Anti-trans ballot initiative fails to make ballot in California

A group called Privacy for All announced yesterday that it had failed in its attempt to qualify the so-called Personal Privacy Protection Act for the November 2016 ballot.

The PPPA would have forced transgender and gender nonconforming people to use public facilities reserved for our birth sex.

Anti-trans activists needed to get 365800 signatures to place the initiative on the ballot but fell short. They are not saying by how much.

Today is the day that Privacy For All should be submitting the signatures required to qualify the Personal Privacy Protection Act for the November 2016 ballot. Unfortunately we fell short of the signatures needed.

While we are extremely disappointed, we know that we gave this effort our best and “left it all on the field”.

Please be encouraged that throughout this we’ve educated many new churches on their role in the political arena, equipped churches to share this message with their members, registered new voters, and educated the public on this issue. Though we didn’t reach our ultimate goal, much was accomplished. You can be proud of that.

Finally, while none of us wants to think about another initiative drive, we assume that someday a measure like the PPPA will qualify for the ballot not just in California but in other states throughout the country.

--Karen England, Privacy for All organizer

There is a strong desire to keep bathrooms sex separate among a segment of California voters. But much of California is still being introduced to the issue.

--Gina Gleason, PFA spokesperson

The same group failed in 2013 in an attempt to overturn AB 1266 which allows students to use facilities consistent with their gender identity.

There is no singular cause for the shortage of signatures. Certainly the holiday season is not the best time to make a final push with petitions, but we just did not find the same urgency to enact a new law today as there was two years ago to overturn a law scheduled to be enacted in a matter of weeks.


We are disappointed that this measure will not be on the 2016 ballot, but our efforts to protect privacy in bathrooms, locker rooms and showers will continue. The legal action to count all ballot signatures submitted in 2013 continues, we expect to see lawsuits by those who have had their privacy violated, and we assume that a measure like the Personal Privacy Protection Act will qualify for the ballot in the future.


PFA says it has compassion for those that believe biology has betrayed them. But they oppose allowing individuals to use bathrooms, locker rooms and showers based on gender identity as opposed to biological really, their compassion is but so much smoke.





Your rating: None Average: 3 (1 vote)


“Privacy for All”...

Robyn's picture

...doesn’t include transgender people, of course.

Your rating: None Average: 3 (1 vote)