Protect Marriage Washington using paid signature gatherers

I don't believe there is anything inherently wrong with being paid

to collect signatures for a petition. I think people deserve to be paid for the work they do, if funds are available.  What am I missing here?

---

by: Pollyanna @ Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 01:24:54 AM CDT

How about the irony?

He reminded me three times that I was depriving his children of food by my presence.

I agree that there isn't anything inherently wrong with paid signature-gathering - unless (1) it actually is illegal in the jurisdiction in question (I don't know if that's the case in Washington or anywhere); and/or (2) the process is being portrayed as 'grassroots' when it is, as this one is via paid signature-gathering, astroturfed.

For me though, the thing here is the irony of what this particular astroturfer is reported to have said.  Does he know - or care - about what might be taken out of the mouths of the kids of gays and lesbians who are targeted by  the referendum he's astroturfing for?

>^..^<

---

by: KatRose @ Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 09:00:24 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Irony? Oh, boo-hoo.

What word would you choose to describe what Lurleen does when she implies that it is illegal to pay signature gatherers.("they've been caught paying for signatures")? When she says, "how low can you go?" to describe paying someone for merely doing a job, I'd have to reply that that doesn't even make my top 100 list of bad behaviors.

Regarding the legality (your point #1), however...essentially, it is legal everywhere now.

Until the 1980s, courts upheld bans on paid signature gatherers. That changed in 1988, when the U.S. Supreme Court invalidated Colorado's ban in the Meyer vs. Grant, 486 U.S. 414 (1988) decision. http://www.ncsl.org/Legislatur...

Regarding your point #2, "grassroots" is meaningless from a legal point of view.  If the state wishes, it can require the disclosure of whether the signature gatherers are paid or volunteer and the method of that disclosure, such as on the petition form itself.  At least seven states, including California and Oregon, require disclosure; Washington does not.

If I were in charge of getting an initiative on a ballot, I would hope I would not be blind to reality.

Today, the vast majority of petition campaigns use paid circulators, who are paid between $1 and $3 per signature. Very few campaigns attempt to qualify an initiative petition with volunteer circulators, and even fewer do so successfully. Paid drives, on the other hand, are much more successful. A campaign that has adequate funds to pay circulators has a nearly 100 percent chance of qualifying for the ballot in many states. http://www.ncsl.org/Legislatur...

I hope, as I trust we all do, that this effort Lurleen has been chronicling will fail. Meanwhile, why should we employ the tactics our opposition so often uses?

---

by: Pollyanna @ Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 16:16:33 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

By saying "they've been caught"

...Lurleen is pointing out that the once noble cause of having churches and pleasantly staffed tables at Home Depot or Wal-Mart or Kohl's has failed and now they have to get down to the nitty gritty to hammer out their last 75,000 signatures.

---

by: Baconcat @ Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 21:06:30 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

just so

Lurleen on Twitter

---

by: Lurleen @ Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 21:14:56 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Could you "point to" that part?

---

by: Pollyanna @ Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 23:07:27 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

References to their supposed grassroots nature, and their not living up to it

She even used quotes, "grassroots".

To me that says she doesn't think they've got the fundamental volunteer-driven time-given activism cred they're claiming, and so having to pay someone who isn't volunteering and isn't likely to be doing this on principle (their exhortations that they're being deprived of food), so, as it goes, so much for their being grassroots.

---

by: Baconcat @ Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 01:25:57 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

here's one

Stickney added that his organization has brought in more than 1,000 volunteers to collect signatures from people across the state.

it is difficult to produce the perfect quote, but if you could read what stickney and gary randall have said in their emails, on websites and in interviews throughout the legislative session and the ensuing referendum period, the sum of it amounts to "we're a xtian grassroots campaign".

Lurleen on Twitter

---

by: Lurleen @ Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 01:53:14 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Jeez, y'all, I was just referring to what was presented in the original piece.

I'm not up on all the ins and outs of this campaign, and I'm probably representative of your readers who aren't of the left coast persuasion as far as knowing who said what when and about whatever.

