Thursday, November 5, 2009
Election That's It: R-71 Wins!
Posted by Dominic Holden on Thu, Nov 5, 2009 at 6:37 PM
Leaders of the campaign to approve Referendum 71 say the latest batch of election results confirm that the majority of Washington voters have approved Referendum 71, thereby upholding the state's domestic partnership law for same-sex and senior couples.
Statewide, R-71 is passing by a margin of more than four points. In King county, where the results of 68,507 ballots were just released, voters are approving R-71 by a 34-point margin. King County Elections officials estimate they have another 138,000 ballots on hand to count. But Protect Marriage Washington, the fanatical Christian group that put the domestic-partnership law on the ballot, has yet to concede.
State Senator Ed Murray (D-43), prime sponsor of the domestic-partnership law, says its a done deal. "I'm pleased and relieved," Murray says. "Pleased as a native son of this state that Washington continues to respect its citizens and relieved because I don't believe we were as ready as a community as we could have been."
It was the shortest referendum campaign in state history—less than two and a half months from qualifying for the ballot to election day. The approve Referendum 71 campaign was run by Washington Families Standing Together. The group organized a massive fundraising network, dozens of cooperating groups, and thousands of volunteers across the state.
"The margin is likely to continue to increase over the next few days" says campaign manager Josh Friedes. "To have this large a margin in an off-year election, when the electorate is older and more conservative than in a general-election year, is proof that the people of Washington strongly support gay and lesbian families."
"I think we immediately have to continue conversations about the problems that our families will continue to face until we achieve marriage equality," Friedes says.
But Murray think the next challenge for LGBT-rights advocates will be fending off challenges to the existing domestic partnership law.
"I expect that the far right--because they lost in this state--nationally they will target this state," Murray says. "I think we face a series of initiatives from the far right and we will have to have these campaigns year after year to overturn the domestic partnership bill or have voters vote on a version of the Defense of Marriage Act." But Murray says the state's organizing networks now are stronger as a result of the R-71 campaign. "The vote affirms that the strategy we tried in Washington state was the right one," he says, referring to passing three incremental domestic partnership bills, each one granting more marriage rights to same-sex couples. "We engage citizens in conversions about what it means, survivor benefits and funeral arrangements, instead of just focusing on one word."
Share via
4
First off, so proud and happy to live here! Yay us!!
Second...can the Hateful Bigot Hutcherson try to turn back a law that passed over 2 years ago, by a popular vote? Is that even in the realm of possibility? Seriously, I can't go through this year in and year out.
Will he try for a constitutional amendment here? Does WA State even allow that?
We need someone who knows something to school us.
Second...can the Hateful Bigot Hutcherson try to turn back a law that passed over 2 years ago, by a popular vote? Is that even in the realm of possibility? Seriously, I can't go through this year in and year out.
Will he try for a constitutional amendment here? Does WA State even allow that?
We need someone who knows something to school us.
5
My sentimental side hopes that 71 ends up approved by a greater margin than Q1 in Maine passed by. I know 50%+1's all that matters, I just want to show those bastards that if they want a fight, we're willing to put one up.
But then, what options does Stinkney even have at this point? He's toast as far as the options posited by Murray go. As in:
1) Any R71 2.0 would be totally arbitrary in terms of what rights and responsibilities it took from gay couples unless it *completely* demolished domestic partnerships. And I don't think there's any way he can turn the tide back that far, considering R71 just barely made the ballot this year.
2) WA already has a statutory DOMA, and I think voters would be put off by the arrogance of trying to put it in the state constitution.
But then, what options does Stinkney even have at this point? He's toast as far as the options posited by Murray go. As in:
1) Any R71 2.0 would be totally arbitrary in terms of what rights and responsibilities it took from gay couples unless it *completely* demolished domestic partnerships. And I don't think there's any way he can turn the tide back that far, considering R71 just barely made the ballot this year.
2) WA already has a statutory DOMA, and I think voters would be put off by the arrogance of trying to put it in the state constitution.
6
A huge amount of credit goes to Sen. Ed Murray for years ago insisting on the incremental strategy. I disagreed with him at the time, but our success in Washington in contrast to the rest of the country vindicates his position. This is a great success and lays the groundwork for the ultimate achievement of marriage in the forseeable future.
7
I won't relax until the results are certified. There's still a lot of outstanding votes in the counties that are rejecting R-71 - particularly in Pierce County.
8
Upon re-reading my own scenarios, I realize arbitrariness and arrogance pretty much sum up Stinkney's psyche...Word to the wise(?) though; expect to be smacked down twice as hard if you try to pull something like that, and expect to never again be able to use the 'let the voters decide' canard and be taken seriously.
