<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>The Capitol Record &#187; Domestic partnership</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.tvw.org/capitolrecord/index.php/tag/domestic-partnership/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.tvw.org/capitolrecord</link>
	<description>News, background and notes on Washington state government.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 00:14:26 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Senate takes up domestic partnership parentage bill now</title>
		<link>http://www.tvw.org/capitolrecord/index.php/2011/04/senate-takes-up-domestic-partnership-parentage-bill-now/</link>
		<comments>http://www.tvw.org/capitolrecord/index.php/2011/04/senate-takes-up-domestic-partnership-parentage-bill-now/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Apr 2011 18:06:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Niki Reading</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Domestic partnership]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[surrogate]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tvw.org/capitolrecord/?p=7495</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Senate is taking up the domestic partner parentage bill &#8212; that previously included paid surrogacy, which was removed in the House. &#8220;I don&#8217;t think it&#8217;s necessary and I&#8217;m opposed to it. I like the idea of having a mother and a father in our culture and in our society,&#8221; said Sen. Don Benton. He [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.tvw.org/capitolrecord/index.php/2011/04/senate-takes-up-domestic-partnership-parentage-bill-now/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Rep. Pedersen wants to repeal ban on paid surrogacy, Publicola reports</title>
		<link>http://www.tvw.org/capitolrecord/index.php/2010/01/rep-pedersen-wants-to-repeal-ban-on-paid-surrogacy-publicola-reports/</link>
		<comments>http://www.tvw.org/capitolrecord/index.php/2010/01/rep-pedersen-wants-to-repeal-ban-on-paid-surrogacy-publicola-reports/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Jan 2010 17:53:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Niki Reading</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Domestic partnership]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[surrogacy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tvw.org/capitolrecord/?p=2679</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Publicola talked with Rep. Jamie Pedersen, who shared two of his legislative priorities: Amend the domestic partnership law and repeal the law banning paid surrogacy. On the domestic partnership front, Pedersen told Publicola he&#8217;d like to see domestic partnerships, civil unions and gay marriages from other states recognized here. And for more on surrogacy, read [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.tvw.org/capitolrecord/index.php/2010/01/rep-pedersen-wants-to-repeal-ban-on-paid-surrogacy-publicola-reports/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Additional domestic partnership benefits start Thursday</title>
		<link>http://www.tvw.org/capitolrecord/index.php/2009/12/additional-domestic-partnership-benefits-start-thursday/</link>
		<comments>http://www.tvw.org/capitolrecord/index.php/2009/12/additional-domestic-partnership-benefits-start-thursday/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Dec 2009 18:24:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Domestic partnership]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tvw.org/capitolrecord/?p=2562</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Starting tomorrow, the &#8220;everything but marriage&#8221; law goes into effect. That means domestic partners who are already registered with the state will automatically receive the remaining state-granted benefits and responsibilities of married couples. Registrations will continue to be done through the Secretary of State&#8217;s Corporations and Charities Division. But dissolution will be done through the [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.tvw.org/capitolrecord/index.php/2009/12/additional-domestic-partnership-benefits-start-thursday/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Watch The Impact: Referendum 71, Nile Valley Landslide and more</title>
		<link>http://www.tvw.org/capitolrecord/index.php/2009/11/watch-the-impact-referendum-71-nile-valley-landslide-and-more/</link>
		<comments>http://www.tvw.org/capitolrecord/index.php/2009/11/watch-the-impact-referendum-71-nile-valley-landslide-and-more/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Nov 2009 17:42:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Niki Reading</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Domestic partnership]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nile Valley landslide]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[R71]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Impact]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tvw.org/capitolrecord/?p=2472</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From host Jessica Gao: Washington voters make history with the approval of Referendum 71, which expands the rights of domestic partners to include all the state-granted rights of married couples. It is the country’s first ever statewide vote in support of a gay rights issue. We talk with State Senator Joe McDermott (D-Seattle) about what [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.tvw.org/capitolrecord/index.php/2009/11/watch-the-impact-referendum-71-nile-valley-landslide-and-more/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Domestic partnership expansion takes effect Dec. 3</title>
		<link>http://www.tvw.org/capitolrecord/index.php/2009/11/domestic-partnership-expansion-takes-effect-dec-3/</link>
		<comments>http://www.tvw.org/capitolrecord/index.php/2009/11/domestic-partnership-expansion-takes-effect-dec-3/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Nov 2009 22:32:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Niki Reading</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Domestic partnership]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[R71]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tvw.org/capitolrecord/?p=2470</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Voters approved Referendum 71, which means Senate Bill 5688 &#8212; to extend all the state-granted rights and responsibilities of marriage to domestic partners &#8212; stands. According to the Secretary of State&#8217;s blog, there&#8217;s a 30-day waiting period after the election for the law to take effect. That means the expanded rights won&#8217;t be available to [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.tvw.org/capitolrecord/index.php/2009/11/domestic-partnership-expansion-takes-effect-dec-3/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Update on R-71: Signatures are in</title>
