REPORT: Why 2012 Is Not Year To Repeal Prop 8

There is a debate going on in California (again) about when (or if) the LGBT community should attempt to repeal Proposition 8 by circulating and passing a constitutional amendment to restore marriage equality in 2012.

REPORT ON WEST HOLLYWOOD TOWN HALL
The state's largest LGBT political advocacy group, Equality California, is hosting 12 town halls around the state seeking LGBT community input on the momentous decision to attempt to pass a ballot measure which would enact marriage equality and overrule Proposition 8. To that end, MadProfessah was invited to attend the 2nd of these events at the West Hollywood Auditorium on Sunday May 22 (Harvey Milk Day) as part of the panel. Other members were David Codell, a leading gay attorney who participated in the California marriage case and is one of the smartest legal minds in the state, Jim Carroll, interim Executive Director of Equality California, and Andrea Shorter, Director of Coalitions and Marriage at EQCA.

About 75 people showed up for the event which started a bit late at 5:45pm. Incoming EQCA Executive Director Roland Palencia was introduced to the crowd but did not say anything. During the event David explained that if a new constitutional amendment were to be passed then that would immediately make the Perry v Brown lawsuit moot. He also gave his opinion on the disposition of that case, making it clear that he felt it was very unlikely that the California Supreme Court would rule that the Proposition 8 proponents have standing to pursue the federal lawsuit when the Attorney General and Governor of the state have declined to defend the ballot measure in federal court. According to his timeline, oral arguments should happen in September with a ruling in December and the 9th Circuit ruling soon after that in early 2012. That would lead to a U.S. Supreme Court ruling sometime before June 2013. David also thought that the U.S. District Judge James Ware would quickly dispose of the offensive challenge to the original Perry v Schwarzenegger decision based on the sexual orientation of the judge, saying he was looking forward to reading the decision to see just how sharply the judge smacks down the heterosexual supremacists for making the ridiculous claim that a gay judge's sexuality or relationship status would have any impact on his ruling. David also made the point repeatedly that never in the history of America has any state passed a ballot measure to enact legislation to provide a right to LGBT people. There was a question from the audience about this later and I explained that there have been pro-gay ballot measure results (Maine 2005, Arizona 2006, Washington State 2009). Maine 2005 was the defeat of the repeal of a statewide gay civil right bill on employment. Arizona 2006 was the defeat of a measure to ban domestic partnerships and same-sex marriage (in 2008 Arizona passed  a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage only). Washington 2009 was the statewide approval of a referendum on a comprehensive domestic partnership law recently passed by the state legislature and signed by the Governor. These are all different situations from asking voters to overturn a previously passed initiative statute and constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage while a lawsuit is pending.

Jim Carroll's job was to give the results of a new poll about marriage equality conducted by Binder Research paid for by former Ambassador James Hormel and Love Honor Cherish. You may recall LHC was the group who moved forward with a Repeal Prop 8 campaign in 2010 (and failed to turn in any signatures) despite most of the LGBT community deciding in summer 2009 that this was not the right time to raise and spend tens of millions of dollars to pass a pro-gay ballot measure that year. Carroll presented a powerpoint which demonstrated that there has been very little change in public support for marriage equality since the last time the LGBT community polled in 2009. Carroll tried to educate the audience about the difference between polls of "adults" and polls of likely voters. California has 37 million people, and about 24 million adults, of which 21 million are registered to vote and about 15 million who are likely to vote in the next election. These 15 million are, on average, whiter, older and more conservative than the population as a whole which is "majority minority." The poll results Carroll discussed were for this group of likely voters.

THE LATEST POLLING RESULTS ON MARRIAGE EQUALITY IN CALIFORNIA
The topline result is that on the question of marriage equality, i.e. "Do you support or oppose allowing same-sex couples to be legally married" the 2011 numbers are 45% Yes-45% No 10% Undecided compared to the 2009 numbers of 47% Yes 48% No 5% Undecided. This is a somewhat shocking result in the light of numerous national polls (Gallup, CNN)showing majority support in the adult population for marriage equality in the last 6 months or so.

Unsurprisingly, support for marriage equality varies depending on how you ask the question. For example, if the question is about repealing Proposition 8 there is majority support (51%). Note that the margin of error in the telephone poll of 900 likely voters May 10-14 (with oversampling in African-American and English-speaking Asian Pacific Islander communities) is 3.3 percentage points. Look at the graphic above to see that support in communities of color for marriage equality has slightly increased with opposition slightly decreasing.