I spent some time this evening clicking around endlessly on that Protect Marriage Washington site simply trying to find the wording of R71. Found bupkis. One other weird thing - only four or five pastors were listed as endorsing this thing. You'd think he'd have hundreds of preacher types listed, wouldn't you?

Anyway, to close (and to continue to beat a horse I beat often), based on your information, Lurleen, I can't find any verifiable evidence that these mopes are or are not using paid signature gatherers. But, as my original reply indicated, that wasn't my point. I was objecting to your implication that such practice was illegal or somehow morally wrong.

---

by: Pollyanna @ Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 02:26:18 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

sorry if i left you

with that impression.  you've probably seen from the other comments by now where i was coming from.  i'm entertaining 2 families of relatives this week - not conducive to lucid writing... :)

oh, regarding not finding the wording of the referendum on the pmw website, i'm sure that it deliberate on their part because the ballot language is terrible from their perspective.  pmw relies on the lie that this referendum is about the definition of marriage, whereas in reality it is about a domestic partnership law.  the ballot language clearly states that "a domestic partnership is not a marriage", thus speaking inconvenient truth to pmw's favorite lie.

Assigned Number: 71
Filed: 05/04/2009

Sponsor
Mr. Lawrence Stickney
P.O. Box 501
Arlington, WA 98223
Phone: 360-631-1894

lstickney@valuesaction.org

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 ___

Ballot Measure Summary
Same-sex couples, or any couple that includes one person age sixty-two or older, may register as a domestic partnership with the state. Registered domestic partnerships are not marriages, and marriage is prohibited except between one man and one woman. This bill would expand the rights, responsibilities, and obligations of registered domestic partners and their families to include all rights, responsibilities, and obligations granted by or imposed by state law on married couples and their families.

View Complete Text (pdf)

Lurleen on Twitter

---

by: Lurleen @ Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 02:37:33 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

You think people should be PAID for participating in the democratic process?

This is only a guess on my part, but you played hooky during civics class, didn't you?

I am not interested in picking up crumbs of compassion thrown from the table of someone who considers himself my master. I want the full menu of rights.  -Archbishop Desmond Tutu

---

by: QScribe @ Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 09:33:38 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

BrickwithanA described it well below.

What you're missing (I didn't set the story up very well - my fault - sorry) is that PMW sells its referendum as something with wide public support emanating from strong religious/moral conviction.  but if that were the case, there would be plenty of "citizen legislators" willing to do the work to get the required signatures.  the fact that they're resorting to paying people to protect god's order tells you something about how either not numerous or dedicated these people truly are.

secondly, both stickney and randall managed to so far hide the fact that they were paying signature gatherers.  i believe that if people knew this was a non-grassroots campaign, some would have been less likely to sign.  i think stickney and randall knew this too, and that is why they tried to hide the fact that they've hired mercenaries.

Lurleen on Twitter

---

by: Lurleen @ Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 20:48:45 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Excellent counter movement

covering the and hovering around the PAID signature gatherers.
Good luck Washington.  

---

by: Karen in Kalifornia @ Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 02:23:04 AM CDT

Paid *Grassroots* Support

The people supporting Initiative 71 tout the strong support and rush of enthusiasm surrounding their cause.  The fact that this enthusiastic crowd is NOT volunteering their time for their passionate push to get the initiative on the ballot is a big issue.  So, they are hiring supporter.  Sad.

My hat and heart are tipped to the AMAZING people who were there in Bellingham.  They are so dedicated and amazing tou our cause.  The young man leading Club Diversity at Sedro-Woolley High is a fresh new voice in our movement.  I am an out, proud alumni of S-W high.

Thanks for the great post.  See you at Brunch!  :)

---

by: BrickwithanA @ Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 07:41:01 AM CDT

Says alot, doesn't it?

EQME's volunteers were exactly that- VOLUNTEERS.

I collected signatures in May and got not a single penny; in fact I wrote a check to EQME for $100 afterwards when we were counting up the blue cards.

It says so much for the desperation level within the opposition's camps, when they are forced to hire people (in Maine's case, from MICHIGAN) to do what local supporters are able to accomplish for free.

