Maine Next Battleground for Marriage Equality

In just 77 days, Maine voters can set the national agenda for marriage equality. The state legislature passed same-sex marriage earlier this year, but now the right has collected enough signatures to put a referendum ("Question One") on the November 2009 ballot -- and has hired the same political consultants who successfully passed Proposition 8. Supporters of marriage equality, however, are determined not to repeat the same mistakes we made in California -- and will run an inclusive field campaign with a pro-active and pre-emptive message that (with the right resources) can bring about victory. It does not cost a lot to win campaigns in Maine (only $3 million), and voter turnout is expected to only be about 500,000 people. In other words, the campaign is winnable -- but has not yet received the national attention it deserves. While Californians are divided on whether to repeal Prop 8 in 2010 or 2012, they can set aside their differences by helping us win in Maine. If we prevail on November 3rd, it will be easier to take our rights back in California.

The fight for marriage equality has made crucial progress in the past six months -- from a court victory in Iowa to legislative victories in Vermont, New Hampshire and Maine. The American Taliban is scared of the inevitable trend toward justice, and views the upcoming Maine referendum as "ground zero" in this battle. Groups like the National Organization for Marriage have already thrown massive resources into Maine and are taking it seriously. "The side that cares more will win," said "No on One" field director Monique Hoeflinger.

The LGBT community is aware that whenever marriage rights have been on the ballot, bigotry has prevailed. Arizona rejected an anti-gay marriage amendment in 2006, but it threatened both marriage and domestic partnerships -- and the campaign to defeat it focused on the latter. Two years later, the right put another measure in Arizona that only banned marriage -- and it passed by a 13-point margin. In other words, winning a campaign in Maine at the ballot box will change the conversation -- and help us repeal Proposition 8.

Everyone knows that defeating Prop 8 was winnable, but our side ran an awful campaign that -- like Michael Dukakis -- blew a seventeen-point lead. It had a reactive message that did not anticipate or preempt attacks from the other side, failed to run an adequate field campaign that included California's diverse constituencies, and suffered from an early complacency that led to its downfall. But after meeting some leaders from Maine's No on One campaign at the Netroots Nation conference in Pittsburgh last week, I am confident they have learned from our mistakes.

A Grassroots Campaign that is Proactive and Preemptive

Unlike in California, where gays and lesbians won marriage rights at the Supreme Court, in Maine the legislature and Governor passed it into law -- less than three months ago. It took an intense grassroots lobbying campaign to make this happen, and now the same Mainers who fought for their marriage rights are ready to defend them at the ballot box.

On Election Day last November, marriage equality advocates stood outside polling places in Maine with pledge cards for the legislative campaign. By the time the legislature voted six months later, they had identified 50,000 registered voters who support gay marriage - but what's interesting is where most of them came from. Lobbying efforts come down to persuading "swing" legislators, and most of them don't represent liberal communities. Most of the 50,000 identified supporters live in "swing" parts of the state, giving the campaign an advantage to make inroads in places that will decide this election.

Compare this with the "No on 8" field campaign in California, which focused almost entirely on gay neighborhoods in San Francisco and Los Angeles -- while ceding the rest of the state to opponents. Mobilizing your base is important (especially in a low-turnout election), but a winning campaign needs to have a visible presence in every part of the state.

"No on 8" also ran a reactive campaign that spent too much time responding to lies that the opposition hurled at us. It was inexcusable to not anticipate the "gay-marriage-will-be-taught-in-public-schools" line, because it's only been used as an attack from the right in every state that had a marriage amendment. The "No on 1" effort has already planned a TV ad when the other side makes this argument. And unlike in California, where we put a politician on the air (State Superintendent of Public Schools Jack O'Connell) to say it's not true, the Maine campaign will counter that message with teachers and families.

People of faith have been part of the coalition for years - and are framing support for gay marriage in moral terms. On the day after the California Supreme Court ruled for marriage equality, they had five press conferences throughout Maine lauding the decision. This pro-active show of force actually put the religious right on the defensive. If this is how they plan to run the "No on 1" campaign, it's an effort worth giving your money to.

Not a Lot of Resources Required

At Netroots Nation, the "No on 1" campaign said they needed about $3 million to win a statewide campaign in Maine ("We're a cheap date," they said.) All of us Californians laughed, because we spent $40 million last year only to have our marriage rights taken away. But it's not just how much money a campaign spends, but whether they use their resources wisely -- and when the money comes in. "No on 8" ultimately outspent the opposition, but too much of the funds came in late in the game -- when there was a tangible fear of losing. In Maine, it's important to send a contribution before Labor Day -- so the campaign can hire enough field directors that requires weeks of hard work.

Mainers have a "live-and-let-live" approach, but they don't like outsiders trying to buy the election process. Most of the "No on 1" money has come from Maine residents, in small contributions from supporters of the legislative campaign to pass marriage equality. The opposition has already raised $343,000 -- and all but $2,000 from four big donors: $160,000 from the New Jersey-based National Organization for Marriage, $100,000 from the Roman Catholic diocese of Portland, $50,000 from the Knights of Columbus and $31,000 from Focus on the Family Maine. No sign yet if the Mormons are sending in their millions from Utah, but when they do I hope to see more creative YouTube spots like this one.

