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 |
![]() |
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/07/consensus-amo…
Voter ‘animus’ to be issue in Calif marriage case
When the U.S. Supreme Court overturned an amendment to the Colorado Constitution that outlawed discrimination protections for gay people, same-sex couples could not enter into civil unions or domestic partnerships anywhere in the nation, much less get married. But as they seek to persuade a federal judge to strike down California’s ban on gay marriages, lawyers for two unmarried gay couples are using that 13-year-old decision as their road map — one they expect will eventually lead the high court to take up the marriage issue. In the Colorado case, Romer v. Evans, the Supreme Court majority held that voters’ dislike of gays and the laws that several cities had approved to shield them from bias motivated the state amendment. Such “animus,” it said, was incompatible with the section of the U.S. Constitution that requires the government to treat its citizens equally absent a compelling reason to do otherwise. The attorneys behind the challenge to California’s Proposition 8 plan to argue during a pretrial hearing Thursday that by stripping gays of the right to wed, the voter-approved ban runs afoul of America’s founding framework in the same way — and for the same reason. “Romer is a strikingly similar situation to what we have here. You had a ballot initiative, a majority vote of the people, taking away a right,” said Theodore J. Boutrous Jr., a member of the legal team led by former U.S. Solicitor General Theodore Olson and veteran trial lawyer David Boies. “And there was no justification or rationale other than disapproval by that majority of that group.” U.S. District Chief Judge Vaughn R. Walker on Tuesday issued a tentative order to fast-track the case in his San Francisco court. Among the questions he said he wants covered at trial are whether sexual orientation is unchangeable, if permitting same-sex marriage “destabilizes” traditional unions and whether Proposition 8′s ballot history demonstrates the measure had “discriminatory intent.” California Attorney General Jerry Brown, a defendant in the case, has sided with gay rights advocates and declined to defend the ban, which overturned a California Supreme Court ruling that had legalized same-sex marriages. The state Supreme Court five weeks ago upheld the measure, saying it represented a valid exercise of voters’ authority to amend the California Constitution. Proposition 8′s sponsors, a coalition of religious conservative groups called Protect Marriage, has been given permission to intervene in the federal case. In court papers, the group’s lawyers rejected the assertions that anti-gay attitudes fueled the November measure and that the 1996 Colorado case was applicable. “Nothing in California law, either Proposition 8 or otherwise, indicates that Californians harbor animus towards gay and lesbian individuals,” they wrote. Since the U.S. Supreme Court’s 6-3 decision, attorneys for gay rights and Christian conservative groups have debated whether the Romer decision could be used to expand gay rights. The ruling marked the first time the Supreme Court determined that the Constitution’s equal rights guarantees extended to gays and lesbians. “The basic point of Romer is that government cannot ever act out of hostility toward a group of people, and whether that is in the context of marriage or anti-discrimination law, the point carries over,” said Suzanne Goldberg, who worked on the case and now directs Columbia Law School’s Sexuality and Gender Law Program. The ruling has been cited, though so far unsuccessfully, in past challenges to gay marriage bans in Nebraska and Florida. At the same time, gay rights groups mostly have shied away from pursuing federal marriage cases in favor of pursuing marriage rights in state courts. Legal observers on both sides of the debate agree, however, that California’s Proposition 8 presents novel questions that could make the issue ripe for federal action.
San Francisco Chronicle
* Tags = gay men gay news lesbian news transgender bisexual
| Published by |
![]() |
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/07/voter-animus-…
LGBT discussion takes on a new tone in the Ohio Statehouse
Columbus–As the House State Government committee considered a bill to outlaw discrimination by sexual orientation or gender identity, State Rep. Cliff Hite of Findlay challenged Crystal Curry of the anti-gay Concerned Women for America.
“You and the other [Equal Housing and Employment Act opponents] have testified that homosexuals are only about three percent of the population,” said Hite, a Republican. “So how is it that three percent represents such a threat?”
“They’re not,” Curry answered, “unless we give them civil rights and allow them to marry. Then they are a threat. Three percent is not harmful unless they keep pushing and pushing and take on rights.”
Curry then told lawmakers that because LGBT people use the word “gay” instead of “homosexual” and Will and Grace has gay characters, homosexuality will “become accepted.”
