NATIONAL

Gay marriage ban on ballot in 8 states
Votes in Ariz., S.D., Wisc. could be close, activists say

JOSHUA LYNSEN
Friday, October 13, 2006

With the mid-term elections just weeks away, experts are predicting at least five proposed state constitutional amendments to ban gay marriage will pass.

But fights in three other states — Arizona, South Dakota and Wisconsin — are competitive and too close to call, sources said.

Political experts said voters in Colorado, Idaho, South Carolina, Tennessee and Virginia were likely to approve the constitutional bans next month.

“If there’s going to be a victory for the LGBT community, it’s going to be in Wisconsin,” said Dan Pinello, a City University of New York government professor and author of “America’s Struggle for Same-Sex Marriage.”

Pinello, who is gay, said activists chose Wisconsin as a key battleground partly because of the state’s symbolic value. In 1982, it became the first state to bar workplace discrimination based on sexual orientation.

But as the Nov. 7 vote approaches, polls show that most Wisconsinites support the amendment.

A poll conducted Oct. 2-4 by Research 2000 shows 51 percent of registered voters support the amendment and 42 percent oppose it. The margin of error is 4 percent.

Activists nonetheless remain hopeful. Josh Freker of “Fair Wisconsin” said the state’s same-day voter registration practice, along with its usually high turnout among younger voters, could turn the tide.

“So we really feel optimistic,” he said, “even though we’re behind right now.”

Some activists also are optimistic about South Dakota, where many voters have criticized the proposed amendment.

“South Dakota has a history of a live-and-let-live attitude, and treating people fairly,” said Jon Hoadley, spokesperson for “South Dakotans Against Discrimination.”

“I think we are a competitive state this year. I think we’re going to beat a lot of people’s expectations.”

Mason-Dixon Polling & Research found in July that 49 percent of voters oppose the amendment and 41 percent support it. The margin of error is 3.5 percent.

Pinello, however, disputed that assessment. He said South Dakota's usually conservative voters likely would pass the amendment.

And in Arizona, opposition to the amendment has increased in recent months.

Earlier this year, a poll showed 52 percent of voters supported the amendment while 40 percent opposed it. More recent polls show 38 percent support the proposal and 51 percent oppose it.

The earlier poll, conducted in March by Northern Arizona University, had a 4.3 percent margin of error. A more recent poll, conducted in August by Arizona State University, has a 3.3 percent margin of error.

Another poll conducted last weekend by Harstad Strategic Research showed that 48 percent of voters oppose the amendment effort, with 11 percent still undecided.

Pinello said the increased opposition among Arizonans is attributable to Republican Rep. Jim Kolbe, the state’s retiring gay congressman, a vocal opponent of the amendment.

“If Arizona is close, I’d be willing to bet it’s because of his presence,” Pinello said. “Without him, I would suggest it would not be close at all.”

Activists there also attributed the increased opposition to concerns that the amendment is too sweeping.

Cindy Jordan of “No on 107” said the amendment would have unintended consequences for elderly couples and immigrant families.

“This is about family,” she said. “This is about what your family looks like, who’s in it, and what benefits you can get.”
 

Framing the debate

Activists in different states are using different messages to target voters.

Asha Leong, leader of the South Carolina Equality Coalition’s campaign against the amendment, said her group depicts the vote as a civil rights battle.

“We know we have a challenge on our hands doing this in the buckle of the Bible Belt,” she said. “We’re talking about this in terms of social justice.”

Randy Tarkington of “Vote No on 1” said his group is portraying the Tennessee measure as redundant and unnecessary.

“We already have a law,” he said. “Should we really be worried about activist judges in Tennessee? Let’s be honest.”

On the other side of the country, Andrew Yoder of “Idaho Votes No” said his organization has worked to educate voters.

“Very few people we talk to around the state realize that the amendment goes well beyond reaffirming the state’s definition of marriage,” he said. “They don’t realize that the amendment also seeks to eliminate any possibility of civil unions, domestic partnerships, or any other form of relationship recognition.