Binder also polled on the question of explicitly adding a religious exemption to a ballot measure which legalizes same-sex marriage (and thus also implicitly repeals Proposition 8) and support went down from the repeal Prop 8 numbers.

Would you vote yes or no on a ballot initiative that would legalize civil marriage for same-sex couples, on the condition that clergy or religious institutions are never required to perform a marriage that goes against their religious beliefs?

47% Yes 43% No 10% Undecided

Binder calls this an increase in support because the 47% number is higher than the 45% baseline support for the marriage equality question. However, the question "Would you vote yes or no on a ballot initiative that would legalize civil marriage for same-sex couples" was not included in the poll. The assumption is that the results of this question would track identically with the results on the marriage equality question.

In fact, in a bizarre case of fallacious reasoning Binder lumps all the respondents who said they support marriage equality OR repealing Proposition 8 OR would vote yes on a ballot measure with a religious exemption and comes up with a support of 58% Yes and 34% No. The notion that you can presume that people who will vote for a measure that does ONE of these things will also vote for a measure which does ALL of these things is simply ridiculous. (Mathematical geek aside: There is a huge logical difference between an OR and an AND.)

WHY TRYING TO REPEAL PROP 8 IN 2012 IS A BAD IDEA
All in all, I went into the Town Hall undecided and left pretty convinced that a 2012 ballot measure campaign to restore marriage equality to California is a bad idea. Especially when there is a pending federal court challenge which may not only restore marriage equality in California but support the legal argument to strike down the 30 other constitutional amendments which ban marriage equality around the nation. There are numerous other states which will likely have anti-gay marriage measures on the ballot (Minnesota, North Carolina and Indiana) and there may be states which have affirmative pro-gay measures on the ballot (Oregon and Maine). For the amount of money it takes to expand California from civil unions to full marriage equality one could have a good shot of winning one or both of the affirmative measures and possibly defeating one or some of the anti-gay measures. Nationally, it just doesn't make sense to me to spend 30-plus million dollars to enact marriage equality in California when there are states which do not have basic laws banning discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation (29) and gender identity (38).

We shall see what happens in the future, since EQCA says they will report back to the community in September 2011. LHC says that we can file ballot language and collect signatures before the California Supreme Court rules on the standing issue. Depending on the decision, the signatures do not have to be submitted. I'm not opposed to this idea, but I think it will be very very difficult to not submit the signatures to the secretary of state in March 2012 if either the Cal Sup. Ct. or  9th Circuit doesn't rule our way. Of course if a measure does get submitted and qualified I would support it, not monetarily but I would vote for it.

I just think that 2012 is not the right year to repeal Proposition 8. In order to make that decision to move forward I have three pre-conditions which need to be met: 1) Show majority support outside of the margin of error for marriage equality in the state in multiple polls 2) Significant (7 digit) quantities of money in the bank and 3) a open, accountable leadership structure and detailed plan for how to run a statewide ballot measure campaign.

Field Poll Confirms Majority Support for Marriage Equality

New polling from the Field Poll confirms that a majority of Californians support marriage equality, 51% to 42%.

Prop 8 Repeal Will Not Make 2010 Ballot

Love Honor Cherish, the primary group behind the Sign for Equality campaign, has sent out a press release announcing that they have failed to collect the requisite 700,000 signatures for the November 2010 ballot.

INITIATIVE TO REPEAL PROP 8 WILL NOT BE ON THE BALLOT IN 2010

All-Volunteer Petition Drive Triggered Conversations Across California

(LOS ANGELES - April 12, 2010)

Love Honor Cherish, which spearheaded an effort to place an initiative on the November 2010 ballot to repeal Proposition 8 and restore equal marriage rights for same-sex couples, announced today that the proponents did not gather the 694,354 signatures necessary to place the proposed initiative on the ballot. The group vowed to work toward the repeal of Prop 8 at the next general election in November 2012.

"This is a heartbreaking moment," said John Henning, Executive Director of Love Honor Cherish. "Despite the dogged efforts of hundreds of volunteers across California, we did not get the signatures we needed within the 150-day window set by the state."

