Referendum 71 in Washington Called by AP

by: Adam Bink

Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 10:38

Referendum 71 in Washington State, which I had been working a little bit, was called last night by the AP for the Yes side (i.e. the good guys won) with 52.05% of the vote (county-by-county results are here). Josh Friedes, the campaign manager, told me the numbers are actually expected to increase, as about half of the 500-600K ballots still left (WA is, with the exception of one county, a vote by mail state) are from King County, where the LGBT community and more progressive voters are concentrated. We have 67% in that county so far.

LGBT couples will retain adoption rights, the ability to use sick leave to care for one's partner, and a number of other important rights. Congrats to them and to the Referendum 71 campaign. Congrats to Josh and the rest of the folks on that campaign for a job well-done in what was essentially an eight-week lightning-speed campaign.

I neglected to mention the other LGBT issue that we won with an astounding 65% of the vote, which was the One Kalamazoo campaign to protect the ordinance twice-passed by the city commission to ban discimination on the basis of sexual orientation in employment, housing and public accomodations. We wanted a Yes vote, and the other side used slimy tactics like door-hangers that said "No to Discrimination!" to muddle the issue and TV ads with gay men stalking little girls in the bathroom. Perhaps the latter turned voters off in the end. Also a campaign well-run.

Adam Bink :: Referendum 71 in Washington Called by AP

Tags: Referendum 71, One Kalamazoo, LGBT movement, (All Tags)

Print Friendly View

Send As Email

Referendum 71 in Washington Called by AP | 4 comments

re: rights (0.00 / 0)

LGBT couples will retain adoption rights, the ability to use sick leave to care for one's partner, and a number of other important rights.

adam, can you elaborate on what rights, besides marriage, R71 style referendums do not give? or when they say 'everything but marriage' they really mean 'everything but marriage', at least on the state level?

by: The Big Hurt @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 10:29:01 AM CST

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

Rights (0.00 / 0)

On the state level, that's correct. Should DOMA be overturned tomorrow, these couples are not eligible for federal benefits.

Get your copy of The Progressive Revolution
Me on Facebook

Me on Twitter

by: Adam Bink @ Mon Nov 09, 2009 at 12:33:03 PM CST

[ Parent ]

What role does voting "yes" for LGBT rights versus voting "no" for LGBT rights play? (0.00 / 0)

How much of an affect would it have had on the results in Maine if an affirmative vote had been to preserve LGBT rights rather than take them away? I could imagine that there's a decent chunk of the up-to-the-last-minute undecided vote that basically doesn't care one way or the other about LGBT rights, but feels obligate to cast a vote once the time comes, and is psychologically inclined therefore to vote "yes" rather than "no" with no real dependence on which vote does what.

Expressing an affirmative opinion just feels better than expressing a negative opinion, and that might be the deciding factor for people who really don't care about the issue.

Probably someone's looked at this, and I'm just showing my ignorance by not knowing what the research says.

by: MadScientist @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 10:47:11 AM CST

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

At least here in Washington State (4.00 / 1)

in the early stories, it was being said that the reason the opponents of gay rights chose this language for the Referendum was that it is easier to get a NO vote than a YES vote from those who are low information. That people like to vote no on things when they have less understanding.

Because of that perception, there was a huge educational push to make sure supporters got the difference and the word YES was relentlessly and prominently promoted, from a campaign that was significantly more well-funded than the opponents of gay civil rights.

That 48% voted this down in our state shows that there is still a very motivated anti crowd in eastern Washington and apparently churches did a quiet and effective job in GOTV with them. Public opinion statewide going into this battle showed in the high sixties for affording civil rights to gay couples, either marriage or civil unions and it ended up winning by only 4 points.

The other factoid about this outcome is that it is the first statewide vote of the people to affirm gay civil rights. This just hasn't happened before. Of course it shouldn't ever have to happen, but given our current Supreme Court, it is heartening to know that it can.

by: mission419 @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 12:30:08 PM CST

[ Parent ]