(Ok, I didn't intend to start with a pun, but I like puns, so the title stays.)

Disclaimer: Domestic partnerships are insufficient. Civil unions are insufficient. Oregon, and the nation, need to get rid of legalized marriage. All couples, of any assortment, should get a civil union, and that should cover nothing but the legal stuff. The state's job is to sanctify relationships; that's what a church, or a gathering of friends and family, can do. The state's job is to cover the legalities: home ownership, debts, responsibility for children, health care issues, etc. Until we get the state out of the marriage business entirely, we're going to have these problems.

Disclaimer 2: This legislation needs to go into effect as soon as possible to provide a measure of justice for Oregonians being denied basic rights.

Federal Judge Mosman placed a termporary restraining order on Oregon's domestic partnership law, due to go into effect with the new year, to determine that the rights of voters were not being denied by the process used to determine if petitions were properly counted by the Secretary of State's office. A right-wing advocacy group, based out of the state, is trying to force an initiative to overturn the new law by claiming that the count was done improperly and signatures were improperly invalidated. Groups like Basic Rights Oregon say this is no more than a political ploy and has nothing to do with counting signatures.

What does the law say?

Here's the relevant portion of Oregon Statude Chapter 250 "Initiative and Referendum".

250.105 Filing officer; filing requirements; rules; signature verification.

1. An initiative or referendum petition relating to a state measure shall be filed with the Secretary of State for the purpose of verifying whether the petition contains the required number of signatures of electors. The filed petition shall contain only original signatures. Each petition shall be verified in the order in which the petitions are filed with the secretary.
2. An initiative or referendum petition relating to a state measure shall not be accepted for filing if it contains less than 100 percent of the required number of signatures.
3. If an initiative or referendum petition is submitted not less than 165 days before the election at which the proposed measure is to be voted upon and if the Secretary of State determines that insufficient signatures have been submitted but the deadline for filing the petition has not passed, the petitioners may submit additional signatures.
4. The Secretary of State by rule shall designate a statistical sampling technique to verify whether a petition contains the required number of signatures of electors. A petition shall not be rejected for the reason that it contains less than the required number of signatures unless two separate sampling processes both establish that the petition lacks the required number of signatures. The second sampling must contain a larger number of signatures than the first sampling. If two samplings are required under this subsection, the total number of signatures verified on the petition shall be not less than five percent of the total number of signatures on the petition.
5. For purposes of estimating the number of duplicate signatures contained in a petition, the Secretary of State shall apply at least an eight percent duplication rate in the first sampling of signatures on all petitions. If a second sampling of signatures is required under subsection (4) of this section, the secretary shall calculate an estimated signature duplication rate for each petition for which a second sampling is required. For purposes of calculating an estimated signature duplication rate for each petition for which a second sampling is required, the county clerks shall report to the secretary the number of electors determined to have signed a specific petition more than once.
6. When verifying signatures for a state initiative or referendum petition, the county clerk shall identify on an elector’s voter registration record or other database that the elector signed the specific initiative or referendum petition.
7. The Secretary of State may employ professional assistance to determine the sampling technique to be designated under subsection (4) of this section. [1979 c.190 §149; 1985 c.447 §7; 1989 c.68 §6; 1999 c.1021 §1]

Lots of people, mostly those ignorant of science, math and democracy, have trouble with statistical sampling. The fact of the matter is, however, that sampling is a proven process. Done correctly, sampling will come closer to the truth about things that don't admit to quantitative measurement than any other tool we have. And when it comes to something like counting signatures, it's a no-brainer. That's why the law specifically calls for it to be done. Because it works. This is not fancy guessing; it's the most accurate way of determining if tens of thousands of submitted signatures meet the law's criteria.

What are the changes the sampling is wrong? Virtually none. Unless someone can prove that the various County elections offices did their jobs badly, or that the Secretary of State's office fiddled the count, or some other nefarious scheme was hatched and has managed to remain in the dark despite the willingness of government workers to blab to the press when wrong is done; I'm thinking we can be pretty confident the SOS may be off by a dozen votes one way or the other — but no more.

But the sampling was correct. The signature count was short. They lose. Now, do we have a judge who understands and accepts that statistics is a proven, verifiable methodology; or do we have another activist right-wing judge who'll substitute his own values and overturn not just domestic partnerships but the ability of government to use statistical processes, and perhaps other scientific and factual methodologies.

We'll see.