Under California law, it is too late to mount a new effort to repeal Prop 8 in 2010. "Regrettably, Prop 8 will remain as a stain on our constitution until at least 2012, and perhaps later," said Henning. He challenged activists statewide to rededicate themselves and unify behind a 2012 repeal effort.

Prop 8 passed by a margin of 52 to 48 percent. However, polls taken since the vote have shown that a majority of Californians now support the right of same-sex couples to marry, indicating that a new ballot proposition to repeal Prop 8 would be likely to pass in November 2010. In March, a poll by the Public Policy Institute of California showed a 6 percent increase in support for equal marriage rights in just the last year.

The proponents of the repeal initiative sought to seize the momentum unleashed by the passage of Prop 8 and parlay it into a victory at the polls. "This signature campaign was the right thing to do in the wake of Prop 8," said Love Honor Cherish board member Lester Aponte. "We were determined to act affirmatively to achieve equality and we will continue to do that until Prop 8 has been finally repealed. We had hundreds of thousands of conversations with California voters about the right to marry and we know that we have moved hearts and minds. In the process, we have set the foundation for a future repeal effort and brought hope to thousands whose hearts were broken by the passage of Prop 8."

Love Honor Cherish was one of more than 40 groups supporting the repeal of Prop 8 in November 2010, and was part of the Restore Equality 2010 coalition. The campaign utilized a unique web-based social networking tool, located at www.SignForEquality.com, which enabled volunteers to download the petition form, watch training videos and join teams.

Love Honor Cherish is a Los Angeles-based grassroots organization committed to repealing Prop 8 and to developing a new generation of leadership on this issue. Formed in May 2008 to defeat Prop 8, it raised over $500,000 for the No on 8 campaign and mounted its own outreach and media efforts. After the passage of Prop 8, Love Honor Cherish began working immediately to secure its repeal by means of a new ballot proposition. For more information, visit www.LoveHonorCherish.org.

Bizarrely, that website has not been updated since November 2009. MadProfessah was with the diverse coalition of organizations and activists called Prepare to Prevail who said that we need more time to insure that the next time we go to the ballot to restore marriage equality for all Californians we are well-prepared, well-funded and well-positioned for victory. 2010 was too early for all three of those things to be aligned, although it is interesting that public opinion in favor of marriage equality has recently become a majority position in California polls.

2012 will almost certainly be the year that a Prop 8 repeal effort is attempted, but that will take a lot of work, even if we could start right now, and the 2010 versus 2012 debate became so heated that a lot of bridges were burned between activists and groups that need to work together. 2012 also has it's own complications in California because it is also the first year after 2010 Census when all legislative races will be run in brand new districts, so the Propositions will actually be less prominent in people's minds than the 100 contested legislative races for the Assembly and Senate (as well as the 50+ Congressional races). I know some people will be arguing that 2014 will be a more propitious year but I would argue against that.

Lambda Legal Joins "Repeal Prop 8 in 2012" Chorus

Lambda Legal has issued a statement calling "for more education and time" in order to restore marriage equality in California, says that bring the measure to a vote in 2012 would be "the strongest strategy."

From the press release

Lambda Legal Calls for More Education and Time to Restore Marriage Equality in California "While we're within striking distance, we're not there yet."

Los Angeles, November 30, 2009 - Lambda Legal today called for more
outreach, education, research and time to change hearts and minds before
returning to the ballot to reopen marriage to gay and lesbian couples in
California. At least one initiative to restore marriage equality for
same-sex couples is currently circulating that, if it qualifies, would
appear on the November, 2010 ballot, but Lambda Legal believes that putting
this measure to a vote in 2012 is the strongest strategy.

The Courage Campaign, in partnership with Lambda Legal and other leading
groups, has recently concluded the first phase of extensive and
groundbreaking research about public beliefs about marriage and gay people.
It confirms that attitudes are shifting steadily toward equal treatment of
same-sex couples, and that conversations among family members and other
close relationships inevitably speed the process.

"Over the past year since Prop 8's passage, we've expanded our community
education in California and have seen the remarkable national progress
exert a positive influence here," said Jennifer C. Pizer, Marriage Project
Director for Lambda Legal. "We've seen our many community groups
collaborating as never before. With the great field operations of the
Courage Campaign, Vote for Equality, Equality California and countless new
activists and allies across the state, the next two years hold great
promise. This work complements the efforts within California's racial and
ethnic minority communities and within the state's diverse communities of
faith. There has never been any doubt that the LGBT community and our
friends and allies will restore marriage equality in California – the only
question has been when. We now believe it's November 2012."