“When they find this out, their attitude toward the amendment dramatically shifts to one of opposition. They recognize that it is simply unfair.”

Despite those efforts, the majority of voters in Idaho, Tennessee and South Carolina are expected to support the amendments.

Conservative groups actively pushing the measures have emphasized the need to prevent state courts from doing “what the court did in Massachusetts.”

“There is nothing currently preventing a Wisconsin court from making a decision similar to that made by the Massachusetts Supreme Judiciary,” according to amendment proponents “Vote Yes for Marriage.”

Other amendment supporters noted that marriage should be clearly defined to benefit children.

“A consequence of the South Carolina marriage amendment is to send a positive message to our children that we believe this is the best arrangement for their well being,” said the Palmetto Family Council, the South Carolina affiliate of Focus on the Family.

Pinello said gay activists in conservative states like South Carolina never really had a chance.

“The extent of resources needed to educate people basically from square one statewide are substantial,” he said. “And many of these states do not have effective statewide LGBT organizations to begin with.”



D.P. measure on ballot in Colo.

Marty Rouse, the Human Rights Campaign’s national field director, said the organization has given cash donations totaling between $500,000 and $1 million to groups opposing the eight amendments.

He said HRC also has contributed “significant” amounts of staff resources, including advice on how to best convert opponents to supporters.

“Think of the joy you had when your daughter got married,” Rouse said. “Why prohibit another family member or neighbor or coworker that same joy?”

It’s unclear, though, what effect the contributions will have. Pinello said Colorado, Idaho, South Carolina and Tennessee voters are almost certain to pass their amendments, and Virginia voters likely will do the same.

Polls in July and September showed a majority of Virginians favored the amendment. Pinello said the polls, conducted by Mason-Dixon, probably are accurate predictors.

“I would love to be proven wrong about that,” he said, “but I’m not optimistic that I will be.”

Despite the expected losses, activists could win an important victory in Colorado.

Voters there are considering a domestic partnership measure that would extend new rights to gay couples. A recent poll by Public Opinion Strategies shows the measure, called Referendum I, is supported by an estimated 58 percent of voters.

“Referendum I is helping stake out the middle ground on this issue,” said Pat Steadman of Coloradans for Fairness and Equality, “and Colorado voters, I think, are flocking there.”

Steadman said the measure gives voters an alternative to the marriage amendment, which also appears on the ballot and is expected to pass.

“You find that voters, no matter how they feel about the marriage issue, they are embracing the idea that they can do something positive,” he said.

But not all have embraced the idea. Pinello said some opponents complain the measure advocates a problematic “separate but equal” treatment.

Rouse said the measure’s untried approach could nonetheless be a milestone in the fight for gay civil rights.

“Colorado is doing something that is unique,” he said, “and people will either consider it brilliant or horrific.”

Rouse said the broad support for Colorado’s domestic partnership proposal shows that a growing number of Americans want to protect their gay family members, neighbors and coworkers.

“We might win or lose the marriage battles,” he said, “but we’re winning the hearts and minds of Americans slowly but surely on the need to define protections for same-sex couples and their families.”

Rouse noted votes next month likely will yield closer results than in 2004, when 11 states passed marriage amendments by often overwhelming margins.

Proposals that year passed by a 3-to-1 margin in Kentucky and Georgia, 3-to-2 in Ohio, and 6-to-1 in Mississippi. Amendments also passed in Arkansas, Michigan, Montana, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Utah and Oregon.

“We are making progress,” Rouse said. “And in the long run — the very long run — we will be victorious.

“We’re in a civil rights battle. We don’t get our civil rights in two years, or five years, or 10 years. Sometimes, it takes generations. We can’t just go to an ATM and push the ‘V’ button for victory.”

national | local | world | arts | classifieds | real estate | about us

© 2008 | A Window Media LLC Publication | Privacy Policy