Washington · individual fact

Washington real gross domestic product

Washington’s inflation-adjusted economic output, annual growth, industry structure, and employment context.

Real GDP$715.88B2025 · #9 of 50 · highest first
Annual real GDP growth3.2%2025 · #5 of 50 · highest first
Current-dollar GDP$892.25B2025 · #10 of 50 · highest first

Washington over time

Explore Washington readings, major events and reviewed actions on the same date scale. Washington officeholders appear in separate lanes. National event evidence describes national context; it does not measure a Washington effect.

Major events & context · A curated selection, including uncertain effects. Milestone dates do not establish that an event caused a Washington change.

Enacted / issuedDid not proceedPending / in progressStatus unclear

Colors show the latest recorded status. Passing one chamber is not enactment. A number groups actions with the same date, body and status.

Real GDP Washington · source units
WashingtonPublished U.S. benchmark

Move across the chart to inspect the nearest observation. Click or tap to keep a reading selected, or focus the chart and use the arrow keys. Hover over or focus a marker to explore; click or tap to pin. Press Escape to clear.

Real GDP2025: $715.88B$0$13.38T$26.76TWashington, 2014: $456.19BWashington, 2015: $476.72BWashington, 2016: $495.72BWashington, 2017: $527.17BWashington, 2018: $561.72BWashington, 2019: $588.69BWashington, 2020: $586.26BWashington, 2021: $626.71BWashington, 2022: $641.88BWashington, 2023: $666.63BWashington, 2024: $693.91BWashington, 2025: $715.88B201420192025
✦ Major events & context · 29National context · Hurricanes Katrina and Rita · 2005-08-29Katrina and RitaNational context · Great Financial Crisis and Great Recession · 2008-09-15Great Financial CrisisNational context · Federal Reserve moves rates close to zero · 2008-12-16Fed near-zero ratesNational context · American Recovery and Reinvestment Act · 2009-02-17Recovery ActNational context · Japan disaster disrupts U.S. auto production · 2011-05-17Japan / auto supplyNational context · Midwest drought reduces farm output · 2012-09-27Drought / farm outputNational context · Automatic federal spending cuts begin · 2013-03-01Federal spending cutsNational context · 2013 federal government shutdown · 2013-10-012013 shutdownNational context · Oil-price decline cuts drilling investment · 2015-02-24Oil investment downturnNational context · Hurricanes Harvey and Irma disrupt activity · 2017-08-25Harvey and IrmaNational context · 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act · 2017-12-222017 tax lawNational context · U.S.–China tariff escalation · 2018-07-06U.S.–China tariffsNational context · 2018–19 federal government shutdown · 2018-12-222018–19 shutdownNational context · Federal Reserve begins 2019 rate cuts · 2019-07-312019 Fed rate cutsNational context · COVID-19 pandemic · 2020-03-11COVID-19 pandemicNational context · Emergency rate cuts and asset purchases · 2020-03-15Fed emergency supportNational context · CARES Act pandemic relief · 2020-03-27CARES Act reliefNational context · American Rescue Plan · 2021-03-11American Rescue PlanNational context · Reopening recovery meets supply bottlenecks · 2021-07-09Reopening / shortagesNational context · Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act · 2021-11-15Infrastructure lawNational context · Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine · 2022-02-24Russia invades UkraineNational context · Federal Reserve begins 2022 rate increases · 2022-03-16Fed rate increasesNational context · Semiconductor and energy investment incentives · 2022-08-16CHIPS / energy incentivesNational context · Banking stress and credit conditions · 2023-03-22Banking / credit stressNational context · Federal Reserve begins 2024 rate cuts · 2024-09-182024 Fed rate cutsNational context · Broad U.S. tariffs and volatile trade flows · 2025-04-02Tariffs / trade timingNational context · 2025 tax and spending reconciliation law · 2025-07-042025 tax / spending lawNational context · 2025 shutdown reduces federal services · 2025-10-012025 shutdownNational context · Iran conflict and Strait of Hormuz disruption · 2026-02-28Iran / Hormuz disruption● Washington Legislature · 0No reviewed actions match these filters.● U.S. Congress · Washington delegation · 0No reviewed actions match these filters.◆ Governor · 0No reviewed actions match these filters.■ Washington agencies · 0No reviewed actions match these filters.2005-08-012026-02-28

0 of 0 reviewed Washington actions match · 0 date markers shown. 29 major events shown separately.