		<link>http://www.tvw.org/capitolrecord/index.php/2009/07/update-on-r-71-signatures-are-in/</link>
		<comments>http://www.tvw.org/capitolrecord/index.php/2009/07/update-on-r-71-signatures-are-in/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 27 Jul 2009 17:13:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Niki Reading</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Domestic partnership]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[R71]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tvw.org/capitolrecord/?p=1998</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On Saturday, the group behind Referendum 71 &#8212; which would cancel the implementation of the 2009 Legislature&#8217;s &#8220;everything but marriage&#8221; law for domestic partners -- turned in their signatures to the Secretary of State&#8217;s office. They estimated that they had 138,000 voter signatures. The signatures will be scanned for archives, counted and then checked for [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.tvw.org/capitolrecord/index.php/2009/07/update-on-r-71-signatures-are-in/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A first look at Referendum 71 &#8212; all 114-pages-in-one</title>
		<link>http://www.tvw.org/capitolrecord/index.php/2009/06/a-first-look-at-referendum-71-all-114-pages-in-one/</link>
		<comments>http://www.tvw.org/capitolrecord/index.php/2009/06/a-first-look-at-referendum-71-all-114-pages-in-one/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2009 17:50:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Niki Reading</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Schools]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Domestic partnership]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[referendum 71]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tvw.org/capitolrecord/?p=1822</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As you may recall, Referendum 71 &#8212; the one to repeal the everything-but-gay-marriage bill &#8212; faced a big challenge: How to get 114 pages of the text of the bill onto one, readable page (as is required by state law). Well, they figured it out and here&#8217;s a first look, courtesy of Dave Ammons from [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.tvw.org/capitolrecord/index.php/2009/06/a-first-look-at-referendum-71-all-114-pages-in-one/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Elections Division is concerned about R71 opponents pledge to publish names</title>
		<link>http://www.tvw.org/capitolrecord/index.php/2009/06/elections-division-is-concerned-about-r71-opponents-pledge-to-publish-names/</link>
		<comments>http://www.tvw.org/capitolrecord/index.php/2009/06/elections-division-is-concerned-about-r71-opponents-pledge-to-publish-names/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Jun 2009 22:15:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Niki Reading</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Domestic partnership]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[initiatives]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tvw.org/capitolrecord/?p=1781</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Yesterday, a group called Who Signed announced that they would publish the names of Washington voters who sign Referendum 71 &#8212; the initiative to repeal the domestic partnership expansion. The names of voters who sign petitions are, of course, public record. But the state&#8217;s Elections Director, Nick Handy, said this is an instance where making [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.tvw.org/capitolrecord/index.php/2009/06/elections-division-is-concerned-about-r71-opponents-pledge-to-publish-names/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Initiative supporters file an appeal of domestic partnership initiative language</title>
		<link>http://www.tvw.org/capitolrecord/index.php/2009/05/initiative-supporters-file-an-appeal-of-domestic-partnership-initiative-language/</link>
		<comments>http://www.tvw.org/capitolrecord/index.php/2009/05/initiative-supporters-file-an-appeal-of-domestic-partnership-initiative-language/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 May 2009 17:04:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Niki Reading</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Domestic partnership]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[initiative]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tvw.org/capitolrecord/?p=1749</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Last night, supporters of an initiative to prevent the expansion of domestic partnership filed an appeal to the Thurston County Superior Court on the proposed ballot language. The proposed language was: &#8220;&#8230;This bill would expand the rights, responsibilities, and obligations of registered domestic partners and their families to include all rights, responsibilities, and obligations granted [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.tvw.org/capitolrecord/index.php/2009/05/initiative-supporters-file-an-appeal-of-domestic-partnership-initiative-language/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Fitting 114 pages onto one readable page &#8230; the initiative process</title>
		<link>http://www.tvw.org/capitolrecord/index.php/2009/05/fitting-114-pages-onto-one-readable-page-the-initiative-process/</link>
		<comments>http://www.tvw.org/capitolrecord/index.php/2009/05/fitting-114-pages-onto-one-readable-page-the-initiative-process/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 May 2009 23:48:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Niki Reading</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Domestic partnership]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tvw.org/capitolrecord/?p=1747</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The always-interesting Office of the Secretary of State&#8217;s blog, From Our Corner, has checked out the requirements for initiatives and found a conundrum for the initiative to prevent expansion of domestic partnership: The 114-page bill must be printed &#8212; in a way that&#8217;s readable &#8212; on one sheet of paper. &#8220;&#8230; no multiple page stapled [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.tvw.org/capitolrecord/index.php/2009/05/fitting-114-pages-onto-one-readable-page-the-initiative-process/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