The recently concluded research validated the lasting effect of the work
already being done in the successful Camp Courage program and by Courage
Equality Teams organizing across the state. These grassroots efforts are
building support for marriage equality by training Californians to tap into
their community's resources to start a conversation and connect the
movement for equality to their own lives and their own experiences. This
outreach has surged ahead, fueled by the passion and determination of
countless new activists who have committed to this cause within the past
year.

"We're so close," said Pizer. "Each year, each month, public understanding
shifts a bit more in our direction. As crushing as it was to lose in Maine
this year and in California in 2008, support is building strongly in our
favor: in 2000, Proposition 22 won with 61 percent of the vote;
Proposition 8 passed by a meager margin of only four points. It's
insulting to have to wait and work to regain a core human right that should
never have been taken. As legal advocates, we know minorities should never have to beg the majority for equal rights. Given the decision by the California Supreme Court earlier this year, that's our only path. It's essential that we choose wisely when to return to the ballot – while we're within striking distance, we believe we're not there yet."

It's interesting that Lambda would release their statement now, after the 2010 absolutists are circulating petitions in a vain attempt (in multiple senses of the word!) to collect the 800K-1100K signatures necessary to qualify a Proposition 8 repeal for the statewide general election ballot next year. It seems Lambda may have been influenced by Courage Campaign also finally revealing their "neutral" stance on 2010, a change from the Rick Jacobs-led organization's previously announced gung-ho position in favor of rushing to the ballot next November. MadProfessah posted the news from Facebook posts ove rthe break, but today the Courage Campaign released a press release making it official that they no longer support a 2010 repeal effort.

“For months, we have laid out the criteria for moving forward. Like the Obama Campaign, we understand that we need a combination of powerful and clear research that informs an expertly run campaign, an unstoppable movement that harnesses the new energy we have seen since the passage of Prop. 8 and the connections through personal stories and outreach in order to win at the ballot box,” said Rick Jacobs, the Courage Campaign founder and Chair. “We are taking the lessons learned from last year’s Prop. 8 campaign, the campaigns in Maine and other states to understand the fundamental work that must be done before moving forward in California. We also must come together as a community to create a broad coalition and governance structure, put in place a strong manager and secure the resources to win. Right now, the pieces are not all in place to do so confidently.

To Lambda I say (as I did to Courage Campaign earlier), welcome to the Prepare to Prevail team! Now, let's work together to restore marriage equality in California.

Courage Campaign Finally 'Comes Out' Against 2010 Prop 8 Repeal

Rumors that had been swirling for weeks about a schism between the only significant organizations that were supporting a 2010 repeal of Proposition 8 were confirmed by the Bay Area Reporter this weekend:

The chair of the statewide Courage Campaign told the Bay Area Reporter this week that he doesn’t see the governing structure and other necessary elements in place to win marriage equality.

[...]

As to whether his group’s stance on 2010 has changed, Jacobs said, “Courage Campaign has never changed our attitude or the basis on which we’re operating, which is that we have to have research that informs a path to victory, a governance structure that the progressive community and LGBT community respects, a campaign manager that is empowered to make decisions reporting to that structure, and funding, so we’ve been very, very consistent on that and remain so.”

Asked if he sees those elements in place at all, Jacobs said, “I don’t see them.”

[...]

Courage Campaign has been doing research on repealing Prop 8 for months.

Jacobs said that some summaries of the research will be available “I would think sometime in December.”

After the B.A.R story, Rick Jacobs posted a lengthy statement on Facebook clarifying Courage Campaign's position on a 2010 repeal of Proposition 8:

First, I hope everyone had a happy Thanksgiving. Second, I invite those interested here to read the blog post that the BAR put up. No where in it does it mesh with their controversy-grabbing headline: neither I nor Courage criticized the leadership of the 2010 effort. Read the story. What I do say is what we have been saying since late July. Nothing we have said has changed.

Second, I would be very interested in knowing more about the supposed meeting we had with EQCA. I will tell you that since June, Courage has sought such a meeting, has sought to improve relations in the community and we hope and expect to meet and talk soon. We look forward to working with everyone so that we stop duplicating efforts and better coordinate/share information.

