Oct. 4 Daily News editorial

Last year, the Washington Legislature sensibly and fairly expanded the state’s 2007 domestic partnership law to grant same-sex couples all the legal rights granted married couples. Opponents of the expanded law have managed to qualify a statewide referendum for the November ballot. They’re asking citizens to repeal the additional legal rights granted same-sex couples under Senate Bill 5688.

The Daily News editorial board urges voters to affirm those rights by voting yes on Referendum 71. It’s troubling to see the rights of thousands of Washington citizens subjected to a vote. Much worse would be having to witness the denial of those rights by popular vote.

We were encouraged by strong legislative support for this domestic partnership law and evolving public attitudes to think voters won’t let that happen. There is still some resistance to extending the legal rights and benefits married couples enjoy to same-sex couples, to be sure. But no one can dispute that same-sex relationships exist, or that many of those relationships involve children. Surely, there is a strong consensus that both adults and children involved in those relationships deserve the law’s protection and benefits.

Senate Bill 5688 expanded the state’s original domestic partnership law to include around 170 legal protections and benefits. The additional legal rights deal with probate and trusts, community property, homestead exemptions and guardianship and powers of attorney.

Sponsors of the November referendum say they’re not so much interested in denying same-sex couples legal protections as they are in protecting the institution of marriage. Gary Randall of Protect Washington Families told Associated Press writer Rachel La Corte that, “We’re not trying to keep anyone from having anything, we’re simply trying to keep marriage from being redefined.”

The domestic partnership law would neither threaten the institution of marriage nor redefine it. Unlike married couples, the legal rights granted couples registered as domestic partners in Washington would not be recognized beyond the state’s boundaries. Their partnership would not be legally recognized by the federal government. And while Randall and other opponents of this law may not be trying to take away anything, what they’re advocating would deny many Washington citizens something of considerable value.

A primary sponsor of the expanded domestic partnership law in the House, Seattle Democrat Jaime Pederson, said the measure represented the “next step” toward providing financial security for all families in the state. He was right, and taking that step was the right thing to do. Indeed, many private employers recognized the need to take that step well before elected officials could muster the political will to act. At least 100 of the Fortune 500 companies have been offering employment benefits to same-sex couples for more than a decade.

Private employers have a practical incentive not to discriminate in their policies. They want the best employees available, many of whom might be in same-sex partnerships. The state of Washington has both practical and moral reasons not to discriminate. For the same reasons, voters should support the non-discriminatory law now in place for same-sex couples.

Clarification

Sunday’s editorial regarding Referendum 71 fell victim to a confusing aspect of state referendums. A previous version of this editorial incorrectly stated that voters could affirm Washington’s expanded domestic partnership law by voting no on the referendum. That’s the vote advocated by those who seek to repeal the law. In fact, it will take a yes vote to affirm this important law. We urge citizens to vote “yes” on R-71.