Washington Votes Forum

Introduced in the Senate on January 25, 2010

Click here to view bill details.

Why do my elected officials think that my signature on a petition should be public record? Should my choice to sign a petition be any less protected then my right to a private vote. This kind of move only opens the door for harassment to the signer of these documents. The right of the public to the privacy of  their thoughts and beliefs should not be open to the kind of harassment that this could lead to to.

Instead of dealing with this why are you not using your time taking care of the budget and the needs of the unemployed???

Does this legislation provide safeguards against people or organizations targeting the signers of initiatives with physical harm or harrassment? Harrassment of initiative signers should be considered a hate crime. The reason why people who sign initiatives oppose this measure is the fear of harrassment by opponents of the initiative. I hope this concern is accounted for in the bill.

 I'm sure this bill was introduced under pressure from the homosexual lobby who was outraged that enough signatures were gathered for a full vote on Referendum 71 which gave them the same rights and benefits as married heterosexuals.

Knowing how this lobby reacted in California when the people voted against homosexual marriage, the people of this state have a valid concern that those who oppose their agenda will suffer the intimidation, threats and violence that is normal for this lobby when people anywhere vote against their agenda.

Don't expect anyone who does not agree with them to protected under law in this state.

The fact that you voted is a public record. If you go to Olympia and testify, that also is a public record. People often sign initiatives mindlessly and without reading them. In fact, the chances that voters read R-71 before signing it are essentially nil because of its length, and yet by placing a measure on the ballot, their signature has the force of law, just as does a legislator's vote. Signing an initiative is a public act, and rightly so. This bill is not about any particular issue and should not be viewed that way. Instead, it is aimed at making people accountable for their signature on a initiative.

No one was threatened with physical harm. The suggestion was made that if you knew someone who signed R-71, you might want to have a conversation with them over the back fence or at the water cooler.  Nothing more.

Sen. Pam Roche's bill to require no other information but a signature on an initiative is ridiculous. Without an address, there would be no way to verify the signature. Most voters' signatures are not legible. Her bill would undermine any efforts to verify signatures and would invite fraud in the signature-gathering process.

OK Joe, as long as legislators home addresses are published on every bill they sponsor, cosponser or vote for. Seems fair to me!

Sarajane46th:

No one was threatened with physical harm. The suggestion was made that if you knew someone who signed R-71, you might want to have a conversation with them over the back fence or at the water cooler.  Nothing more.

 

 And perhaps that can constitue harassment?  Or can only gays, lesbians and other "favored" minorites able to claim it as such?  The only reason this bill is proposed is to do away with the iniative process, so there will be no way for the populace of WA to have a voice in Olympia.  In the meantime Washington becomes a fascist state.  Be worried when the State Patrol uniforms become brown.

 

Vote the bat-rastards out

OK....so I suppose you want next to know how I voted too?  Come on....I sign a petetion based on it's face value, and when it comes time to vote on it, I read it in it's entirety....just like our elected officials voice vote on the bill's face value without reading the entire bill's language.  But I am not an elected official...I am a private citizen and my vote and my signature is private...keep it that way!

 WOW!!!! I agree!!!!!!! Let LEGISLATORS provide THEIR home addresses and be "role models" for the rest of us unwashed masses. Turds all. Vote 'em out!

"Remember in November"

 This bill was introduced for two reasons.

First, to appease the sodomite-practioner's who, like in California, cannot tolerate it when the majority vote against their agenda so this bill will serve to discourage people from proposing initiatives and then from signing them because they have a VALID reason to fear the violence these radicals always perpetrate against those who oppose them (California was a prime example of this truth.)

Secondly, the liberals in the legislature cannot tolerate the fact that citizens would stand up against their agenda to dictate to everyone how they should think and act and how much of their money should be confiscated to support failure, corruption, inefficiency and ineffective agencies, programs and policies.

 You are completely wrong and either very nieve or purposefully unaware of how the sodomite-practioners handle rejection. They don't want a back-fence conversation. They want to bash you over the head. They want to demonstrate outside your home or business or smash windows or destroy your property.

Please cite proof that no one was threatened with physical harm. I sincerely doubt that you can.

And in the case of R-71, it's purpose and the opposition to it were widely and thoroughly reported on for a long time. I doubt that anyone who signed it did not know what it was, what it would do, and why the sodomite-practioners opposed it.

Lainie59:

 This bill was introduced for two reasons.

First, to appease the sodomite-practioner's who, like in California, cannot tolerate it when the majority vote against their agenda so this bill will serve to discourage people from proposing initiatives and then from signing them because they have a VALID reason to fear the violence these radicals always perpetrate against those who oppose them (California was a prime example of this truth.)

Secondly, the liberals in the legislature cannot tolerate the fact that citizens would stand up against their agenda to dictate to everyone how they should think and act and how much of their money should be confiscated to support failure, corruption, inefficiency and ineffective agencies, programs and policies.

?? Sodomites? If you want to gay bash, why not use the standard 'libertarian' dialect to describe them? Playing PC games?

 

 This isnt Idaho. Perhaps the true purpose of this bill is to make sure sneaky tricks that conservatives play can be traced back to them during elections, just as ol 'Dino'.

 The only reason for this law is so that anyone signing a petition can be harassed by the those who oppose the petition.  Nothing more, nothing less.

It's just the californicators way of saying they disapprove of prop 8 in California and will do anything to prevent the same thing from happening here.

 

DK