Backers of Gay Marriage Rethink California Push

LOS ANGELES — Discouraged by stubborn poll numbers and pessimistic political consultants, major financial backers of same-sex marriage are cautioning gay rights groups to delay a campaign to overturn California’s ban on such unions until at least 2012.

Earlier this year, many supporters of same-sex marriage seemed eager to mount a 2010 campaign to overturn Proposition 8, which was passed by California voters in November and defined marriage as “between a man and a woman.”

But the timing of another campaign has since been questioned by several of the movement’s big donors, including David Bohnett, a millionaire philanthropist and technology entrepreneur who gave more than $1 million to the unsuccessful campaign to defeat Proposition 8.

“In conversations with a number of my fellow major No on 8 donors,” Mr. Bohnett said in an e-mail message, “I find that they share my sentiment: namely, that we will step up to the plate — with resources and talent — when the time is right.”

“The only thing worse than losing in 2008,” he added, “would be to lose again in 2010.”

The issue of when to go back to the polls was also the central topic at a contentious “leadership summit” held Saturday at a church in San Bernardino, east of Los Angeles, where about 200 gay rights advocates gathered to discuss their next step. It was the second large meeting of gay leaders since late May when the California Supreme Court ruled against a legal challenge to Proposition 8, which passed with 52 percent of the vote.

Shortly after the court’s decision, officials at Equality California, one of the largest gay rights groups in California, issued an online plea for donations for a possible 2010 campaign, citing a need to capitalize on anger over the decision and on the seeming momentum from the recent legalization of same-sex marriage in several other states.

But that thinking has apparently evolved.

Marc Solomon, marriage director for Equality California, said he spent June and early July asking the opinions of nearly two dozen California political consultants and pollsters and had been surprised by the almost unanimous opinion that a 2010 race was a bad idea.

“I expected having watched the protests and the real pain that the L.G.B.T. community had experienced that there would be some real measurable remorse in the electorate,” Mr. Solomon said, referring to lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people. “But if you look at the poll numbers since November, they really haven’t moved at all.”

A major factor in any California balloting, of course, is money; campaigns here are remarkably expensive, with a number of costly media markets. The Proposition 8 campaign, for example, cost more than $80 million, with opponents spending some $43 million.

Sarah Callahan, ch

See Backers of Gay Marriage Rethink California Push

New York Times

* Tags = gay men gay news lesbian news transgender bisexual

Published by  Published by xFruits

Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/07/backers-of-ga…

A consensus: among consultants Wait until 2012 To Repeal Prop 8

he advice is piling up on one side for folks who want to see same sex marriage legalized in California: Wait until 2012 to ask voters to overturn Proposition 8.

We’ve told you about the three LGBT coalitions of color who suggested waiting, and the nation’s oldest LGBT Democratic club saying the same. Now some of California’s top political consultants are joining the chorus.

Now, now. We know that some gay marriage fans blame consultants for the ruinous anti-Prop 8 campaign. But Equality California marriage director Marc Solomon — who helped lead the successful drive for marriage in Massachusetts — asked seven to share their thoughts on the 2010 v. 2012 question. Plus, they asked what the LGBT community and their allies should do to prepare to go back to the ballot. Three were openly LGBT (including two who are married) and one is a Republican.

The consensus: Wait until 2012.

Sue Burnside, co-chair of the National Gay & Lesbian Victory Fund Campaign Board, is “convinced that we should refrain from rushing in 2010, and instead to build on grassroots passion and strategically prepare for a ‘Yes on Marriage Equality’ referendum in 2012.” Ditto for Mark Armour and Rick Claussen suggests “a multi-year campaign that culminates in an election when the time is right.”

“If you do UNSUCCESSFULLY undertake this issue at the ballot in 2010, this will further erode public support on the issue and make it harder for future efforts to succeed,” Claussen said.

Even though Democratic consultant Richie Ross — who has won a bazillion races in California going back a few decades — doesn’t offer a definitive suggestion, he presents a raw numbers breakdown that suggests that by 2012 there will be more young voters on the rolls (likely to vote for gay marriage) and more older voters (likely to oppose) dying off.

Dave Fleischer, who has worked on many gay-related ballot measures over the years, worries about money. Each side on the Prop 8 battle raised at least $40 million. “The most conventional path to victory employed by a wide variety of campaign strategists — bury your opposition by dramatically outspending them, effectively drowning out their message — isn’t an option when the opposition is as well-funded as ours is in California.” He worries that the 66 weeks until Nov 2010 “is a very brief time to raise $40-50 million.”

Plus, he worries if “our strategy, in a lower turnout year, (can) insure that those who voted withus in 2008 return to the polls in greater numbers than those who voted against us? We can certainly try. But we have to acknowledge that this would be very difficult. Key blocs of our supporters, such as younger voters, often turn out to vote in reduced numbers in off-years.”

Former Los Angeles Times pollster Jill Darling said “Did the 2008 campaign move voters? Are the post-elections efforts having any effect? Nothing measurable, as of May.”

See The consensus: Wait until 2012.

San Francisco Chronicle

* Tags = gay men gay news lesbian news transgender bisexual

Published by  Published by xFruits

Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/07/consensus-amo…

Gates Plan May Be Beginning of the End of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’

Pentagon Studies Ways to Relax Enforcement as First Step; Impact on Troops Would be Minimal

SANTA BARBARA, Calif. — In the wake of yesterday’s unexpected Pentagon announcement about gays in the military, experts say the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy may be on the brink of irreversible change that would speed up its demise. After speaking with President Obama last week, Defense Secretary Robert Gates has asked military lawyers to explore how to modify enforcement of the policy in ways that are “more flexible until the law is changed.” The President Monday reiterated his intention to end discrimination against gay troops, saying he is working with Congress and the military to do so.

