For a barometer of the shifting public opinion on gay rights, take a look at the escalating debate over Referendum 71 and public disclosure.
In 1994, a group that formed to oppose anti-gay rights initiatives in Washington pleaded with the Public Disclosure Commission to excuse donors from having to list their occupations and employers. Leaders of Hands Off Washington claimed that gay and lesbian contributors might be targets for harassment and intimidation.
Fast forward 15 years, and the shoe is on the other foot. This time, it’s opponents of gay rights who say they have reason to fear campaign finance disclosure.
Protect Marriage Washington, which is seeking to undo the state’s latest extension of rights to same-sex couples, is asking the PDC to withhold even donor names. The group’s attorney, citing a menacing blog post and a couple of nasty e-mails already received by the campaign, says release of donor information would expose contributors to possible violence.
Let’s get one thing clear up front: No one deserves to be threatened for their political views, and no one has the right to try to incite violence against people with whom they disagree.
Any crank who writes, “I advocate using violence against the property of ALL of those who are working tirelessly to HURT my family; starting with churches and government property” rightfully deserves a visit from the police. (Lucky for law enforcement, the angry author of that blog post signs his name to his stuff.)
But Protect Marriage supporters can’t possibly believe that they are alone in attracting such vitriol. Political discourse is peppered with it today. Those looking to be shocked by the debasement of public debate need only visit the comments section of any news story on a hot-button issue.
Washington Families Standing Together, the group trying to save the gay-rights law, notes it too receives harassing messages. The fact that hateful people are spewing garbage is no better excuse for turning back the clock on campaign finance disclosure today than it was in 1994.
R-71 sponsors are also fighting to block the release of their petitions, which include the names of people who signed in the hopes of getting the measure on the ballot. They had blamed that move on the efforts of a fringe group, WhoSigned.Org, which is threatening to build an online database of petition signers’ names so that Washingtonians could seek them out for “conversations.”
We too have bemoaned WhoSigned’s interference. But its involvement would now appear less a factor in Protect Marriage Washington’s fight to shield supporters from public view.
In opposing Hands Off’s request 15 years ago, we said, “The ability to ‘follow the money’ in political campaigns is vital to informed decision-making by the voters.” That’s still true today.
--