Courage has a specific view of the means by which training and organizing should occur. That's why we have so many Equality Teams, all of which are led by volunteers who are, in turn, led by Deputy Field Organizers (all volunteers) with the professional leadership of a small, smart and highly motivated field staff (Hope, Arisha, Anthony and Caitlin) who in turn benefit from the leadership and experience of Sarah Callahan. ... See More

We are learning from our research and applying lessons at every turn. We try to integrate online and offline and we try as hard as we can to build on ideas and leadership of our members and volunteers. We have had some remarkable results from the ideas and work of many, many of those teams and others. The recent meeting Derrick and others held at Lucy Florence Coffee House about homophobia in the Black community is just one such example. No one person or organization can think of or do everything. We are all made more powerful by the manifold talents and ideas of others. Our job at Courage is to magnify those where we can.

Our model is to build a permanent volunteer infrastructure using the Obama Campaign as the jumping off point. We believe firmly that LGBT rights are part of the larger progressive movement. All of our work is informed by that.

In that context, it's important to look around. Last week, for the first time in years, we saw major demonstrations and non-violent civil disobedience on multiple UC campuses. Why? "Fees" (which is California French for tuition) increased 32% at UCs, resulting in a three-fold increase in ten years. Cal States are set to reject 50,000 or more eligible students because of budget cutbacks. Community colleges and Cal States are the traditional routes for advancement for those in our society least able financially to afford higher education. They are the backbone of California's once upwardly mobile workforce, the only mechanism by which we as a state can grow our way out of this economic mess. The once model California education system that took every Californian from kindergarten to post-doctoral work, is in shambles--unless you are white and rich (or in some cases just rich).

And in 2010, next month, the state's $70 billion general fund budget faces a $25 billion shortfall, plus a further debt to special funds which could effectively mean we have a $40 billion deficit. Forty billion out of $70 billion. And you thought 2009 was bad.
Think about it: our state cannot print money to get out of deficit (as can a sovereign nation) and the right wing has convinced the entire country that all government is bad. We have Meg Whitman, a billionaire who has not voted for "twenty or thirty years" saying that we have to lower taxes and spend more on higher ed. Maybe she can do that kind of voodoo math on E-Bay, but it does not work in government. If that's the ethos for 2010, we are in a whole heap of trouble. Well, we're in trouble anyway, but I and Courage are not about to sit around and wait for candidates to talk nonsense, get elected and just make things worse. We're done with that.

Now is the time for the LGBT community to stand up together and rebuild our state. Now is the time for us to stand together to lead. More about this in coming weeks and months, but clearly LGBT people, along with everyone else, are hurt when colleges are unaffordable or entrance closed, healthcare is decimated, unemployment (and underemployment) rise to over 20%. We're all in this together. As Derrick has pointed out so eloquently in what he and RENEWL do, we win equality by lending a hand, leading in a fight for all of us and showing that together we are all stronger.

As to the current effort to put an initiative on the ballot, while organizationally we will not participate for the reasons above, we do not now, nor have we ever, attempted in any way to interfere with the efforts of others to win equality as they see fit. I and Courage greatly respect that there are different paths to victory. As we have seen all too well, no one path is "correct." What we do know from Maine and our research to date is that we have a lot more to learn.

I look forward to working with everyone to win equality--economic and social--for our state and nation. And clearly it is going to take all of us.

Welcome to the Prepare to Prevail team, Mr. Jacobs!

LA TIMES Joins Chorus Uring 2012 Prop 8 Repeal

The big dog of California newspapers has finally weighed in on the question of when people who support marriage equality and opposed Proposition 8 should attempt to pass a constitutional amendment to that effect.

In "Outsmarting Proposition 8," the Los Angeles Times editorial board says:

The most important objective should be a decisive victory, sending a clear message that this state no longer will tolerate separate but not-quite-equal status for families based on sexual orientation. Given the opinion polls, the lack of a coherent campaign strategy and the current makeup of the U.S. Supreme Court, this most likely means an unfortunate wait. A loss at the ballot box or in the nation's high court could set back same-sex marriage for years.

Equality California, the organization that led the campaign against Proposition 8, wisely decided to hold off until 2012 before attempting a ballot initiative to repeal the marriage ban. A successful campaign will require $50 million in funding, an extensive outreach program to black and Latino voters, who largely favored the ban, and, most important, an infusion of young voters, the group most sympathetic toward same-sex marriage. Waiting until 2012 gives Equality California a demographic advantage.