Christopher Neff, political director of the Palm Center, said the remarks by Secretary Gates marked the first time the Defense Secretary has made clear that the Pentagon is onboard with the President’s determination to lift the ban. “‘Don’t ask, don’t tell’ is a package — both a law and a policy — that hasn’t been penetrated for fifteen years,” Neff said. “This is a crack in humpty dumpty, and it gets the ball rolling for a political solution since it gives cover to lawmakers who have been waiting for a nod from the Pentagon.”

Neff said that even a small change in how “don’t ask, don’t tell” is enforced could represent a seismic political shift, even if it does not have a substantial operational impact on most gay troops, who would still be subject to discharge. If the military stops applying certain provisions of the policy, as Gates says it is considering, it would send a signal to Congress about the inevitability of change. “That’s why executive action is the key to unlocking the political stalemate,” said Neff. “Even the statements themselves, although they do await follow-up action, have changed the political landscape.”
 
Last month, the Palm Center published a report which outlined several legal and political rationales for executive branch discretion in regulating, and even halting, discharges provided for by federal statute. One of those rationales is closely linked to the new review announced by Secretary Gates. According to the Palm Center study, “the ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ policy itself, as codified by Congress, also grants authority to the Department of Defense to determine the procedures under which investigations, separation proceedings, and other personnel actions under the authority of 10 U.S.C. Section 654 will be carried out … The Secretary of Defense has discretion to determine the specific manner in which ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ will be implemented.” Prior to the release of the Palm Center’s report, most observers had assumed that only Congress or the federal courts end the firings of gay troops.
 
Amidst mounting public pressure, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said this week that he thought “don’t ask, don’t tell” would be repealed by the end of the President’s first term. Nathaniel Frank, senior research fellow at the Palm Center, said this week’s developments were politically significant. “Serious discussions have been launched by the President himself,” said Frank. “Obama has said this is a failed policy that harms national security, so these measures are not just fixes, but may be the beginning of the end.” Frank added that any regulatory changes that fall short of halting all discharges will be “window-dressing,” but he focused on the implications for further political change. “This means the hot potato party may finally be over, as the President understands where the buck stops.”
 
In the wake of this week’s developments, the Palm Center announced that it is preparing a more extensive legal analysis of administrative options for relaxing the application of certain provisions of “don’t ask, don’t tell.” Neff said that the Defense Department should invite public input as the rules are re-drafted, which would be consistent with past processes when military regulations have been
changed. “This review should be no different,” he said.
 
Organizations and individuals who have endorsed or endorsed consideration of the use of executive action based on the legal theories outlined in the Palm Center’s study include Secretary Gates, 77 members of Congress, the New York Times editorial page, Center for American Progress, Human Rights Campaign, Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, Hendrik Hertzberg of the New Yorker, the political consultant Robert Shrum, and former White House aide Richard Socarides.
 
The Palm Center is a research institute at the University of California, Santa Barbara. The Center uses rigorous social science to inform public discussions of controversial social issues, enabling policy outcomes to be informed more by evidence than by emotion. Its data-driven approach is premised on the notion that the public makes wise choices on social issues when high-quality information is available. For more information, visit www.palmcenter.ucsb.edu.

Published by  Published by xFruits

Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/07/gates-plan-ma…

Danny Westneat Debate about gay equality appears to be ending

Whatever you may think of Joe Fuiten — the Bothell megachurch pastor and family-values political activist — you gotta give him points for bluntness.

Fuiten put out a revealing memo this week on gay marriage and domestic partnerships. To my eyes, it is the strongest sign yet that sweeping cultural change isn’t just someday coming to our state.

It’s already here.

Last month the state Legislature passed a bill that extends all the state-given benefits of being married to same-sex couples who register as domestic partners.

It’s dubbed the “everything but marriage” law. Its point is: Homosexual marriage may still be illegal here, but in the meantime gay and lesbian couples should have the same legal protections as everyone else.

Fuiten and other conservative Christian leaders opposed the bill, arguing it’s a precursor to gay marriage (which it is). Lately they’ve been debating whether to try to repeal it at the ballot box.

On Monday, Fuiten, pastor at Cedar Park Church, published the frank views of 34 right-leaning political or religious activists on the topic at his blog, franklyfuiten.com.

It’s wide-ranging, so you should read it for yourself. My take-away was that our long debate about gay equality seems to be ending. Gays and lesbians have won. Nobody understands this better than the other side.

“I have seen nothing approaching religious and/or other opposition that amounts to a hill of beans,” wrote Tom Henry, a GOP political consultant.

“Voters are immune or desensitized to the word ‘gay marriage’ right now. Besides, they think we hate them,” wrote Josephine Wentzel, a Vancouver-area Christian conservative.

“With every passing day, we lose more young people to the postmodern philosophy (no absolutes) and older people (with the Judeo-Christian value) to death. Time is not on our side,” wrote Heidi Lestelle, a Kitsap County Christian activist.

I called Fuiten. Though he and I disagree on many political issues — gay marriage in particular — we still stay in touch and debate. I asked him: Is the war over gay rights ending?

 See Danny Westneat Debate about gay equality appears to be ending

Seattle Times

Published by  Published by xFruits

Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/05/danny-westnea…

Gay Blogads

website stats