Referendum 71 - What it is and What Will Happen?

I was just talking with my roommate and realize that there is probably a lot of confusion about what Referendum will do (and genuine confusion, not crazy conservatives who think rejecting the law will make it so same-sex couples don't have children - way to go King5 for providing that completely inaccurate b.s. some air time).

Okay, so first, what is a referendum?
A referendum is a process for citizens to vote on a law before it becomes final. It happens after the legislature passes the bill and after the governor signs it. To do this, you have to first gather enough signatures to put it on the ballot (equal to four (4) percent of the total votes cast for the office of Governor in the last regular gubernatorial election). Once you have reached that threshold, the issue goes to the ballot. The vote before the citizens then becomes "I approve the law" or "I reject the law." If enough people approve the law, it then becomes the law of the land.
The Secretary of State's explanation is also available here: http://www.secstate.wa.gov/elections/ReferendumQuickFacts.aspx

What Happens if voters Reject the Domestic Partnership Law?
The referendum only deals with the most recent domestic partnership law. Our state already has two domestic partnership laws on the books. The rights and responsibilities embodied in these laws will continue unchanged (death and dying benefits, community property, divorce, etc. (you can see a January 2008 Note I posted that discusses the second bill). Regardless of the outcome, we will still have Domestic Partnerships in Washington, they will just not have the as many rights.
We were probably about half way to having all the rights of marriage, the new bill took us the rest of the way. The summary of the new bill describes it as:
Declares that for all purposes under state law, state registered domestic partners shall be treated the same as married spouses. Any privilege, immunity, right, benefit, or responsibility granted or imposed by statute, administrative or court rule, policy, common law or any other law to an individual because the individual is or was a spouse, or because the individual is or was an in-law in a specified way to another individual, is granted on equivalent terms, substantive and procedural, to an individual because the individual is or was in a state registered domestic partnership or because the individual is or was, based on a state registered domestic partnership, related in a specified way to another individual.
Provides that the act shall be liberally construed to achieve equal treatment, to the extent not in conflict with federal law, of state registered domestic partners and married spouses.

I really haven't done an analysis of what the two previous laws provided versus the third law (really together they are approximately 300 pages). What I do know is that there are three big things in the most recent law:
(1) The legislature's expression that what they are attempting to create is a segregated marriage structure. Hets get marriage; gays get domestic partnership, but the state should view both institutions the same.

(2) Presumption of parentage - this extends the legal presumption that if one partner has a child during the domestic partnership, the other person will be presumed to be the other legal parent unless they take formal steps denying parentage. This already exists for heterosexual married couples (even for alternative reproduction). While this is a lovely provision, it's not something any lawyer I know would want you to hang your family security hat on. The reason being that you connection to the child would be based on your relationship to your partner. The fear (and legitimately so) would be that you would travel to a state that rejected domestic partnerships and they wouldn't recognize your relationship to the child because it was based on the relationship to your partner, which they don't recognize. Thus, despite this change, as long as the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and baby DOMAs exist, interstate travel really isn't available for gay families.

(3) The new bill takes away the easy out for gay couples dissolving their relationship. Currently if you get registered and you don't have property or kids, you basically get to just file something saying you broke up. The new bill makes you go through a real divorce.

You can find out more about the new almost law if you want by going here: http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary.aspx?bill=5688&year=2009

In my mind a big part of what this bill is about is really an opinion poll on the legitimacy of my existence (and that of all other gay people, coupled, singled, etc.). Most people (on either side) are not going to take the time or effort to understand what is at stake. If King5's report that I watched today is any indication, media is going to do very little to provide accurate information. Basically what people are voting on is how much the state can discriminate against the gays. If we approve the law, we're saying the level of discrimination should be minimal, possibly even indicating that we reject this stupid separate but totally unequal set-up. If those voting to reject it win, they will be saying go back in the closet faggot/dyke. And yes I do believe that is not some sort of visceral reaction or extreme response. I say this because it is not like Referendum 71 eliminates Domestic Partnerships. A rejection of the most recent D.P. law won't prevent us from existing, from falling in love, from wanting our relationships recognized by our friends, family, and state (and for some people churches, but churches get to decide what to do regardless of the law). We will still find ways to have children (foster, adoption, alternative reproduction). We will still occasionally break up. We will still die. Rejecting Referendum 71 only means that we will not have the structures that have developed to address the issues that arise as our families grow and change that have developed for families with a heterosexual couple at its helm.