"It goes on one at a time, it starts when you care to act, it starts when you do it again after they said no, it starts when you say We and know who you mean, and each day you mean one more."

---

by: Louise @ Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 08:10:11 AM CDT

Its a bigger issue than just the money

A lot of organizations use paid signature gatherers. Sometimes it is just a matter of getting something done quicker and in a more organized fashion. Something far more effective than attempting to train and schedule volunteers with little time.

However, the idea of exclusively using paid signature gatherers and playing them off as grassroots volunteers; making false statements about legislation and playing against stereotypes and unfounded fears; then adding insult to injury by paying for it all with the same organizations while passing even that off as raised from public volunteers is just the trifecta of falsehood and lies. Its all being passed off as the people of Washington or the people of Maine or in our case, the people of California. The latter effort telling us all how effective this has been in our recent past.

I can't say where I stand on all of it as far as what to do about it. It's too much like Kent state writ large. Guns on one side and daisies on the other. In the end the truth will win out but why do real people have to get shot for others to begin to understand? What I do think is important is that the people of Washington and Maine and Even California begin to hear how they have been represented in falsehood by both bigoted and religious organizations. It might mean more to these peoples to learn how we are not the only ones being misrepresented in this national effort os lies that has been planned since the very idea that gays might be free to be themselves back in the early 70s.  

Always thinking about it...

---

by: kudo451 @ Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 09:22:37 AM CDT

And the worst realization in all this is that,

as I think we must all be aware, this will be far from the last time our community has to face this lying crowd.  They have used these same patently dishonesty tactics in one campaign after another, and they will continue using them to fight against every pro-LGBT law that is ever passed anywhere.  And when their ballot initiatives fail, or in jurisdictions where there none are permitted, they will file one frivolous court suit after another.  Whichever ancient Greek first formulated the myth of Sisyphus sure knew what he was talking about.

I am not interested in picking up crumbs of compassion thrown from the table of someone who considers himself my master. I want the full menu of rights.  -Archbishop Desmond Tutu

---

by: QScribe @ Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 09:31:24 AM CDT

Huh!

He reminded me three times that I was depriving his children of food by my presence.

Next time, just remind him that he's depriving you of your civil rights by his presence.

____________________________________
Cuius testiculos habes, habeas cardia et cerebellum.

---

by: tavdy79 @ Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 10:24:33 AM CDT

Don't get your panties in a pinch

As someone born and raised in Washington (Not the District of Columbia), nearly ALL signature-gatherers in State's Initiative process are paid per-signature.  The quaint idea of well-intentioned true-believers volunteering their time for placement of worthy causes via initiative on ballots ended with the 1988 Meyer v. Grant, 486 U.S. 414 ruling by SCOTUS.  It was once against the law to use paid signature-gathers for initiative petitions.  No more.

In fact, T. Eyman, of Edmonds, WA has turned this ruling to his advantage, creating an organization called "Permanent Offense"  (no joke) and makes his living raising monies for an annual initiative or two.  The paid signature-gatherers are notoriously ill-informed about the petitions they're peddling.  Mr. Eyman, a former watch repairman, now lives in a $300,000 home.

---

by: Laurence Ballard @ Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 11:25:47 AM CDT

So, from what I'm hearing, ear to the rail about signature counts...

...get ready for the biggest fight for equality in WA since Seattle fought off Prop 13.

That's the rumble, though. There could be some misinformation out there on the success of their petition, but it would serve us well to prepare for the worst.

---

by: Baconcat @ Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 01:33:37 AM CDT

preparations for a pitched battle

have been in the works since before the referendum was announced.  

Lurleen on Twitter

---

by: Lurleen @ Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 01:47:18 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

My other ear on the rail...

...knows a large number of municipalities want to make sure Ref 71 passes, so we're likely to see major resolutions in support of passing Ref 71 if this petition is successful.

Again, however, it's not likely that Stickney and Randall care if this passes or fails.

---

by: Baconcat @ Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 12:36:31 PM CDT

[ Parent ]