R-71 update: signature requests pending
As Archives workers wrap up their microfilming of over 9,000 Referendum 71 petitions, public records requests are pending –and it could well lead to online posting of everyone who signed the petitions.
Archives will wrap-up their “imaging” of the petitions Wednesday and the Elections Division crew will count the raw number of signatures submitted by Protect Marriage Washington, and then begin checking the signatures against voter registration records. The R-71 group hopes to force a statewide vote in November on the state’s new “everything but marriage” law that gives registered domestic partners the full range of rights and responsibilities now provided married couples. The legislation, Senate Bill 5688, is on hold while the referendum is pending.
Three individuals have contacted the Secretary of State’s public records officer to inquire about getting the names and addresses of people who signed the measure, although no formal request has been made just yet. 3 p.m. Tuesday UPDATE: Brian Murphy of the citizen group WhoSigned.org has filed an official public records request for all of those who signed R-71 petitions, “at the earliest possible moment they are made available.” That will probably be early next week, presuming a court doesn’t block their release.
The Archives are microfilming both the entire petition – 2 feet by 3 feet because the entire text of the 100-plus pages of the legislation must be included – and the “pages” that include up to 20 voter signatures and the reverse side that shows the name of the signature-solicitor. The records then are digitized and available in CDs, DVD, rolls of microfilm or portable hard drive. Costs will range from about $25 for the DVD to about $200 for the hard drive.
It’s no longer unusual for groups or individuals to request the records and there is no law restricting the use to which they are put. Some supporters of the domestic partnership law have said they will post by hometown and address the names of people who signed the referendum. State Elections Director Nick Handy has said the agency supports transparency and supports the open-records, but strongly urges people not to use the information to harass voters for taking part in a constitutionally protect right.
6 thoughts on “R-71 update: signature requests pending”
Harassment was never the goal as much as the bluster sounded like it was (They are Washingtonians, after all, so no real confrontational intent), just transparency– or it was. That’s not it anymore, not after that video of the petition taker telling folks that his petition would allow people to vote for marriage equality. There’s a definite interest by certain parties to determine how many people were duped, and certainly if the measure qualifies, a major campaign point will be in the idea that a large number of signatures are from people unduly harassed into signing something like this.
It’s clear from that video, too, that the petitioner made every effort to prevent the signer from checking the purpose of the petition, including a large binder clip obscuring the pertinent information (i.e., the purpose of the referendum and the rationale of the petition sponsor).
The R&I process in this state was started to help people get around corporate interests and out of state lobbying groups and their funding of state legislative acts, but now people are trying to rubber-stamp the efforts of an outside lobbying group founded by a man living in Oregon, with outright protections of their admitted deceptions. Any truly noble and highly moral movement would seek to avoid such a thing, don’t you think?
I think it’s time to change the R&I process.
Don’t throw the whole bushel of apples away because a couple of them are rotten.
I wish the Gov or Sec of State would form a diverse volunteer tiger team to look at this process. Its getting abused with no over-sight.
Any plans on addressing things like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=47u2m4hH0SQ
That’s a paid signature-gatherer lying about the purpose of the petition and making an active effort to obscure the petition language.
I was confronted by a signature gatherer for the King County proposition of having some district council members. I signed that. Later coming out I see he had carefully folded R-71 ballots that basically just showed the signature portion, absolutely none of the initiative they were for.
I still don’t know if I was slipped an R-71 ballot. The dissent of the Supreme Courts overturning of the campaign lying law warned that it was ‘an invitation to lie with impunity’ and they’ve been proven right. Lies at the top of the petitions, lies told to get people to sign, out and out deceit to get a signature on the form.
I look forward to seeing if my signature is surprisingly on an R-71 petition – is there any recourse for a citizen that has been tricked into signing something they had no intention of signing?
Apparently its not illegal to lie about contents of a petition because the person signing should be well informed of the purpose before they sign. Then again, if you are trying to trick people into signing the last thing you would want them to do is read the real purpose of the referendum.
In my own personal opinion, R&I have never really done much for this state. In fact the only things I’ve liked recently were I-1000 and the smoking ban. Other than that its just Tim Eyman and every single year with another plot to rob this state of its money.
Concerning the P-I and their posting today. The signatures on the back were for a requirement of PAID signature gatherers only. As far as I know their were not Paid signature gatherers for R-71 so the lawsuite is irrelevant.
Comments are closed.