But another gay-rights organization, the Courage Campaign, is eager to use the momentum of recent gay-marriage advances in other states and has announced that it will go forward with a 2010 ballot initiative. Both Equality California and some major donors who tried to defeat Proposition 8 have indicated that a 2010 campaign cannot expect their active support.

Though this page will back same-sex marriage no matter what the year, we hope the Courage Campaign will rethink its timing. Gay-rights activists must recognize that their lackluster campaign did little to sway the public, especially considering the misleading ads by gay-marriage opponents. So far, the Courage Campaign has not articulated a sophisticated strategy for changing this. Without other gay-rights groups by its side, its low chances are further weakened.[emphasis added]

It's not as though waiting three years means idly letting injustice prevail. There is plenty to do between now and 2012 -- forging alliances with minority groups, lining up financial support and vetting the best campaign managers. Advocates of same-sex marriage already have a just cause; coupled with campaign smarts and money, they also will have voter support.

This is one of the smarter editorials I have seen since Jordan/Rustin Coalition and other groups released the Prepare to Prevail statement on July 13th calling for the LGBT community to join together to do the hard work necessary to produce a state in which a popular majority supports equal marriage rights for everyone.

Multiple Northern CA Newspapers Support 2012

Following in the footsteps of the San Francisco Chronicle, the Sacramento Bee is also editorializing in favor of waiting until 2012 to repeal Proposition 8.

Here's some good news: It now appears that Californians might be spared another bitter, divisive fight over the definition of marriage next year.

One of the state's leading gay rights groups – Equality California – announced this week that it will not sponsor a ballot measure next year to try to repeal Proposition 8, the initiative voters passed last November banning same-sex marriage in California.
We opposed Proposition 8 and we, too, would like to see it repealed. Like the leaders of the gay rights movement, we believe it is only a matter of time before Californians restore the right of same-sex couples to marry. Younger voters overwhelmingly support this position, and as they become a bigger and bigger part of the electorate, equal marriage rights for gays will become the law of the land.

The question is how and when to ask the voters to reconsider their recent decision. Understandably, gay rights leaders don't want to wait. They see Proposition 8 as an injustice that must be overturned, either at the ballot box or in the federal courts. And they already are pursuing a legal strategy that could eventually bring the matter to the U.S. Supreme Court.

But waiting until 2012, as Equality California has decided to do, makes sense. It will give voters more time to reflect on the passage of the gay marriage ban and to see what is happening in other states that are taking the lead on this issue. Most importantly, the pause will allow the gay rights movement to engage in a low-key, grass roots campaign to communicate their message to Californians on a personal level, in a way that cannot be done in the heat of a ballot battle.

Equality California does not speak for the entire movement, and it's still possible that another group will push a ballot initiative in 2010. We hope not. California needs a calm and civil discussion of this issue to prepare for what is sure to be another high- decibel fight when the question is next posed to the voters

The Other Half calls my attention to an editorial in the San Jose Mercury News titled "Waiting til 2012 on gay marriage? Wise move":.

Advocates of same-sex marriage can't afford another loss with state voters, and political experts agree that there's a better chance of success in 2012 rather than 2010. Polls show support for the right of gays to marry is growing, and two more years provide advocates with time to build on that trend. In addition, younger voters tend to support marriage equality, and they're more likely to vote in the 2012 presidential election.

[...]

But if waiting another two years means a surer victory, then it's the right thing to do.

I wonder when the Los Angeles Times (and other Southern California papers) will weigh in?

SF CHRONICLE (& Mark Leno & Mayor Gavin) Support 2012!

The San Francisco Chronicle printed an editorial in support of the Prepare to Prevail position on when to repeal proposition 8: 2012.

It's regrettable that the restoration of marriage rights to gays and lesbians has to be subject to strategic political calculation. But it's also hard to argue with the conclusion reached by Equality California, the state's largest gay-rights group, that the repeal of Proposition 8 would have a better chance in 2012 than in 2010.

Other gay-rights groups plan to push forward with a ballot measure in 2010.

Sen. Mark Leno, D-San Francisco, said he agrees with the decision to wait. "There is much work to be done in winning the hearts and minds of California voters," he said, citing polls that showed public opinion has not shifted notably since November.