Washington · 2025: $715.88B · Rank #9 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: $23.94T

Total value added produced in the state in millions of chained 2017 dollars. Annual estimates; the downloaded BEA snapshot is retained with a source hash. Revisions can change historical values and ranks. Annual observations use December 31; monthly observations use the first of the month. Lines connect consecutive readings and do not supply values between them. Missing observations break the lines.

View observations and export data
Washington Real GDP · source units
PeriodWashingtonRankU.S. benchmark
2025$715.88B#9 of 50$23.94T
2024$693.91B#9 of 50$23.39T
2023$666.63B#9 of 50$22.72T
2022$641.88B#10 of 50$22.08T
2021$626.71B#10 of 50$21.56T
2020$586.26B#10 of 50$20.28T
2019$588.69B#10 of 50$20.72T
2018$561.72B#10 of 50$20.19T
2017$527.17B#12 of 50$19.61T
2016$495.72B#14 of 50$19.14T
2015$476.72B#14 of 50$18.8T
2014$456.19B#14 of 50$18.26T
How major events are selected

The timeline combines the corresponding national fact’s reviewed event catalog, labeled National context, with individually reviewed state milestones. State events use primary sources and distinguish signing, effective and filing dates. Each milestone keeps its source-check date, geographical limits and evidence limits. This curated selection is not a complete history.

Date ranges affect events and actions. Action type, status and official-name search affect government records only. Events remain separate from action counts. An event after the latest observation extends context without creating a new reading.

Washington · state comparison

Washington output and growth

Annual real GDP removes price changes. Annual growth compares annual levels; it is separate from an annualized quarterly growth rate.

Washington · 2025$715.88B
Washington rank#9among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark$23.94TSame measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Real GDP

Total value added produced in the state in millions of chained 2017 dollars.

Annual estimates; the downloaded BEA snapshot is retained with a source hash. Revisions can change historical values and ranks.

Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.

Washington
Real GDP history in Washington$-3.07T$12.2T$27.47T20142025
2025 · Washington: $715.88B · Rank #9 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: $23.94T · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Washington Real GDP history
PeriodWashingtonCompare
2014$456.19B
2015$476.72B
2016$495.72B
2017$527.17B
2018$561.72B
2019$588.69B
2020$586.26B
2021$626.71B
2022$641.88B
2023$666.63B
2024$693.91B
2025$715.88B

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Washington stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Washington has a dark outline.

Lower value · $38.06BHigher value · $3.43TStriped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Washington · $715.88B2025 · Rank #9 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Washington with every state · 50 ranked
Real GDP · 2025 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1California$3.43T—
#2Texas$2.33T—
#3New York$1.89T—
#4Florida$1.38T—
#5Illinois$948.03B—
#6Pennsylvania$815.87B—
#7Ohio$738.49B—
#8Georgia$719.74B—
#9Washington · your comparison$715.88B—
#10New Jersey$688.76B—
#11North Carolina$682.83B—
#12Massachusetts$640.79B—
#13Virginia$631.98B—
#14Michigan$575.4B—
#15Colorado$452.78B—
#16Arizona$451.49B—
#17Tennessee$447.66B—
#18Maryland$437.37B—
#19Indiana$422.47B—
#20Minnesota$392.31B—
#21Wisconsin$363.84B—
#22Missouri$362.46B—
#23Connecticut$297.35B—
#24South Carolina$287.16B—
#25Oregon$264.75B—
#26Louisiana$263.89B—
#27Alabama$259.46B—
#28Utah$243.04B—
#29Kentucky$239.51B—
#30Oklahoma$216.31B—
#31Nevada$210.1B—
#32Iowa$204.86B—
#33Kansas$178.51B—
#34Nebraska$156.61B—
#35Arkansas$147.93B—
#36Mississippi$123.37B—
#37New Mexico$122.58B—
#38Idaho$103.62B—
#39New Hampshire$99.06B—
#40Hawaii$93.38B—
#41Delaware$89.92B—
#42West Virginia$84.94B—
#43Maine$77.23B—
#44Rhode Island$67.25B—
#45North Dakota$65.27B—
#46Montana$61.08B—
#47South Dakota$59.87B—
#48Alaska$56.34B—
#49Wyoming$40.16B—
#50Vermont$38.06B—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

Washington · state comparison

What makes up Washington GDP?

Choose an industry to compare Washington’s output with every state. Nominal industry values can be added within a year.

