this post was submitted on 25 Feb 2025
10 points (100.0% liked)

Seattle

1662 readers
18 users here now

A community for news and discussion of Seattle, Washington and the surrounding area

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 4 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] colonelp4nic 10 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Well, if the Republicans hate it, it's probably reasonable. Let's check the article. "It would require the Secretary of State’s Office to check addresses during the signature verification process and it would require signature gatherers to sign a declaration on each sheet of signatures they collect."

That's basically the smallest, least intrusive thing that can be done to prevent fraud. It's kinda wild that wasn't already in place, but that probably explains the ease with which unpopular, right-wing, corporate-sponsored initiatives have been ending up on the ballot 🙄

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Backers of the bill say this will increase accountability and ensure each signature belongs to a registered voter. They don’t think it should be controversial.

It is.

Fuck the Seattle Times for not understanding how to keep opinion out of their reporting. There's a reason that nobody here bothers listening to their endorsements.

[–] DougHolland 2 points 23 hours ago

I'm old, and always, always subscribed to the local paper everywhere I've lived, but they'd have to pay me to subscribe to the Times. Sleepiest paper I've ever seen.

[–] colonelp4nic 1 points 22 hours ago

Are there examples of neutral news sources that you like?