However, polls show an unmistakable correlation between voters' ages and their support for marriage equality, and each election cycle brings another wave of young voters. The issue also is advanced as Californians who may be instinctively uncomfortable with the idea of same-sex marriage consider the effect of this discrimination among neighbors and colleagues who are denied the rights, responsibilities - and societal reverence - of marriage.

The delay is wise in giving advocates of marriage equality the time - and resources - to educate and motivate voters to remove this vestige of discrimination from the state constitution.

Openly gay State Senator Mark Leno was the chief sponsor of the marriage equality bill passed by the California Legislature in 2005 and 2007 and vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger.

San Francisco Mayor (and gay marriage champion) Gavin Newsom also does not support rushing to the ballot in 2010.

Newsom said today he believes that a 2012 ballot initiative makes sense, considering the fragmented state of the same-sex marriage coalition.

"In a perfect world we'd go forward next year, but the reality is we're not united," Newsom said.

"Time is definitely our ally," especially with thousands of younger, liberal Californians registering to vote, he said.

It will be interesting to see the 2010 proponents rebut these arguments from same-sex marriage supporters with data and analysis, instead of emotion and "magical thinking."

EQCA Supports 2012; Courage Campaign 2010

As expected, in a detailed plan with accompanying press conference, Equality California came out in favor of targeting November 2012 to repeal Proposition 8 by an affirmative marriage equality ballot measure.

The Courage Campaign reiterated their support for continuing to aim for November 2010, citing their success in raising well over $100,000 by today's August 13th goal.

Interestingly, Marc Solomon (EQCA's Marriage Director) sat down with Unite The Fight blogger Phillip Minot and gave them an exclusive interview in which he strongly cites the Prepare to Prevail statement as influential in making EQCA's decision. An excerpt:

"When I first got out here, I thought, 'Of course we’re going back in 2010. We can’t wait.' And I heard people say, 'Well are you sure? Does that make sense?" From funders and more."

Marc paused. "And then I really started listening. I listened carefully. I think the people need to listen carefully to the POC LGBT groups who feel they are being steamrolled. I think they felt steamrolled when we first came out for 2010.

"There’s this feeling that when it’s convenient, that people will listen to what [the POC groups] have to say and when it’s not, they won’t. I think we all have to think about that. Think about what these communities went through after Prop 8 passed and the blaming of POC communities. I think it’s important that people listen to that perspective, that they're thinking 'Our communities got blamed for Prop 8.' And after, people said a lot of work will happen, and now the work hasn’t happened and we’re saying we’re going right back to the ballot. That’s an important perspective to keep into account."

Marc rebuffed the claim that those who support 2012 are wanting to "wait."

"We all want to win back marriage as quickly as humanly possible. The question is, 'Can we get it done by 2010 or not?'"

Marc then addressed the philosophy of returning to the ballot each election year until we win.

"We [EQCA] don’t believe we can go back to the ballot in [2010 and 2012] - it’s one or the other. If we lose, it will be very hard to go back to the ballot before 2014, 2016 or 2018. The thought of spending 150 million dollars three election cycles in a row is totally unrealistic.

"If you keep going back to the ballot over and over, you appear to the movable middle, to the people you need to persuade, as a zealot. Regular people will say, 'Oh my god, they’re back again. Haven’t we already decided this?' And we say, 'We’re fighting. We’re fighting to win.' But we have to think about who needs to come our way and who we need to move."

If people are curious about what they can do to win marriage back NOW there's a Joint EQCA-JRC-VFE Canvass this Saturday from 10am-3pm in South Los Angeles. We'll be talking to real voters door-to-door about marriage equality. Join us!

VOTER CANVASS
Saturday, August 15th, 10am-3pm
Holy Faith Episcopal Church
260 N Locust St
Inglewood, CA 90301

RSVP@jordanrustin.org

We're not waiting until 2012, we're working until 2012!

MadProfessah Quoted in Sacramento Bee on 2010 vs 2012

A little bird emailed me to let me know that I was quoted in today's Sacramento Bee column("Gay marriage advocates debate next California move") by noted political pundit Dan Walters. In fact, not only was I quoted but this very blog you are reading was mentioned as well! Unfortunately, he still clings to the "zombie meme" that Black and Latin voters were to blame for Proposition 8's passage:

In the aftermath of the 2008 Proposition 8 campaign, it became apparent that much, if not all, of the winning margin came from African American and Latino voters who turned out in extra-heavy numbers to support Obama's presidential bid, and that has generated nearly a year of acrimonious debate within the gay rights community and black and Latino political circles.