Washington · 2025$8.05B
Washington rank#7among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark$255.93BSame measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting · output

Industry value added, current dollars. The broad industries listed form an exhaustive partition of total GDP.

A large industry output rank can reflect the size of the state. Chained-dollar components should not be added.

Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.

Washington
Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting · output history in Washington$-36.06B$150.2B$336.45B20142025
2025 · Washington: $8.05B · Rank #7 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: $255.93B · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Washington Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting · output history
PeriodWashingtonCompare
2014$6.92B
2015$7.74B
2016$7.11B
2017$7.14B
2018$7.62B
2019$7.74B
2020$7.6B
2021$8.03B
2022$9.5B
2023$8.61B
2024$8.49B
2025$8.05B

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Washington stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Washington has a dark outline.

Lower value · $164.2MHigher value · $50.67BStriped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Washington · $8.05B2025 · Rank #7 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Washington with every state · 50 ranked
Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting · output · 2025 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1California$50.67B—
#2Texas$16.95B—
#3Iowa$14.1B—
#4Nebraska$10.6B—
#5Illinois$9.52B—
#6Florida$8.33B—
#7Washington · your comparison$8.05B—
#8Minnesota$8.01B—
#9Indiana$7.13B—
#10South Dakota$7.08B—
#11Kansas$7.02B—
#12Ohio$7B—
#13Wisconsin$6.58B—
#14Oregon$6.18B—
#15Michigan$6.02B—
#16Missouri$5.71B—
#17North Carolina$5.55B—
#18Idaho$5.41B—
#19Pennsylvania$4.97B—
#20North Dakota$4.71B—
#21Georgia$4.53B—
#22Oklahoma$4.26B—
#23Arkansas$4.13B—
#24Kentucky$3.75B—
#25New York$3.55B—
#26Alabama$3.29B—
#27Mississippi$2.99B—
#28Colorado$2.98B—
#29Arizona$2.85B—
#30Montana$2.49B—
#31Louisiana$2.42B—
#32Virginia$2.37B—
#33Tennessee$2.01B—
#34New Mexico$1.7B—
#35South Carolina$1.63B—
#36Utah$1.59B—
#37Maryland$1.31B—
#38New Jersey$1.27B—
#39Maine$1.2B—
#40Wyoming$888.5M—
#41Massachusetts$869.6M—
#42Delaware$741.1M—
#43West Virginia$561.8M—
#44Hawaii$553.9M—
#45Nevada$551.2M—
#46Vermont$536.1M—
#47Alaska$488.1M—
#48Connecticut$341.8M—
#49New Hampshire$320.1M—
#50Rhode Island$164.2M—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

Washington · state comparison

Does growth translate into more work?

BEA’s total employment counts jobs, including proprietors, rather than distinct people.

Washington · 20254,879,224
Washington rank#14among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark218,324,700Same measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Total employment · jobs

BEA annual total full-time and part-time employment, including proprietors. One person can hold multiple jobs.

Separate from residence-based civilian employment in BLS LAUS and from nonfarm payroll employment.

Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.

Washington
Total employment · jobs history in Washington-28,039,640111,209,770250,459,17920142025
2025 · Washington: 4,879,224 · Rank #14 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 218,324,700 · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Washington Total employment · jobs history
PeriodWashingtonCompare
20144,094,839
20154,199,867
20164,314,703
20174,433,544
20184,539,582
20194,594,388
20204,438,563
20214,578,926
20224,760,255
20234,821,444
20244,863,087
20254,879,224

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Washington stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Washington has a dark outline.

