UPDATE: R-71 processing begins, disclosure challenged
State election crews have begun counting the signatures submitted by sponsors of Referendum 71, the effort to force a public vote in November on the state’s newly expanded domestic partnership law. Sponsors, called Protect Washington Families, meanwhile, are taking the state to court to try to block public release of the names of people who signed their petitions.
After state Archives completed microfilming of 9,359 petition sheets, about 20 crew members began counting the raw number of voter signatures submitted by sponsors on Saturday. Sponsors estimate the total at 138,000, not much above the bare minimum of 120,577 valid signatures needed to win a spot on the ballot. The historic error rate is 18 percent; 138,000 is about 14 percent. Actual signature check, comparing petition signatures against computerized voter registration cards, will begin in a few days.
Meanwhile, the sponsors are asking U.S. District Judge Benjamin Settle to block public release of the petitions. They say disclosure would “chill free speech protected under the First Amendment, particularly when it is reasonably probable that those exercising their First Amendment rights will be subjected to threats and harassment.” “The hearing is at 2:30 p.m. Wednesday in Settle’s courtroom in Tacoma.
The Elections Division has a consistent policy of granting public-records requests for initiative and referendum petition sheets, notes Elections Director Nick Handy. There is no statute that permits the state to deny the request or to black out any of the fields, such as the voter’s signature. The division is currently responding to a request for Tim Eyman’s Initiative 1033 petitions. Brian Murphy of the citizen group Whosigned.org has an R-71 request pending. The group plans to post signers’ names and addresses on the Internet. Handy has cautioned against use of legitimate public records to harass or intimidate voters for exercising their constitutionally protect right of initiative and referendum.
4 thoughts on “UPDATE: R-71 processing begins, disclosure challenged”
Mr. Ammons:
Could you please post an estimated time when the raw count will be done? I would think this would go very quickly, if you have 20 people checking the raw count on 9,300 petitions.
Also, could you please say something more about the historic error rate of 18%. Is that a consistent number or is it an average that might be skewed by a few outliers with very high error rates?
we should have that raw number on Thursday. it’s counting through an estimated 130,000-plus signatures, not 9,300 petitions we’re talking about. the 18 percent is a fairly good rule of thumb, though there have been several in the 20s in recent years. Tim Eyman’s I-1033 this year was a possibly record low 12 percent error rate.
Thank you.
I look forward to hearing the raw number, since (as I understand it) the 138,000 estimate comes from the R-71 proponents and not from your office. It seems odd to me that the R-71 proponents claimed on their website to be just at the 120,000 threshold on Friday and yet came in 18,000 over that threshold within 24 hours. So the raw number is of great interest.
Also, FYI: if they came in at exactly 138,000, the cushion for error would be a little less than 13%. 13% exactly would bring them a few hundred names short of the goal.
I just looked up the information from the Secretary of States news room announcement on I-1033. You mentioned you included a random sample of signatures of 3%. For 3% of 315,444 this would have been. 9463.32. You choose 9614 for your three percent number. Of these 970 were invalid signatures. 970/9614 is .100894 and not 12% as previously indicated. I am not understanding the discrepancy difference. I did use a calculator for this exercise also.
Comments are closed.