9
Can't really say I'm proud when marriage is not officially recognized, and when almost half of the state doesn't even believe in "everything but marriage." I'm just glad that some rights will finally be afforded to fellow citizens.
10
A quarter goes in my piggybank tonight toward the day I can move to the Northwest, get gay married, and fill in the bubbles against all future dumbass, bigoted ballot measures. Congrats, people.
11
It's a good step, but I was hoping for a wider margin.
Just as an aside though - a rejection of Ref 71 would NOT have repealed the current DP law. Ref 71 adds more rights, but the DP law stands no matter what happened with Ref71.
Just as an aside though - a rejection of Ref 71 would NOT have repealed the current DP law. Ref 71 adds more rights, but the DP law stands no matter what happened with Ref71.
12
Does anybody know how soon the bigots could file another challenge? I assume it must be at least after a certification of 71.
In the mean time. Horray for Washington!
In the mean time. Horray for Washington!
13
awake:
as long as same-sex is written on the ballot, no matter what comes after it, there's going to be a large # of folks who will just go with their inner ignorance and religious bigotry and vote against us.
(and I guarantee all of those who voted 'reject' had no CLUE what they were really voting against, except it was against gay people in some fashion. The # of times I wrote in comment threads that it was AN EXTENSION OF BENEFITS, just like that, caps yelling at the top of my fingertips...it fell on deaf and more significantly, dumb ears - they could care less. It was same-sex blah blah blah to them).
That we have over 50% in counties beyond King County is impressive in of itself in an off-year election.
I'm very happy with the results!
as long as same-sex is written on the ballot, no matter what comes after it, there's going to be a large # of folks who will just go with their inner ignorance and religious bigotry and vote against us.
(and I guarantee all of those who voted 'reject' had no CLUE what they were really voting against, except it was against gay people in some fashion. The # of times I wrote in comment threads that it was AN EXTENSION OF BENEFITS, just like that, caps yelling at the top of my fingertips...it fell on deaf and more significantly, dumb ears - they could care less. It was same-sex blah blah blah to them).
That we have over 50% in counties beyond King County is impressive in of itself in an off-year election.
I'm very happy with the results!
14
No shit, @6. I bitched at Ed both in person and behind his back for saying so publicly that marriage was the end goal here - I felt it gave unnecessary ammo to the bigots, while he knew he needed to state it out loud to placate his "marriage or nothing" supporters.
It all seems to have worked out. If I wore a hat I'd tip it in the general direction of him and Jamie and their respective others and kids and dogs and such.
Now Washington State partners have a chance to live equal, but I believe him when he predicts our local fight ain't over.
It all seems to have worked out. If I wore a hat I'd tip it in the general direction of him and Jamie and their respective others and kids and dogs and such.
Now Washington State partners have a chance to live equal, but I believe him when he predicts our local fight ain't over.
15
@4 regarding a constitutional amendment you need to have a 2/3 majority vote before it is sent to voters for a simple majority vote to the voters.
ARTICLE XXIII
AMENDMENTS
SECTION 1 HOW MADE. Any amendment or amendments to this Constitution may be proposed in either branch of the legislature; and if the same shall be agreed to by two-thirds of the members elected to each of the two houses, such proposed amendment or amendments shall be entered on their journals, with the ayes and noes thereon, and be submitted to the qualified electors of the state for their approval, at the next general election; and if the people approve and ratify such amendment or amendments, by a majority of the electors voting thereon, the same shall become part of this Constitution, and proclamation thereof shall be made by the governor
ARTICLE XXIII
AMENDMENTS
SECTION 1 HOW MADE. Any amendment or amendments to this Constitution may be proposed in either branch of the legislature; and if the same shall be agreed to by two-thirds of the members elected to each of the two houses, such proposed amendment or amendments shall be entered on their journals, with the ayes and noes thereon, and be submitted to the qualified electors of the state for their approval, at the next general election; and if the people approve and ratify such amendment or amendments, by a majority of the electors voting thereon, the same shall become part of this Constitution, and proclamation thereof shall be made by the governor
16
@15 - that's interesting; sounds like it would be impossible to ram something like that through either house (senate = 63% Dem, house = 64% Dem)
So what's the next step in WA for marriage equality? Do we cool it and let people figure out the sky won't fall because some homos have their separate-but-equal DPs sanctioned by the state and try to repeal DOMA in a few years? Or is it going to be year after year, as Ed put it, of more defensive play?
So what's the next step in WA for marriage equality? Do we cool it and let people figure out the sky won't fall because some homos have their separate-but-equal DPs sanctioned by the state and try to repeal DOMA in a few years? Or is it going to be year after year, as Ed put it, of more defensive play?