Lower value · 439,349Higher value · 25,407,891Striped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Washington · 4,879,2242025 · Rank #14 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Washington with every state · 50 ranked
Total employment · jobs · 2025 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1California25,407,891—
#2Texas20,639,097—
#3Florida15,174,955—
#4New York13,498,360—
#5Illinois8,197,037—
#6Pennsylvania8,150,272—
#7Ohio7,394,537—
#8Georgia7,184,433—
#9North Carolina6,864,520—
#10New Jersey6,095,348—
#11Michigan5,946,187—
#12Virginia5,789,397—
#13Massachusetts5,020,627—
#14Washington · your comparison4,879,224—
#15Tennessee4,633,711—
#16Arizona4,455,141—
#17Colorado4,231,488—
#18Indiana4,213,622—
#19Maryland4,009,451—
#20Missouri3,998,549—
#21Minnesota3,914,167—
#22Wisconsin3,855,203—
#23South Carolina3,245,739—
#24Alabama2,966,686—
#25Louisiana2,831,737—
#26Kentucky2,718,290—
#27Oregon2,671,758—
#28Oklahoma2,466,719—
#29Utah2,458,247—
#30Connecticut2,424,541—
#31Nevada2,163,825—
#32Iowa2,122,389—
#33Kansas2,007,083—
#34Arkansas1,811,561—
#35Mississippi1,713,294—
#36Nebraska1,410,465—
#37Idaho1,238,642—
#38New Mexico1,183,906—
#39New Hampshire942,254—
#40Hawaii925,451—
#41West Virginia910,570—
#42Maine898,379—
#43Montana761,061—
#44Rhode Island690,505—
#45Delaware678,218—
#46South Dakota665,420—
#47North Dakota605,276—
#48Alaska472,008—
#49Wyoming451,906—
#50Vermont439,349—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

What candidates are saying

Explore statements about GDP, economic growth and production from FactVote’s Washington candidate profiles. Compare candidates within each recorded race, with each person’s matching statements kept together. These are candidate and campaign statements, not verified outcomes.

10 statements from 6 candidates

2026 Washington U.S. House — District 1 — General Election

2 candidates with matching statements · 2 statements

Mary Silva

1 statement

Republican · U.S. House District 1 · WA

Economic growth & production context

For too long, short-sighted economic policies have allowed multinational corporations to hollow out America’s middle class from within. Offshoring has stripped away vital manufacturing capabilities, leaving our local economies vulnerable. I believe it is time to reverse this trend. By implementing p…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Economy, jobs, taxes, and affordability

Candidate campaign source

For too long, short-sighted economic policies have allowed multinational corporations to hollow out America’s middle class from within. Offshoring has stripped away vital manufacturing capabilities, leaving our local economies vulnerable. I believe it is time to reverse this trend. By implementing policy-driven solutions that incentivize domestic production, we can return high-quality jobs to Washington and rebuild our economic independence.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026

2026 Washington official voter-guide statement — Mary Silva ↗

Suzan DelBene

1 statement

Democratic · U.S. House District 1 · WA

Economic growth & production context

We need a Congress that will focus on putting working families and broad economic growth first, and that’s what I’m fighting for every day. I continue to champion efforts that provide tax relief for the middle-class, including the enhanced Child Tax Credit and the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit. The …

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Economic Security and Rising Costs for Families

Candidate campaign source

We need a Congress that will focus on putting working families and broad economic growth first, and that’s what I’m fighting for every day. I continue to champion efforts that provide tax relief for the middle-class, including the enhanced Child Tax Credit and the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit. The enhanced Child Tax Credit was included in the American Rescue Plan and provided families with monthly checks for 6 months and lifted 3 million kids out of poverty. I am also the lead sponsor of legislation that would create or preserve more than 2 million affordable housing units nationwide in the next decade and address the growing housing crisis.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026

Suzan DelBene — candidate-owned primary source 5 ↗

2026 Washington U.S. House — District 4 — General Election

1 candidate with matching statements · 3 statements

Amanda McKinney

3 statements

Republican · U.S. House District 4 · WA

Economic growth & production context

Energy independence is national security. Amanda McKinney supports American energy dominance through hydropower, nuclear energy, natural gas, and responsible domestic production.

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Energy Independence and Affordability

Candidate campaign source

Energy independence is national security. Amanda McKinney supports American energy dominance through hydropower, nuclear energy, natural gas, and responsible domestic production.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026

Amanda McKinney — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
View 2 more statements from Amanda McKinney
Economic growth & production context

Financial Freedom and Cryptocurrency With her background in banking, Amanda McKinney understands the importance of financial freedom and innovation.She supports cryptocurrency and blockchain innovation as tools for economic growth, privacy, and American leadership. Amanda opposes using regulation to…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Cryptocurrency and financial privacy

Candidate campaign source

Financial Freedom and Cryptocurrency With her background in banking, Amanda McKinney understands the importance of financial freedom and innovation.She supports cryptocurrency and blockchain innovation as tools for economic growth, privacy, and American leadership. Amanda opposes using regulation to monitor or control lawful financial activity.In Congress, she will fight to keep financial innovation in the United States and protect Americans from government overreach.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026

Amanda McKinney — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
Economic growth & production context

