
Those trying to block an expansion of rights for same-sex domestic partners face long odds in their effort.
— Everett Herald
Since the pushers of the hateful, anti-family Referendum 71 have problems counting to 100, I thought it only sporting to lay out some numbers for them. Best case scenario, Oregonian Gary Randall & his bumbling Washington operative Larry Stickney will have only 60 days to collect 120,577 valid signatures from a population that overwhelmingly disagrees with their attack on Washingtonians. The cold, hard numbers after the flip.The clock is ticking. The deadline for turning in referendum signatures is July 25, 2009. This is a fixed date. As of today, we’re 74 days from the deadline.
Referendum sponsors cannot print their petition sheets and start collecting signatures until they get finalized ballot language from the Secretary of State. The Secretary of State cannot release ballot language until the governor has signed the legislation in question. According to the SOS’s office, Governor Gregoire is expected to sign the Domestic Partnership Expansion Bill of 2009 (SB 5688) on Monday, May 18th. The reason that the SOS won’t release ballot language until then is because the governor has the option of vetoing all or part of the bill, which would require the filing of a new referendum.
If Governor Gregoire signs the bill without any partial vetoes, the SOS plans to release the ballot language on Tuesday, May 19th. That’s 67 days from the deadline. That’s also a best-case scenario, because any citizen has 5 days to challenge the ballot language, and the Thurston County Court has another 5 days within which to rule. Therefore there may be an additional loss of 5-10 signature-gathering days. If the referendum sponsors are judicious with their funds, they will wait out the 5-day challenge period before going to the printer. That takes us to 62 days from the deadline.
Assuming it will take 2 days to typeset, print and deliver the petition forms, signature gathering can begin on May 26th, 60 days from the deadline. You’ve lost the Memorial Day weekend.
The minimum number of valid signatures required is 120,577. Rule of thumb says you need collect 150,000 raw signatures, to make up for the fake signatures your paid petition solicitors copied from the phone book, etc. With that in mind, let’s look at your needed FTEs.
150,000 signatures ÷ 60 days = 2500 signatures/day must be collected, on average. Assuming an average individual signature collection rate of 10 per hour, you need to staff 250 daily person hours every single day. That’s 31 people working 8-hr days, 7 days per week for 60 days solid. Good luck with that.
Dominic Holden claims it would require an act of god to pull it off. His commenter Josh has a more sober take, and delivers some useful advice.
It’s not an act of G-d that would allow the referendum to be qualified. It would be large donors who finance paid signature gathering. The most important thing we can be doing is asking our friends and family to pledge to decline to sign refererendum 71 petitions. Spread the link below!http://eqfed.org/campaign/Decl…
And if you or your family belong to a Church that you think might allow signature gathering, let the Priest or Minister know that this is not acceptable to you because it hurts families and goes against you understanding of your faiths traditions of social justice.
I guess it remains to be seen whether outside forces like the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is in the mood to fight what will be another damaging battle for them in a state that overwhelmingly supports domestic partnerships. But one thing is for sure, Larry Stickney has gone begging on the wider national stage. I guess this is his way of admitting that few of his natural allies in Washington support the referendum. No wonder he’s gleeful at the prospect of his supporters losing their jobs and remaining unemployed. Somehow I just can’t picture him getting off his duff and into the streets with petitions. Certainly Oregon Gary won’t be seen wielding a Washington referendum petition.
Cross-posted at Washblog.




8 Comments


R-71The five day period during which the ballot title can be challenged does not include Sat/Sun/Holidays, so if they wait out the challenge period and no challenged is filed, they have 60 days. The legal challenge can (and probably will be) filed after the memorial day weekend. If the ballot title is released on 5/19, the challenge can be filed as late as 5/27. The court has five business days to decide (again excluding Sat/Sun/Holidays). Could be considerably less than 60 days
In the unlikely event the governor does a partial veto (i.e. of an obscure paragraph of the 181 page bill – such as the section dealing with public waterways), the opposition will need to refile, which means a new waiting period for a ballot title – adding at least another week of delay.
One unanswered question is whether a referendum is invalid if it’s filed during the period during which the governor has the authority to take action upon it. Can a referendum be filed only after the governor’s chance to act has expired? Is a premature referendum invalid? The law here does not address “conditional filing”. I’m trying to spread the word regarding this bit of uncertainty. Legal uncertainty regarding the validity of a proposed ballot measure is not good for fund raising.
The devil is in the details.I’m am much enthralled by the detail in your posts of late, Lurleen. It’s like chess isn’t it. Erick, too.
Good luck Washington to saying YES!
Great question about conditional filing.The answer is I don’t know. I am assuming that the SOS wouldn’t have allowed it if it wasn’t legit, but as you say it brings more uncertainty into the picture because regular people like us (and potential referendum supporters) don’t know what the pertinent rules are, and whether Larry & Gary are breaking them.
One rule I wonder if they’ve broken is the one about registering their PAC within 2 weeks of starting to fundraise for the referendum. As I showed in a previous diary, they’ve been fundraising on and for this referendum for months, but as of this morning still didn’t have a PAC registered for it. They are using Gary Randall’s Faith & Freedom PAC, but it is registered as a general PAC, not dedicated to the referendum.
You’re absolutely right about the timeline. I was using a best-case scenario, but there are several ways they could lose even more days of signature gathering time if certain things happen.
Oh silly me…I thought Thomas Monson of the LDS church said they were in favor of civil unions. You mean they might actually try and support this referendum? I’m shocked I tell you!
Theocratic Constitution Party adopted by the Randall-Stickney familyWell lookie here. The Constitution Party has announced that they’re jumping on the clown car.
How warm and fuzzy. This press release deserves a whole diary when someone has the time, but for now I’ll just note that I’ve never heard of a Constitution Party candidate making it onto the ballot in WA let alone in office (correct me if I’m wrong). They’re even more “out there” than Larry & Gary Randall-Stickney, who work for the republicans. Nothing spells LARRY IS A FAILURE more than having to accept the help of people so extreme that they’ll scare away some of your core stalwarts.
R-71The secretary of state may have accepted the referendum for filing, but it could still be ruled premature by another entity. Referedum 43, from the 80s, (nothing to do with our issues) was filed before the governor’s authority to act expired. The AG refused to write a ballot title. There no authority on the issue of conditional filing or conditional validity. There is an old case and some old AG opinions that imply, but don’t explicitly say, that filing must occur after the governor’s authority to act has expired. Big wide open question. And if a ballot title is actually written and signature gathering starts, this might be a unique case or, as the courts call it, a “case of first impression.” Always dicey territory. Washington’s Supreme Court hates to break new ground (Anderson v. King County is Exhibit A).
If I were a potential donor, I wouldn’t want to donate my hard earned money – in the midst of a bad recession – to a proposed referendum that’s tainted by potentially serious legal problems. Especially if the supporters could have played it safe and waited for the governor’s authority to expire. (speaks badly about judgment of the people running the campaign) I would wait for something better to come along.
Constitution PartyFRINGE party. Their members tend to be, to put it charitably, highly eccentric. The type of party that perennially runs unknown/unqualified candidates every election season just to get a little publicity in the voters pamphlet. I don’t think even typical Republicans want to be seen associating too closely with them. This press release is good news for us it takes their credibility down a notch in the eyes of ordinary voters. Once again, Larry and Gary are calling their own judgment into question. Good fund raising strategy!
I personally wouldn’t trust a guy who can’t add to 100.This from the man who still boasts spectacular campaign losses. Are we surprised that the numbers just don’t add up for Larry? Right-click image to see full size.