17
win or lose, we still need to see the names of the people who signed the petitions supporting putting this on the ballot. we cannot let that slide and become precedent.
sincerely,
diggum
sincerely,
diggum
19
@11: Not quite. Ref. 71 confirmed the passage of Senate Bill 5688. The legislature had already given domestic partners these additional rights and the right was trying to strip those away.
20
@17: Agreed - that would be bad news for the state on the whole, beyond just the equality rights battle. Do it for Eyman -- or more specifically TO Eyman.
21
Hell yes!!! Eastern Warshingtonians need to pack up and head out, preferably to TX, OK, or "Missurah'" where they will be surrounded by their ilk.
WE WON! I am so glad to be from Seattle right now.
WE WON! I am so glad to be from Seattle right now.
24
There are times when I really love our little pocket of territory up here in the northwest corner. This week is one of them. We stood firm on civil rights and trashed that hideous watch seller.
25
As pleased as I am to see that 71 passed, and I did vote for it; I think it is wrong in to make initiative signers names public. It opens people up to the most hateful among us; and it's only purpose is to chill political discourse. I am very pleased that those who shrilly complained that the voters hadn't been consulted have now been thoroughly chastised.
In twenty years kids are going to be as baffled that gays were considered unequal, as mine are now that blacks and whites weren't allowed to marry.
In twenty years kids are going to be as baffled that gays were considered unequal, as mine are now that blacks and whites weren't allowed to marry.
28
@25 - am I mistaken, or isn't it ALREADY the law that signers' names are public information, and the Bigotards are fighting for an exception to be made on their behalf?
31
Want to defeat far right initiatives in this state?
Find out when they plan to have them on the ballot - and put up a Legalized Marijuana initiative for the same ballot date.
Problem solved.
Find out when they plan to have them on the ballot - and put up a Legalized Marijuana initiative for the same ballot date.
Problem solved.
32
@30,
It's really not you they hate, they actually fear that if Mom shacks up with a domestic partner later in life it might mess up their inheritance. You see, domestic partnerships for senior citizens is just a Trojan horse -- next they might want the right to marry.
It's really not you they hate, they actually fear that if Mom shacks up with a domestic partner later in life it might mess up their inheritance. You see, domestic partnerships for senior citizens is just a Trojan horse -- next they might want the right to marry.
33
@28 - You are not mistaken.
@25 - You are Wrong On The Internet, sir or ma'am. While one only gets one vote to make their voice heard and that should remain private, one individual or company can potentially donate millions to "buy" thousands of votes. That requires a certain amount of sunshine to keep things on the level, when peddling that kind of influence.
@25 - You are Wrong On The Internet, sir or ma'am. While one only gets one vote to make their voice heard and that should remain private, one individual or company can potentially donate millions to "buy" thousands of votes. That requires a certain amount of sunshine to keep things on the level, when peddling that kind of influence.
37
This is good news! The whole state, on a county by county level is trending towards LGBT equality! http://pamshouseblend.com/diary/13979/al…
38
@34 - we're not Maine. My family used to own an island there.
My advice was for here. Although it would also work for Oregon and California.
My advice was for here. Although it would also work for Oregon and California.
39
Why are you talking about hating?
People like me, my family and friends are voting against not because we really hate those who practice homosexualism (it is your choice afterall), but because we want our children to be happy - and they will not be completely happy in the case of any physical or emotional defect in normal family relationships. And now they are told everywhere that they do not need to have a normal family to be happy. The same works for pre-marriage relationships - how can people talk to their children about stability and faithfulness if they changed a few partners in their life?
By the way, why do you refer to us, ordinary people, by using curses and offensive words? Does that show your "love"?
People like me, my family and friends are voting against not because we really hate those who practice homosexualism (it is your choice afterall), but because we want our children to be happy - and they will not be completely happy in the case of any physical or emotional defect in normal family relationships. And now they are told everywhere that they do not need to have a normal family to be happy. The same works for pre-marriage relationships - how can people talk to their children about stability and faithfulness if they changed a few partners in their life?
By the way, why do you refer to us, ordinary people, by using curses and offensive words? Does that show your "love"?
40
@ MaRiyA
"because we want our children to be happy"
Great! You focus on your own family and happiness and keep your nose out of my family and happiness.
"because we want our children to be happy"
Great! You focus on your own family and happiness and keep your nose out of my family and happiness.
41
@39 - Darling, just because you talked yourself into justifying your hate, it doesn't mean the rest of us are going to believe that bullshit.
42
@38 - I think that the ballot would break down the same way. Tell me you cannot honestly see Pierce County, et al toking the vote and still voting down equality? Come on.
