Subject: BIGOT BUSTERS (WA): Meeting with Secy. of State; ACLU Statement [long]

From: Richard Isaac <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 1994 01:04:02 -0700 (PDT)

Members of Bigot Busters, including legal representation, met with 
Secretary of State Ralph Munro on Monday, July 25, 1994.  Bigot Busters 
emphasized to the Secy. of State that there was no need for an 
investigation into Init. 608's charges of Bigot Busters harassment 
against signature gatherers, and that any legislation which came about as 
a result of the controversy should not limit the activity of those 
opposed to certain initiatives, but rather should be aimed at expanding 
freedom of speech, and indeed reform in the areas of signature gathering 
in public places, signature reporting, and truth-in-advertising on 
petitions could well be made.

The Secy. of State was reported by those attending to be attentive and 
made no judgments about the charges against Bigot busters.  He indicated 
that his office was, in fact, not authorized to even conduct an 
investigation, which would of necessity be carried out by the District 
Attorney in any county where charges were filed (none have been).  
Moreover, he said that the meeting itself was not part of an 
investigation; indeed, it was initiated by Bigot Busters in response to 
the meeting held between Init. 608 and the Secy. of State on July 14, 1994.

A member of the Init. 608 campaign was at the Secy. of State's office, 
but was not permitted to join the meeting.

The following are reports on the meeting; note the difference between the 
mainstream and the gay press!  Also at the end is a styatement from ACLU 
of Washington on the matter:

````````````````````````````````
Everett _Herald_, 6 August 1994, p. 3B

PETITION HARASSMENT CALLED CHALLENGE
by David Ammons, Associated Press

Olympia -- Harassment by foes of anti-gay-rights initiatives underscores 
a need for laws to protect signature gatherers, but the challenge is 
coming up with a fix that's constitutional, Washington's chief elections 
officer said Friday.

Secretary of State Ralph Munro said his informal probe of alleged 
intimidation and harassment by "Bigot Busters" leaves no doubt in his 
mind that foes of two anti-gay-rights initiatives violated the rights of 
the signature gatherers.

"Absolutely, there was harassment," he said in an interview after 
weighing comments from both sides in the dispute.  "There was definite 
harassment.  When somebody gets spit (at), gets shoved out of the way, 
when you have bodily contact, it is harassment.  I also think there was 
verbal harassment."

He was referring to a number of complaints lodged with his office by 
backers of initiatives 608 and 610 about the conduct of groups of 
self-described Bigot busters.  Initiative backers told Munro that loud, 
argumentative and verbally abusive groups of opponents would descend upon 
signature-gathering areas, trying to interrupt the project or persuade 
people not to sign.

The Bigot Busters sometimes caused such a commotion that the initiative 
sponsors were kicked out of the mall or other signature-gathering venues, 
said I-608 spokeswoman Cathy Mickels of Lynden.  She balmed the tactic 
for the failure of I-6708 to attract enough signatures to make the fall 
ballot.

The Bigot Busters, a group not directly affiliated with the main Hands 
Off Washington campaign, has steadfastly denied doing anything more than 
educating would-be signers about the impact of the initiatives.  The 
confrontations never became physical, spokeswoman Kathleen Conroy said in 
a recent interview.

She did not return a request for comment Friday.

Mickels was gratified with Munro's remarks, saying "the evidence must 
have been significant for him to have publicly said that.  We're not 
dropping the ball on this issue.  We are going to send a message to these 
thugs that voters are not going to accept this."

Police reports will be filed by some sponsors, a federal civil rights 
lawsuit is being considered and other steps will be taken, she said.

"We don't need a new law so much as we need strong enforcement of the one 
we have on the books right now, " Mickels said.  "Our marketplace of 
ideas is called into question when you use this type of threatening tactics."

Munro said the issue of protecting sponsors' rights to collect signatures 
has "absolutely nothing to do with gay rights.  Tomorrow it might be an 
initiative to protect ocean beaches or child labor, or whatever...

"The real point is, we want to make sure harassment doesn't become a 
campaign technique."

Munro said he wants to work with the Legislature to toughen the 
anti-harassment protections, but conceded that it could be a difficult 
task because each side has First Amendment rights.

``````````````````````````````````````````
_Olympian_ (Olympia, WA), 28 July 1994

MUNRO TRIES TO CLEAN UP INITIATIVES
by Bob Partlow, the Olympian

Trying to avoid "open warfare," Secretary of State Ralph Munro will 
propose new laws to the 1995 Legislature governing activities surrounding 
the gathering of initiative signatures.

Munro also will propose legislation to give sponsors more time to collect 
signatures rather than have their measures tied up in court, and he wants 
to make sure legal language required on initiatives is not dwarfed by 
promotional language on the petitions.

"The knottiest problem is protecting the rights of those signing the 
initiative, those gathering the signatures and those who are opposed," 
Munro said.

Munro made his comments after meeting earlier this week with 
representatives of Bigot Busters.  Members of that group were accused by 
sponsors of initiatives 608 and 610 of being spit on, verbally harassed 
and intimidated as sponsors tried to collect signatures.