Energy Independence and Affordability Energy independence is national security. Amanda McKinney supports American energy dominance through hydropower, nuclear energy, natural gas, and responsible domestic production.She opposes radical energy mandates that raise costs, destabilize the grid, and hurt…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Energy independence and affordability

Candidate campaign source

Energy Independence and Affordability Energy independence is national security. Amanda McKinney supports American energy dominance through hydropower, nuclear energy, natural gas, and responsible domestic production.She opposes radical energy mandates that raise costs, destabilize the grid, and hurt farmers, families, and small businesses. Amanda believes America should never depend on foreign adversaries for energy.In Congress, she will fight for affordable, reliable energy, protect jobs, and put American workers first.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026

Amanda McKinney — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗

2026 Washington U.S. House — District 6 — General Election

1 candidate with matching statements · 2 statements

Emily Randall

2 statements

Democratic · U.S. House District 6 · WA

Economic growth & production context

In our country today, there is too much wealth in too few hands. We can build a better future for all of us by strengthening the middle class, by giving folks the opportunity to earn a good wage and benefits, keep their lights on and food on their table, and have money in their pockets. We can creat…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Lowering Costs for Families

Candidate campaign source

In our country today, there is too much wealth in too few hands. We can build a better future for all of us by strengthening the middle class, by giving folks the opportunity to earn a good wage and benefits, keep their lights on and food on their table, and have money in their pockets. We can create more jobs and grow our economy through comprehensive regulatory frameworks that encourage innovation while protecting consumers.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026

Emily Randall — candidate-owned primary source 8 ↗
View 1 more statement from Emily Randall
Economic growth & production context

I believe in an economy that works from the middle class out–not trickle down–putting working families at the center of economic policies. I believe in equal pay for equal work, a tax structure that requires big business to pay its fair share, and in creating good jobs by investing in small and mid-…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Lowering Costs for Families

Candidate campaign source

I believe in an economy that works from the middle class out–not trickle down–putting working families at the center of economic policies. I believe in equal pay for equal work, a tax structure that requires big business to pay its fair share, and in creating good jobs by investing in small and mid-sized businesses. I believe in the importance of driving technological innovation and economic growth, including through blockchain technology and the digital asset industry. I believe in removing the barriers to economic freedom and opportunity for our most marginalized communities such as communities of color, LGBTQ folks, and the disability community.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026

Emily Randall — candidate-owned primary source 8 ↗
Race groups · Page 1 of 2
How statements are selected

This section matches specific GDP, economic growth and production terms in retained, attributed source text from published Washington candidate profiles. A profile heading or biography alone does not qualify. The Florida geography is fixed; saved state preferences cannot change these results. A mention can concern a community or group rather than Florida’s statewide measure.

Matching is automatic and does not establish a candidate’s stance, the accuracy of a claim, or an effect on the measured result. Results are grouped by recorded race, then by candidate name. Within each candidate, the matching issue mentions appear first. Only candidates with matching retained statements are shown; this is not a complete race roster. Repeated identical text for the same candidate is shown once. Coverage follows the existing state profiles and is not a complete record of all candidates or everything they have said. Review dates are not statement dates.

Washington incumbents

What incumbents are proposing

Explore reviewed bills sponsored by current Washington legislators and Washington’s congressional delegation, plus retained proposals from Washington’s governor and agencies. Each record keeps its latest recorded status and official evidence.

0 matching sponsorships or proposals · 0 Washington incumbents. These filters apply only to this section.

No retained proposals match these filters. A missing record does not mean an incumbent has taken no action.

What sponsorship and proposal counts tell us

Only current Washington officeholders retained in the reviewed collection qualify. Bills require a recorded primary sponsorship; cosponsors and signing officials are excluded from sponsorship counts. An official introducer recorded as acting by request is labeled “Introduced by request”; that procedural role does not establish personal policy endorsement. Governor and agency records qualify when recorded as proposed. A separately verified governor transmittal can also establish an original proposal whose latest status reflects its later outcome. Signing an enacted law alone does not establish a proposal. A record appearing under several facts is counted once per officeholder. A bill with multiple primary sponsors appears under each recorded sponsor.

Enacted bills, adopted resolutions and unsuccessful measures remain visible as proposal history. Passing one chamber is not enactment. These counts do not measure effectiveness or prove that an action changed a Washington statistic. Collection reviewed Sep 4, 2026.