Spokane Valley Sen. Leonard Christian draws rebuke over ‘inflaming’ remarks in floor speech

OLYMPIA – State Sen. Leonard Christian, R-Spokane Valley, drew rebuke from fellow lawmakers Wednesday afternoon for using a slur for disabled people while debating the merits of a state program that imposes restrictions on those with developmental disabilities who have been charged or convicted of a sexual offense or suspected of being a risk to others.

Supporters of a bill to repeal the program, and a 2021 ombuds report, argue that the program has little success, an inconsistent admittance policy and restricts the civil rights of the participants, who in some cases aren’t even charged with crimes, but suspected of them.

Opponents, however, say that repealing the program would put those who have disabilities and currently live in less restrictive housing at greater risk of harm as sex offenders potentially move in.

“I do not have a speechwriter. Probably need one, but I don’t,” Christian said. “So the terms that I put this in is that the folks that we’re responsible for, we’re putting rapists in with retarded people.”

The remark drew audible gasps on the Senate floor while a Republican senator sitting behind Christian appeared to wince. Majority Floor Leader Sen. Marcus Riccelli, D-Spokane, raised an objection to his speech and said Christian was “inflaming, rather than engendering, debate.”

Lt. Gov. Denny Heck, who was presiding over the session, told Christian to more closely watch his language.

“I guess I need a list of words I cannot say; that would be very helpful to me,” Christian responded.

Christian added that “I guess that developmental disability would be the right term,” before continuing with his floor speech.

In an interview Thursday morning, Christian said “this bill was going to go by and nobody, literally, was going to say another word about it.” He said he hoped the phrase would draw awareness to the proposal.

He also repeated the word multiple times in the interview.

“The reality is that the underlying policy is going to hurt the most vulnerable people that we’re responsible to protect,” Christian said in the interview. “It is literally putting rapists in with retarded people.”

Christian said that “the only reason we’re talking today is because I said an outdated word,” but added he would “do better to find a different way of making a point in the future.”

State Sen. Noel Frame, D-Seattle, was visibly upset as she rose to speak after Christian concluded his remarks.

“I am so emotional at this moment because I cannot believe a member of this body would feign outrage about caring for disabled people after using such an offensive term that is wildly unacceptable in our society today,” Frame said. “And make jokes about how it’s on a list of words he can’t say anymore because he’s not a speechwriter.”

While the word has long been considered a slur to refer to those with mental disabilities, it has seen increased usage and acceptance largely among some conservatives in recent years. In April 2025, podcaster Joe Rogan declared that the word was back, which he said was “one of the great culture victories.”

Last year, President Donald Trump used the word to describe Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz in a social media post, and later added that he “absolutely” stood by the statement.

A study published by Montclair State University found that usage of the word had tripled on the social media site X after owner Elon Musk used the word in a January 2025 post.

Senate Minority Leader John Braun, R-Centralia, apologized for Christian’s remarks as the Senate opened it’s session Thursday, though he did not specifically identify the senator by name.

“There were some comments made during that debate that, frankly, I found offensive, I was embarrassed by, I was frankly saddened to hear them spoken,” Braun said.

Braun added that while debate can be contentious, the “deliberate use of language that is injurious to others, that is hurtful to others, it does nothing to convince others.”

“In fact, just the opposite,” Braun said. “It undermines our credibility, individually and collectively.”

The legislation, which ultimately passed on a party-line 29-20 vote, would end the state’s Community Protection Program by the end of the year. Under the bill, those currently enrolled in the program would be transitioned into other state services. A previous version of the bill passed the House 52-44 on Feb. 12. Six Democrats voted with all Republicans against the bill.

The program, which had more than 400 enrollees as of 2019, is open to clients of the Department of Social and Health Services Developmental Disabilities Administration who are 18 and older who are either considered to be a risk or who have been charged or convicted of a sex crime.

Braun said Wednesday that among those enrolled in the Community Protection Program are 44 people convicted of sexual offenses and 128 not charged or convicted but who have a history of stalking or violence.

The legislation to discontinue the program was requested by the Department of Social and Health Services.

“This program is failing. This program doesn’t work,” Sen. Yasmin Trudeau, D-Tacoma, said. “I looked at it, and I was like, there is nothing that we are getting as far as a benefit, but we absolutely are restricting the rights of people that, yeah, they may have been in a situation related to their intellectual or developmental disabilities, I don’t know, but what I know is that this program is not worth protecting.”

The Special Olympics calls the word used by Christian a form of hate speech.

“While ‘mental retardation’ was originally introduced as a medical term in 1961 for people with intellectual disabilities, in the decades since, the R-word has become an insult used all too commonly in everyday language. Those who use the R-word often do so with little regard for the pain it causes people with intellectual disabilities – and the exclusion it perpetuates in our society,” the organization says on its website.

Supporters of the legislation said the bill would end a program that is too restrictive for those with disabilities and would allow participants to enter programs with better outcomes that fit their needs.

“It is coercive. It is a violation of their civil rights,” Frame said. “And we have alternative waivers in place, alternative programs, to ensure that we keep the community safe in a way that is tailored to these specific individuals.”

A 2021 report published by the Office of Developmental Disabilities Ombuds outlined the challenges of the program and found that the participants feel forced into the program, and once in, it is nearly impossible to exit. According to the report, enrollees in the program are deemed to pose a “risk” to others and have restrictions on decision-making ability, relationships or participation in community activities.

According to the report, one participant said that after serving time in prison for a sex offense they committed when they were 18, they were told they would need to enroll in the program for seven years. Despite not reoffending, the enrollee said it took them 20 years to graduate from the program.

Participants must be adults and can only leave the program by graduation once deemed no longer a threat to the community, through a refusal of services, terminated services for noncompliance or by going to the hospital or jail.

While the program is technically voluntary, those who leave it without graduating face the loss of some state services normally given to people who have disabilities.

Some in the program never convicted of a crime were advised to enter it by their case managers from the state Developmental Disabilities Administration. If they were to decline, they also would face the loss of state services. The ombudsman report found that what triggers referral from case managers is inconsistent.

Participants, however, frequently complained about arbitrary restrictions and an unclear path to graduation.

Common restrictions include monitoring of all phone calls, a prohibition on social media or the internet, random room searches and a requirement that windows be frosted so that those inside cannot see outside.

Opponents argued that ending the program could increase the risk for those enrolled in other programs the suspected offenders would join .

“I agree with the concerns about this program being overly restrictive or potentially violating their human rights,” Braun said. “There is a big difference between saying we need to look after these folks who are in our care, who have some very significant challenges to themselves, and more importantly, Mr. President, to those around them.”