in the form of land settlements and restitution due to decades of broken treaties. Finally, the Luxembourg Agreements cemented Holocaust reparations which continue for Holocaust victims and their heirs to this day.
Yet Black Americans, whose ancestors endured 246 years of slavery and centuries of lost generational wealth, have only received short-lived government programs like affirmative action and diversity, equity and inclusion, which the current White House is blowtorching nearly every day.
Washington is not alone on this reparations journey. We join states like California, New York and Colorado, which are already undertaking the serious work of reparative justice.
We owe the funding of Washington's historic study to courageous leaders like Sen. Bob Hasegawa, State Rep. Chipalo Street and attorney and former House Majority Whip Jesse Wineberry, who in the 80s delivered reparations checks to Japanese survivors of World War II internment camps and returned to Olympia this year to testify in the House and Senate for the reparations study.
We thank community stakeholders like the NAACP, Washington Equity Now Alliance (WENA), Democrats for Diversity and Inclusion (DDI), Tacoma-Pierce County Black Collective, Seattle-King County African-American Reparations Committee (SAARC), American Renewal 1870, Community Passageways, National Council of Negro Women (NCNW), Olympia Mayor Dante Payne, Olympia City Council and others who raised their voices in Olympia to make this study possible.
Now, Gov. Ferguson, we need you to finish what the legislature has begun for three critical reasons:
Understanding Washington's projected $12-13 billion revenue shortfall, ESSB 5167 allows community stakeholders to raise non-state funding for this study through public, private and philanthropic partnerships.
Only the federal government, not the state, is expected to provide chattel slavery reparations.
The Republican controlled Congress recently reintroduced H.R. 4321 to penalize states that fund slavery reparations programs with the loss of federal funding. Should H.R. 4321 become federal law, Washington state will be prohibited from funding any future slavery reparations initiatives without jeopardizing billions of federal funding for our state. Therefore, please approve the Legislature's $300,000.00 funding now because this may be our state's last chance to fund any reparations programs.
As a man of faith, I cherish the biblical year of jubilee, which signifies a time for restoration with a renewed commitment to forgiveness and reconciliation.
Gov. Ferguson, in the spirit of jubilee, please sign Washington's first reparations study.
Rev. Malando D. Redeemer
Rev. Malando D. Redeemer is the president of the Tacoma branch of the NAACP. He is the youth and young adult pastor at Shiloh Baptist Church in Tacoma. He is also a former labor organizer and contract negotiator for SEIU Healthcare 1199NW and UFCW 3000, and a past fellow of The Martin Luther King Jr. Freedom Center and the Institute for Community Leadership.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Politico
10 minutes ago
- Politico
Likely Pennsylvania gov candidate slams Shapiro over rumored presidential ambitions
Shapiro is considered a top potential presidential candidate in 2028, but has not said whether he will run for the White House. The video seemed intended to signal that Garrity would mount a more aggressive campaign against Shapiro than his past rivals. Far-right state Sen. Doug Mastriano lost to Shapiro by 15 points in 2022, after raising little money and airing few TV ads. Mastriano is considering another gubernatorial bid and remains popular with the MAGA base. 'I can tell you on the record that this may be both the first ad of 2026 and 2028,' Garrity adviser John Brabender told POLITICO. 'And that it's just a start.' The battleground state of Pennsylvania will host a gubernatorial race and as many as five competitive House races as Democrats grasp for control over the lower chamber in the midterms next year. Garrity, a combat veteran in her second term as treasurer, is seen by state GOP insiders as the best Republican candidate to challenge Shapiro. Mastriano's potential bid has alarmed President Donald Trump's advisers and Pennsylvania Republicans .


San Francisco Chronicle
39 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Can San Francisco avoid Trump's ire after National Guard deployments in D.C. and L.A.?
