Published: Thursday, August 13, 2009
PETITION SIGNATURES
Transparency put at risk
Emotions over Referendum 71, the effort to overturn Washington’s expanded domestic partnership law, have put at odds two values that ought to be harmonious: free speech and government transparency.
Backers of R-71 want to repeal a law, passed by the Legislature earlier this year, that grants the same state-sponsored rights and responsibilities to same-sex domestic partners as those of married couples — except explicit marriage. The Secretary of State’s office is currently checking nearly 138,000 signatures submitted in an effort to put the issue on the Nov. 3 ballot.
Referendum supporters filed suit to block the release of R-71 petitions, arguing that voters who signed them could face harassment if their identities are made public. A federal judge has blocked release of the petitions, pending a hearing on Sept. 3.
They’ve also asked the state Public Disclosure Commission to seal the identities of campaign donors. The PDC on Tuesday denied a request to do so immediately, and will hear the group’s arguments at its regular meeting later this month.
In its lawsuit, Protect Marriage Washington argues that releasing the identities of R-71 petition signers would have a chilling effect on free speech. Their opponents, they argue, want to “make it personally, economically, and politically unpopular to advocate a position that would seek to preserve the sanctity of marriage, as traditionally defined as between one man and one woman.”
Indeed, the creators of the Web site WhoSigned.org have said they will post the names of R-71 signers and encourage “uncomfortable conversations” with them. Such aggressive and hostile tactics have no place in civil debate, and only lend weight to efforts to have initiatives and referenda exempted from the Washington Public Records Act. They should be widely and actively rejected.
And this much should be obvious: Harassment, threats and intimidation of voters is already illegal. Credible allegations should be investigated, and appropriate laws enforced.
The public has a clear interest in having these petitions remain open public records: Supporters, opponents and the news media act as a vital check on the initiative/referenda process, ensuring signatures are gathered and verified according to the law.
The public also has vital need to know who is funding election issues and candidates, because so much power and influence can flow from campaign donations.
Harassment should never be tolerated, but burying public records from public view isn’t the way to stop it. Transparency can exist without chilling free speech if responsible voices on all sides rail against bullying tactics, and law enforcement goes after those who threaten violence.
Backers of R-71 want to repeal a law, passed by the Legislature earlier this year, that grants the same state-sponsored rights and responsibilities to same-sex domestic partners as those of married couples — except explicit marriage. The Secretary of State’s office is currently checking nearly 138,000 signatures submitted in an effort to put the issue on the Nov. 3 ballot.
Referendum supporters filed suit to block the release of R-71 petitions, arguing that voters who signed them could face harassment if their identities are made public. A federal judge has blocked release of the petitions, pending a hearing on Sept. 3.
They’ve also asked the state Public Disclosure Commission to seal the identities of campaign donors. The PDC on Tuesday denied a request to do so immediately, and will hear the group’s arguments at its regular meeting later this month.
In its lawsuit, Protect Marriage Washington argues that releasing the identities of R-71 petition signers would have a chilling effect on free speech. Their opponents, they argue, want to “make it personally, economically, and politically unpopular to advocate a position that would seek to preserve the sanctity of marriage, as traditionally defined as between one man and one woman.”
Indeed, the creators of the Web site WhoSigned.org have said they will post the names of R-71 signers and encourage “uncomfortable conversations” with them. Such aggressive and hostile tactics have no place in civil debate, and only lend weight to efforts to have initiatives and referenda exempted from the Washington Public Records Act. They should be widely and actively rejected.
And this much should be obvious: Harassment, threats and intimidation of voters is already illegal. Credible allegations should be investigated, and appropriate laws enforced.
The public has a clear interest in having these petitions remain open public records: Supporters, opponents and the news media act as a vital check on the initiative/referenda process, ensuring signatures are gathered and verified according to the law.
The public also has vital need to know who is funding election issues and candidates, because so much power and influence can flow from campaign donations.
Harassment should never be tolerated, but burying public records from public view isn’t the way to stop it. Transparency can exist without chilling free speech if responsible voices on all sides rail against bullying tactics, and law enforcement goes after those who threaten violence.
Comments
(