43
@40: You don't know the first thing about love. It's sad that you think a child can't be happy outside of a 50s style nuclear family. But then, it sounds like you're probably working through some issues and are doing more than a little projecting. Why don't you work out YOUR shit and leave those of us who are actually capable of love and able to form happy families get on with doing what you are incapable of?
Thanks,
Northwestern Washington
Thanks,
Northwestern Washington
44
@ Rubykelp (#40)
"Great! You focus on your own family and happiness and keep your nose out of my family and happiness."
Why don't you do the same?
@ 41
Relax ;) Please control yourself - and don't look at the world as a huge ball of hatred :)
"Great! You focus on your own family and happiness and keep your nose out of my family and happiness."
Why don't you do the same?
@ 41
Relax ;) Please control yourself - and don't look at the world as a huge ball of hatred :)
45
I campaigned and voted for Ref-71.... BUT let's be clear: As Ed Murray is quoted above, this victory just opens the door for annual attacks on our rights and our lives by the right-wing.
Who the HELL puts their civil rights up to a vote by the majority? Did African Americans? Did women put the right to vote up to a public ballot? HELL NO.
Murray's electoral strategy is fatally flawed, even if we did win this time, and even if we win every time! We should never beg for our civil rights. This should have been settled in the courts, because it IS a constitutional issues. We should have sued and sued until equal rights were established unequivocally.
Now we have to fight, and empty our wallets and waste our time every year to fight the far-right .... which is exactly what they want us to do: Keep us from getting on with normal lives, living in a state of perpetual uncertainty and fear of the next shoe to drop, wasting hard-earned money that could actually go to solving the genuine and lingering problems of our community fostered by generations of oppression.
Worst of all, we actually encourage the right wing to challenge us, precisely by playing their game of insisting that our rights are subject to the whim of the majority! A ridiculous starting proposition!
This is not unlike the (correct) argument that engaging the terrorists in Iraq and Afghanistan merely breeds new terrorists. Our engagement of the right wing doesn't settle anything! Now they'll raise more money than ever!
In the immortal words of Samuel Morse, "What hath God wrought!"
Who the HELL puts their civil rights up to a vote by the majority? Did African Americans? Did women put the right to vote up to a public ballot? HELL NO.
Murray's electoral strategy is fatally flawed, even if we did win this time, and even if we win every time! We should never beg for our civil rights. This should have been settled in the courts, because it IS a constitutional issues. We should have sued and sued until equal rights were established unequivocally.
Now we have to fight, and empty our wallets and waste our time every year to fight the far-right .... which is exactly what they want us to do: Keep us from getting on with normal lives, living in a state of perpetual uncertainty and fear of the next shoe to drop, wasting hard-earned money that could actually go to solving the genuine and lingering problems of our community fostered by generations of oppression.
Worst of all, we actually encourage the right wing to challenge us, precisely by playing their game of insisting that our rights are subject to the whim of the majority! A ridiculous starting proposition!
This is not unlike the (correct) argument that engaging the terrorists in Iraq and Afghanistan merely breeds new terrorists. Our engagement of the right wing doesn't settle anything! Now they'll raise more money than ever!
In the immortal words of Samuel Morse, "What hath God wrought!"
46
@39 MaRiyA "...how can people talk to their children about stability and faithfulness if they changed a few partners in their life?"
Seriously?? More than half of heterosexual marriages end in divorce and those parties frequently marry again (and divorce again and marry again)...
And you're seriously impugning gays and lesbians, who often have decades-long companionships despite the protections and benefit of marriage?
You were born on third base and you think you hit a triple. You may be "ordinary" but you are not normal -- you're merely heterosexual.
Seriously?? More than half of heterosexual marriages end in divorce and those parties frequently marry again (and divorce again and marry again)...
And you're seriously impugning gays and lesbians, who often have decades-long companionships despite the protections and benefit of marriage?
You were born on third base and you think you hit a triple. You may be "ordinary" but you are not normal -- you're merely heterosexual.
47
* And you're seriously impugning gays and lesbians, who often have decades-long companionships despite LACKING the protections and benefit of marriage?
48
* And you're seriously impugning gays and lesbians, who often have decades-long companionships despite LACKING the protections and benefit of marriage?
Most Commented on Slog
-
Slog Somehow Overlooked... by Dan Savage
-
VivaVulva Viagra! by Dan Savage -
Life and Death in a Recliner in South Carolina by Dan Savage
-
Health at Every Size by Dan Savage
-
"Let his days be few... Let his children be fatherless and his wife a widow." by Dan Savage
-
Feeling Sorry for Carrie Prejean by Dan Savage
-
Last Night's Colbert Report by Dan Savage
-
$2,600,000,000 by Dan Savage
-
All The Best Men Are Taken by Dan Savage
-
I Hate You, Garrison Keillor by Jen Graves
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (49) RSS