Finally, the "No on 1" campaign is inviting volunteers to come "vacation" in Maine -- where they will put you up in the homes of supporters. Help is especially needed during the first week of October, when early absentee ballots get mailed out. Volunteers should go to the campaign website, and let them know when they plan to visit the state. This will be a campaign mostly run by Maine residents, but unpaid assistance from those passionate for marriage equality are welcome.

In California, gay marriage supporters who plan to repeal Prop 8 at the ballot box are deeply divided between doing it in 2010 or in 2012. Equality California has endorsed 2012, in part because their donors do not feel confident winning in 2010 is possible. But grass-roots supporters at the Courage Campaign want to try next year. It's a stupid internecine fight that threatens to hurt the LGBT community, when we should all be working together.

I'm undecided about 2010 or 2012, and am willing to be persuaded either way. But there's one thing I know for sure -- defending marriage equality in Maine in 2009 will make it easier to repeal Prop 8, regardless of what year it gets on the ballot. Californians who believe in marriage equality have a moral responsibility to help out the Maine effort. Depending on my vacation schedule and budget, I plan to fly out there in a few weeks.

Paul Hogarth is the Managing Editor of Beyond Chron, San Francisco's Alternative Online Daily, where this piece was first published.

Follow Paul Hogarth on Twitter: www.twitter.com/paulhogarth

Comments

[policyhack]

Time to Repeal Don't Ask Don't Tell.

http://axisofreason.com/2009/07/09/time-to-repeal-don’t-ask-don’t-tell/

[policyhack]

The gay rights movement began in 1969, when a police raid of a Greenwich Village gay bar, called the Stonewall Inn, sparked riots.

Five year earlier, more than 1,000 northern whites, mostly college students, volunteered to travel to Mississippi and help black voters register during the 1964 “Freedom Summer”.

It’s time for more non-gay Americans to join the seminal civil rights issue of this generation!

http://axisofreason.com/2009/06/29/heterosexual-closet-of-silence/

[truthartbeauty]

I hope the Mormons will keep their big fat obnoxious noses out of this one.

[Mike Kilpatrick]

As a gay man I hate the fact that you or anyone else is going door to door to beg for the civil rights you are already entitled to as an American. Have some pride! Demand your rights! Civil rights should not be up for popular vote. By doing what your doing you diminish us all. I'm ashamed of you!

[JRBlargonaut]

While Mr. Hogarth is correct that Mainers don't like outsiders buying the political process, I think that he doesn't take the statement far enough. Mainers don't like outsiders, period. It seems rather duplicitous to chastise the Yes on 1 campaign for using outside money while simultaneously advocating that Californians attempt to vindicate their failure by getting involved in Maine. By getting involved, they run the risk of turning off would-be supporters who would see their involvement as out-of-staters attempting to turn Maine into California.

Turning Maine into a proxy war could backfire and set the cause of marriage for all back quicker than most people expect.

[Aaror]

Interestingly Nate over at 538 looked at the trend lines for support of gay marriage, and found that while every year acceptance rises, it actually is rising fastest where it is already strong, and slowest where it is weak. This leads to the possibility of 60 or 70% of CA and MA supporting it while 55% of OK and MI oppose.
Not sure what that would mean for the country, but it could spark some interesting 10th amendment issues. I don't think that would break up the nation...

[rextrek]

So this was voted on by Maine's Legislature...and now, somehow - again - LGBT citizens RIGHTS are gonna be put up to a "Public" vote? What kind of crap is this? IN America 2009,why is it that LGBT citizens RIGHTS are ALLOWED to be VOTED on by the Public? WHY? This is a disgrace,and NOT the America I thought I lived in!

[Baguette Clang]

It's up for a vote because Maine has a People's Veto, wherein the public has the ability to gather a certain number of signatures (there's some complicated equation behind how many you need) to force a referendum on a bill voted on by the legislature.
This is what the opponents of marriage equality have done in Maine. It is unfortunate, but in Maine it is part of our democratic process.
However, we are capable of winning this referendum and keeping equal marriage rights a law in Maine if we can get the financial and volunteer support that we need. Please, anyone, consider visiting equalitymaine.org and donating time or money to this historic campaign. Even just $5 is helpful.

[dayala]

thanks for the heads up.

[mtdem4ever]

It is disheartening that the rights of a group of people can be decided by a simple majority of uninformed or misinformed, frightened voters.

Civil rights should NEVER be dependent upon the whim of the voters. If they were, I doubt the Civil Rights Act of 1964 would have ever passed.

I am straight and engaged. We refuse to get married until ALL Americans can marry.

[truthartbeauty]

That's very thoughtful of you but go ahead and get married if you want. WE are not against YOU. THEYare against US.

[Jaywalkker]

The Case for Marriage: Why Married People are Happier, Healthier, and Better Off Financially

That is the title of National Organization for Marriage President, Maggie Gallagher's, book. The mere title of her book makes her a discriminatory bigot. I want to see someone, anyone who interviews her, list the title of her book and then ask why she wants to deny homosexuals "happiness, health, and financial security."

[mredder4]

Best of luck in the efforts in Maine. Something tells me those fiercely independent northerners aren't the types to spend their time sticking their noses in other people's bedrooms, especially not using the government to do it. It's a noble characteristic of Maine and her citizens, IMO, and I think it bodes well for the side of civil rights. I think they'll do what's right when given the chance.

[ignoranceequalsfear]

Thanks for this important and insightful rallying cry!

I will be supporting (financially) this fight for fuller equality in Maine.
Maybe I'll get married there too, as a celebration of my 15 years of committed relationship...