“Kids will grow up and try it,” she complained.
The exchange caused a visible reaction in Hite and other committee members, both Democrats and Republicans.
This illustrates what might be the most significant development in the bill’s movement through the Ohio legislature:
The measure’s opponents can no longer make wild, unsubstantiated and long-debunked claims about the lives of LGBT people without challenges from both sides of the partisan aisle.
See LGBT discussion takes on a new tone in the Ohio Statehouse
Gay People Chronicle -
* Tags = gay men gay news lesbian news transgender bisexual
| Published by |
![]() |
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/06/lgbt-discussi…
Here Networks LLC and Its Publishing Affiliate Complete Merger Deal With PlanetOut Inc.
Here Networks LLC announced today the completion of the business combination of Here Networks LLC and its publishing affiliate, which includes the LGBT publications The Advocate and Out, with PlanetOut Inc. (formerly-traded under the ticker symbol, LGBT). The new public company resulting from this business combination will be named Here Media Inc. with Stephen P. Jarchow serving as Chairman and Paul Colichman serving as CEO.
On Wednesday, June 10, 2009 , the holders of a majority of the outstanding shares of PlanetOut Inc. common stock voted to approve the proposed business combination.
“The close of this deal represents an exciting moment for LGBT consumers across the globe,” said Stephen P. Jarchow and Paul Colichman . “We look forward to bringing new features that will enhance the user experience and keep our customers engaged.”
Here Media now becomes the premier global company for providing news and entertainment to the LGBT community. The company is also uniquely positioned to provide advertisers opportunities to reach its niche audience across platforms including television, online, print publishing, and filmed entertainment. Here Media‘s unmatched reach positions the company as a leader in creating an interactive relationship with consumers across all its iconic brands.
Jarchow and Colichman, along with current PlanetOut Inc. Chairman Phil Kleweno , will serve as the initial board of directors of Here Media.
About Here Media
Here Media, Inc. produces and distributes niche content across all platforms worldwide. Here Media’s iconic brands distribute gay media and world cinema programming with universal, humanistic appeal. Its distribution platforms include theaters, television, VOD, broadband, online, print and mobile. It earns subscription, advertising and licensing revenue from its award-winning content.
Here Media owns and operates a variety of media assets including:
- Here Studios, a full service motion picture studio.
- Here Films, a motion picture distribution company.
- here! Networks, a premium television network featuring programming that appeals to a gay and lesbian audience airing in 96 of the top 100 US markets, including every top 10 market.
- Iconic print brands including Out, Advocate and HIV Plus, as well as Alyson Books .
- Online properties including Gay.com, Planetout.com, Advocate.com, Out.com and SheWired.com which provide broadband video and social networking.
Paul Colichman is Chief Executive Officer of Here Media and Stephen P. Jarchow is Chairman. Together, they have produced and/or distributed over 200 motion pictures including Academy Award(R) winners “Gods and Monsters” and “Departures”.
Forward-Looking Statements
In addition to the historical information contained herein, this press release contains forward-looking statements, including statements regarding Here Media’s plans to launch new technologies and user experiences., .These statements include those containing the words “believes,” “anticipates,” “expects,” and similar words. Such forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which may cause the actual results, performance or achievements of the company to differ materially from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. Such factors include, among others, the limited operating history and variability of operating results of Here Media and its subsidiaries; ability to achieve its operating plan; competition; timing and success of product launches; success of marketing efforts; and dependence on technology infrastructure, cable and satellite operators and the Internet. Additional information concerning factors that could affect Here Media’s future business and financial results is included in Here Media’s public filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, which are available at the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov.
* Tags = gay men gay news lesbian news transgender bisexual
| Published by |
![]() |
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/06/here-networks…
ARTS IN THE CITY – Cambridge Chronicle
|
ARTS IN THE CITY
Cambridge Chronicle, MA 30-PLUS LESBIAN RAP — Thursdays, 7-8:30 pm, Women's Center, 46 Pleasant St., Cambridge. Free weekly open discussions with topics. For information, call 617-354-8807. THE TRIBE PRESENTS … — Thursdays, 8 pm, Cantab Lounge, 738 Mass. Ave., Central Square. … |
