      SEATTLE — A poll last month of Washington residents commissioned by a Seattle TV station indicated that a statewide vote could go either way for a controversial measure that is on this month’s ballot largely because of the efforts of concerned evangelical Christians.
     The poll by SurveyUSA for KING-TV 5 showed Washingtonians closely divided on Referendum 71, which asks voters whether to expand the rights, responsibilities, and obligations of registered domestic same-sex partners and their families. The referendum asks voters to approve or reject a state law, Senate Bill 5688, that was signed by Gov. Christine Gregoire last May and which expanded the state’s domestic partnership laws.
     The poll showed the difference between those who oppose SB 5688 and those who support it is within the margin of error — too close to call.

According to the survey, 45 of those polled favor SB 5688; 42 percent oppose and are certain they will vote to reject SB 5688; and 13 percent are undecided. According to Christian groups that oppose the new law, SB 5688 would redefine marriage and provide the final step for homosexual marriage through litigation.
“As people become aware of what SB 5688 is really about, they tend to not support it. The numbers have moved in our favor,” wrote Gary Randall of Faith and Freedom Network, a leader in the Referendum 71 effort known as Protect Marriage Washington.
    Those who favor SB 5688 counter that domestic partnerships are not equal to marriage, and some claim any efforts to halt the new law are motivated by anti-gay bigotry.
    SurveyUSA interviewed 1,050 Washington adults Oct. 3-5. Of them, 907 were registered to vote. Of the registered voters, 548 were determined by SurveyUSA to be likely voters in the November general election.
   Among men, SB 5688 is rejected in the survey by a 4-point margin; among women, it is approved by 12 points — a 16-point gender gap. Seventy-two percent of Republicans say they will vote to reject; 72 percent of Democrats say they will vote to approve; independents reject by a 13-point margin.
   In the Seattle metropolitan area, the measure is approved by 18 points; in Eastern Washington, it is rejected by 18 points. Western Washington voters outside of Metro Seattle are more divided, with an 8-point margin voting against the referendum.
    Protect Marriage Washington conducted rallies against SB 5688 through October in Tukwila, Lynnwood, Spokane, Gig Harbor and Vancouver. More than 200,000 fliers have been distributed throughout the state and radio ads have been running, even though the effort has had, according to Randall, no large donors. On the other hand, he said, those in favor of SB 5688 received, for example, a donation from Microsoft of $100,000 for their campaign.
    While well focused on this month’s vote, the SB 5688 opponents also have been heavily occupied with another fight – a legal battle that is going all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.
    Seeking to prevent names and addresses of Referendum 71 petition signers from becoming public, the coalition that placed the referendum on the ballot asked that such information be sealed. They cited threats of violence against the petition signers and churches.
    A state panel initially said no, but in September U.S. District Court Judge Benjamin Settle in Tacoma ruled to block the release of the names and addresses. On Oct. 15 a three-member panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Oct. 15 ruled in Pasadena, Calif., against Settle’s restraining order.
   However, a Thurston County Superior Court judge on Oct. 14 issued a temporary restraining order against Washington Attorney General Rob McKenna and Secretary of State Sam Reed releasing the names and addresses until he receives the full written opinion of the 9th Circuit.
    On Oct. 16 Randall said the 9th Circuit decision would be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. Four days later, Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, while keeping the restraining order in place, referred the matter to the full High Court, which voted 8 to 1 to keep the restraining order in place for now.
   Randall said he was told the court will not make a final determination on the issue until possibly next June.,
“It is unconscionable that Attorney General McKenna and Secretary Reed are taking such an aggressive position to protect, as they contend, ‘open and transparent’ government, while ignoring the real documented threats already made against some who are defending marriage and the threat to further intimidate people from using the names from the petitions,” Randall wrote in an e-mail to Faith and Freedom Network supporters.