Since the Washington Secretary of State has just announced the official raw signature tally for Referendum 71, I thought it would be fun to summarize some of the other numbers shaping this campaign.
Domestic Partners
Victims’ rights, including the right to receive notifications and benefits allowances. Business succession rights.
Legal process rights, such as the ability to sign certain documents, the requirement to join in certain petitions, rights to cause of action, and ability to transfer licenses without charge.
The right to use sick leave to care for a spouse.
The right to wages and benefits when a spouse is injured, and to unpaid wages upon death of spouse.
The right to unemployment and disability insurance benefits disability insurance issues
Workers’ compensation coverage.
Insurance rights, including rights under group policies, policy rights after death of spouse, conversion rights, and continuing coverage rights.
Referendum 71
Washington Families Standing Together
WAFST is an unbrella organization dedicated to ensuring that families remain protected by the domestic partnership law.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Related
* Washington Families Standing Together: Strength in Unity
* Religious Leaders & Faith Communities Wholeheartedly Support Washington’s Domestic Partnership Law
* APPROVE Ref. 71 to Preserve the Domestic Partnership Law
REFERENDUM 71
Ballot Title
Statement of Subject: The legislature passed Engrossed Second Substitute Senate Bill 5688 concerning rights and responsibilities of state-registered domestic partners [and voters have filed a sufficient referendum petition on this bill].Concise Description: This bill would expand the rights, responsibilities, and obligations accorded state-registered same-sex and senior domestic partners to be equivalent to those of married spouses, except that a domestic partnership is not a marriage.
Should this bill be:
Approved ___
Rejected ___
Join Washington Families Standing Together in their fight to preserve our domestic partnership laws by clicking on the graphics below.




9 Comments





Thank you, LurleenI am trying to wade through the different strata of benefits and recognition provided in various states with CUs vs DPs as compared to marriage, which still isn’t federally recognized marriage of course.
Um, since I don’t know the idiosyncracies of your state (I barely can deal with our own here in AZ), it was good to have the details. How does Washington’s now expanded (and hopefully staying that way!) DP law compare with the one CA still has, never mind the ridiculousness of Prop 8?
It’s hardto keep it all straight, that’s for sure! If SB 5688 (the DP expansion law of 2009) is allowed to go into effect, WA’s DPs will be equivalent to CA’s DPs. That is, both states will have DPs that are equal to civil marriage at the state level. Nitty gritty details of SB 5688 can be found here.
Does the number 116 mean anything to you Oregonians out there?OregonLive has an interesting look at the numbers in the aptly named Yet another nail-biter on domestic partnerships.
Eek! I’m taking no chances. I just signed up to a regular and recurring volunteer schedule with Washington Families Standing Together.
This is just the counting right?The machine hasn’t invalidated any duplicates when it went though scanning right?
You are correctThe validation process begins on Friday.
The raw signatures were hand-counted by real peoplewith observers present.
As Susan_F says, the validation process starts tomorrow (Friday). It could take up to a month.
Smart StrategyIMHO, Lurleen is using excellent strategy by mentioning senior citizens first, then LGBT families. Our opponents are making this about “gay marriage” and the Associated Press (and those papers syndicating them) are routinely referring to Ref 71 being about “gay partnerships”. We need to take the lead in re-framing the conversation by emphasizing that this also affects senior citizens, and “Protect” Washington Families is letting their prejudice blind them to the fact that senior citizens’ rights are at stake here, too.
We need to keep pointing that out in every post, every newspaper comments section, every letter to the editor. We cannot allow our opponents or the press continue to make the affected seniors (gay and straight) invisible. Low-income seniors are a particularly vulnerable population, many are not computer savvy and/or may not have regular access to the internet. We need to speak up for them, too. The MSM seems to have virtually forgotten them.
Thanks for the clarificationI sorta thought that. I’m particularly interested in what different states call “Domestic Partnerships”. Apparently Wisconsin passed a DP law with somewhat limited benefits because their constitutional amendment against marriage equality carried the double whammy of prohibiting marriage AND CUs (which I believe is still being challenged at some court level). They are having to split an odd-shaped hair, now, to show in response to a challenge by the “Wisconsin Family Action” why DPs are not equivalent to CUs or marriage. Seems like they have a DP law similar to your formerly unexpanded one, and even THAT is being challenged. Argh.
KOMOSchram is getting pummeled and so is the validation process story, it’s so… typical.