"They told me that wasn't any of their people," Munro said of his meeting 
with five members of the group.  Bigot Busters was trying to stop people 
from signing the measures -- which would have prohibited the expansion of 
civil rights to gays and lesbians.  Neither measure gathered the 
necessary signatures to make the ballot.

Munro earlier met with sponsors of the measures.  He didn't make a 
judgment about what had happened during signature gathering, but said 
some rules are necessary.

"If we don't do something, we're going 6to have open warfare on the 
initiative process and that's going to harm the process," he said.

He has not yet worked out the specifics of his proposed legislation, he said.

His other two bills would:

* Allow initiative sponsors to collect signatures even if the precise 
wording of the title of the initiative has not been determined.  Court 
fights over titles can take valuable time sponsors need to collect 
signatures, he said.

* Require that legal language required on initiative petitions be given 
more prominence compared to promotional language on the petitions.

"The legal stuff is getting smaller and smaller and the promotional stuff 
is getting bigger and bigger," he said.

`````````````````````````````````````
Seattle Gay News, 12 August 1994, page one (above the fold)

SECRETARY OF STATE'S OFFICE SAYS BIGOT BUSTERS ARE OK
by Tom Flint, Associate Editor

Mainstream news reports on KUOW radio and in the _Seattle times_ created 
the false impression that Secretary of State Ralph Munro found Bigot 
Busters responsible for the harassment of petitioners for anti-Gay 
Initiatives 608/160, and that his office will seek stricter legislation 
to protect the signature gatherers.

Munro was out of town last week, but in a telephone interview with the 
SGN, Assistant Secretary of State Stone Whiting said the reports were 
misleading and false.  "We met with representatives from Bigot Busters 
and Initiative 608.  Neither side ever offered any kind of evidence that 
Bigot Busters were involved in any kind of situation of harassment or 
interference, Whiting said.

The _Times_ article quoted Ralph Munro as saying, "Absolutely, there was 
harassment.  There was definite harassment.  When somebody gets spit 
upon, gets shoved out of the way, when you have bodily contact, it is 
harassment.  I also think there was verbal harassment."

Whiting said that Munro's comment was not in regard to Bigot Busters, a 
fact that was not made clear in the news reports.  "There were a couple 
of incidents of harassment in a couple of locations, but as far as anyone 
is aware, Bigot Busters had no involvement in those incidents whatsoever, 
"Whiting said.  "The existing statutes dealt with those incidents.  There 
are no pending criminal complaints."

Whiting said that the Secretary of State's office would be involved in 
designing such legislation (regarding harassment), but if implemented it 
would not be targeted at Bigot Busters or the freedom of political 
debate.  Whiting said that clearly, certain senators and state 
representatives are going to introduce legislation in an attempt to make 
an issue of Bigot Busters, and Ralph Munro wants to be able to influence 
any such legislation.

"The legislation is going to be introduced by members who want to advance 
this [issue]..." Whiting said.  "Rather than just wait and be surprised 
by it in January [when the Legislature reconvenes] we want to be involved 
in the discussion."

Whiting said the Secretary of State's office sees two areas where current 
regulations might be clarified.  Collecting signatures on state property, 
like the ferry terminals, is an exercise of First Amendment rights.  "But 
when there are too many people collecting signatures, or when there is 
political discussion, the custodian is tempted to tell everyone to get 
out.  There are some First Amendment problems with that," Whiting said.  
He also said the laws need to be clarified about access for signature 
gatherers to semi-public spaces like malls or privately owned grocery 
stores that serve as public accommodations.

The ACLU is monitoring legislation that would restrict political debate 
in the initiative precess. Doug Hoenig, ACLU Director Education, said "It 
is already illegal to physically interfere with the initiative process.  
The laws are clear and adequate," Hoenig said.  "political debate is not 
interference, even heated political debate."

`````````````````````````
LETTER SENT BY THE ACLU TO SECY. OF STATE OF WASHINGTON:

Recent press reports indicate that you may be considering proposals for 
additional legislation  governing conduct near initiative signature 
gatherers.  We respectfully urge you to avoid proposing any legislation 
that could be used to inhibit the vigorous debate and advocacy associated 
with controversial public policy issues.

Current Washington law is more than adequate to protect initiative 
petition signature gatherers from harassment.  In particular, RCW 
29.79.490 (5) provides specific protection, stating that it is a criminal 
offense if one "...interferes with or attempts to interfere with the 
right of any voter to sign or not to sign an initiative...petition...by 
threats, intimidation, or any other corrupt means or practice..."

Initiative campaign -- even at the early signature gathering state -- 
must face the same public scrutiny and challenge as any other political 
offering in the marketplace of ideas.  The idea of legislatively creating 
a "no trespass" buffer zone of arbitrary size around an initiative 
petition signature gatherer does not meet the very high level of 
protection that political speech is provided under the Constitution.

Hearing opposing messages on controversial, emotional issues is not 
always comfortable for the listener, but it is part of the give-and-take 
essential to our democratic process.

Sincerely,

Kathleen Taylor
Executive Director, ACLU of Washington Foundation

       *  Richard Isaac		
    __*_*___
    \*   * /    Seattle
    *\    *	
   ***\**/**    rmisaac
       \/   @eskimo.com