Once again, President Donald Trump has brought his campaign of retribution against liberal jurisdictions to the streets of a major American city, ordering hundreds of National Guard troops to deploy to another Democratic stronghold. And once again, the city in question is not San Francisco, a past Trump target that has so far avoided the kind of direct clash with his administration that previously played out in Los Angeles and is now unfolding in Washington. Trump announced Monday that he was temporarily placing the D.C. police department under federal control and sending 800 National Guard troops to the nation's capital. Those extraordinary steps were necessary because of 'violent gangs and bloodthirsty criminals' that have overrun the city, Trump said, even though official statistics show violent crime in Washington is down. The president put other cities on notice, warning that New York, Chicago, Baltimore and Oakland could also see National Guard deployments over crime concerns. He did not mention San Francisco, a famously liberal sanctuary city that was panned by Trump last year as 'not even livable.' It's not as if San Francisco is flying under Trump's radar entirely. He has promoted the unlikely idea of reopening Alcatraz as a federal prison, and immigration agents have detained people in the city as they've sought to carry out Trump's mass deportation plans. San Francisco has also repeatedly fought Trump administration policies in court. But when it comes to Trump sending military forces to what he views as lawless cities led astray by Democratic politicians, San Francisco and its mayor, Daniel Lurie, do not appear to be top of mind for the president — at least not for now. Some political observers say that's a testament to how well Lurie and other moderate Democrats are running the city, while others warn that Trump could easily turn his ire on the city at a moment's notice. Jay Cheng, executive director of the moderate political group Neighbors for a Better San Francisco, sees political vindication in the fact that Trump didn't invoke San Francisco when he previously sent National Guard troops to Los Angeles or when he announced the actions in Washington on Monday. Cheng said San Francisco voters have shown in electing Lurie, District Attorney Brooke Jenkins and a moderate Board of Supervisors majority that they're focused on improving police staffing, reducing crime, shutting down drug markets and making the city function more efficiently. 'In San Francisco, we're showing that Democratic leaders can successfully govern a city,' Cheng said. 'He's not mentioning us because we're not a good example for his narrative, because we have Democrats that are doing a great job around public safety.' State Sen. Scott Wiener, D-San Francisco, had a more blunt assessment of Trump's treatment of New York, Chicago, Baltimore, Oakland and Washington. All of those cities have Black mayors and large Black populations, Wiener noted, calling it 'straight up Donald Trump's alley and straight out of his racist playbook.' Wiener doubted that Trump was taking note of any specific political changes in San Francisco when thinking about where he wanted to send the National Guard. 'Donald Trump has taken many swings at San Francisco over the years — just ask Nancy Pelosi,' Wiener said. 'The other thing is, when it comes to Trump, the eye of Sauron is going to look wherever it's going to look,' Wiener said. 'If he's going after Oakland, Baltimore, Chicago, New York and L.A. today, he's going to go after other cities tomorrow.' Since he became San Francisco mayor in January, Lurie has carefully avoided even uttering Trump's name in public in an attempt to avoid drawing too much attention from a vengeful president with a reputation for being unpredictable. He's seen little evidence that his approach is unpopular: In fact, 50% of respondents in a recent Chronicle poll said the mayor was right to prioritize local issues. Lurie's office had no comment Monday. Former Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf said Monday that she has 'great compassion for the mayors who are struggling with the right thing to do in Trump's second term,' pointing to the decisive conservative control of the U.S. Supreme Court and the Republican majorities in both chambers of Congress. Schaff had a widely-publicized clash with Trump during his first term in 2018, when she as Oakland mayor issued a public warning about an imminent immigration sweep. Trump called her action a 'disgrace' and urged his attorney general to consider prosecuting Schaaf. In direct response to Schaaf, a Republican Congressman introduced unsuccessful legislation that would have imposed criminal penalties — and possible jailtime — against local officials who made similar disclosures. Schaaf said she thinks it's 'wise' for mayors to focus on what they were elected to do, unless they find themselves directly in the crosshairs of the White House, which is the situation that she thinks she faced in Oakland seven years ago. 'I really did not want to be sucked into a national debate when I was elected to run the city, to keep people safe,' Schaaf said. 'It doesn't surprise me that Mayor Lurie is focused on what he was elected to do and not allowing himself to be distracted, because Trump hasn't called out San Francisco in this way.' Barbara Lee, Oakland's current mayor, responded Monday to Trump's comments about her city by calling them inaccurate and 'an attempt to score cheap political points by tearing down communities he doesn't understand.' Schaaf told the Chronicle that she has 'a lot of respect and faith' that Lee will 'do what is right for her values and the values of Oakland.' And while Trump isn't talking much about San Francisco now, that could change under the wrong circumstances, said Jeff Cretan, who was a spokesperson for former Mayor London Breed. A high-profile violent incident during an immigration action or protest in San Francisco could quickly result in Trump setting his sights on the city, Cretan said. 'I don't want to see something horrible happen, but that could change things,' he said. 'Sometimes those moments are what galvanize people … Those bigger, symbolic things that resonate with people more often are what draw a lot of the attention.' Lurie has clearly indicated his desire to avoid such a scenario. In June, after Trump first sent National Guard troops to Los Angeles, a reporter asked Lurie if he anticipated something similar happening in San Francisco, where protests had already erupted. Lurie said he was focused on 'keeping San Franciscans safe.' 'We have this under control,' he said.


New York Post
39 minutes ago
- New York Post
What is Section 740 of the DC Home Rule Act that Trump is using to take over DC's police?
The Home Rule Act, which granted DC self-governance in 1973, allows the president to assert emergency control of the Metropolitan Police Department for 30 days. Congress can pass a joint resolution extending his control, which would require a bare majority in the Republican-held House and Senate.