Ron Buckmire, a mathematics professor at Occidental College who describes himself in his Internet blog as a "black, gay, Caribbean, liberal, progressive, moderate, fit, married, college-educated, NPR-Listening, tennis-playing feminist atheist," has emerged as one of the leading advocates for waiting.

"As I like to say: Do the math," Buckmire said in one interview. "It's going to take a long time. … I haven't seen a plan to win yet. I've seen a plan to get on the ballot. But not to win."

One question that gay rights advocates are trying to answer is whether the 2010 election, an off-year for presidential politics but one in which California will elect a new governor, would be more or less conducive to same-sex marriage.

Voter turnout would be lower than in 2008, most likely, and that probably would mean a somewhat whiter and older set of voters, which also could mean a lower turnout of those pro-Proposition 8 black and Latino voters.

While it is true that if only White voters had voted in November 2008, Proposition 8 would have failed. That does not mean that people of color are responsible for the passage of the measure. When you control for the rate at which different groups go to church (i.e. once a week, once a month, almost never) Black, Latino and Asians have approximately equivalent rates of support for marriage equality as white voters.

MadProfessah Quoted in SF Chronicle Blog

MadProfessah has been involved in the Prepare to Prevail movement to urge people who are gung ho about repealing Proposition 8 by an affirmative ballot measure in 2010 to think more deeply about the implications and impacts of such a commitment on the entire community.

To that effect, the media has been catching up to the story of intra-community dialogue. The latest story was written by Joe Garofoli at the San Francisco Chronicle Politics blog and is titled "The uphill climb facing same sex marriage supporters"

Leave it to a math professor -- like Ron Buckmire, associate math prof at Occidental College -- to break down some raw numbers to illustrate the task facing folks who want to put gay marriage on the ballot in November 2010.

The Mad Professah -- as herefers to himself in his blog-- has another gig as board prez of the Jordan/Rustin Coaltion, a African-American gay rights group in LA. As we've told you before, it's one ofseveral LGBT coalitions of colorthat says there hasn't been enough outreach done, and wants to hold off on rushing to the ballot (like in 2010) until more hearts and minds can be changed. The Professah knows how hard that can be. He's been canvassing in LA for a while (and involved in other gay rights campaigns since the early 1990s).

In July, he was part of a group that had its most successful day ever in "moving" voters in a middle-class black neighborhood in LA -- that is getting them to change their mind just a bit about the issue. They moved 50 voters -- after knocking on 1,200 doors.

"As I like to say: Do the math," Buckmire told us. "It's going to take a long time." While he's happy that some outreach is starting, "I haven't seen a plan to win yet. I've seen a plan to get on the ballot. But not to win."

Garofioli goes on to intimate that a plan to win will be released on Monday. Presumably, he is referring to Equality California's Marc Solomon's much anticipated memo on exactly how and when the state's largest LGBT organization feels Proposition 8 should be repealed.

MadProfessah will be on Michelangelo Signorile's Sirius radio show at 1:30pm PDT on Monday discussing the reasons why I think 2010 is too early to attempt to repeal Proposition 8 permanently.

NY TIMES Covers 2010 vs 2012 Prop 8 Repeal Question

MadProfessah addressing the LGBT Leadership summit in San Bernadino on

Saturday July 25th on behalf of the Prepare to Prevail contingent on

why 2010 is too soon to return to the ballot to repeal Prop 8

Well, well! The New York Times has finally gotten around to covering the internal debate in the LGBT community over when a measure to repeal Proposition 8 should be on the ballot: November 2010 or November 2012?

In an article in today's paper by Jesse McKinley called "Backers of Gay Marriage Rethink California Push" several of MadProfessah's colleagues and fellow LGBT activists are quoted (Matt Foreman, Hans Johnson, Marc Solomon and John Cleary):

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, chief operating officer of the Courage Campaign, a 700,000-member advocacy group in Los Angeles, told the gathering on Saturday that the two critical elements to persuade donors were organization and a winning plan. “No one is going to invest in chaos,” Ms. Callahan said, adding, “The money will come if you can show you can win.”

[...]

John M. Cleary, president of a Los Angeles group called the Stonewall Democratic Club, said many younger activists were particularly eager to fight Proposition 8. “I find the language of some of the organizations really self-defeating,” Mr. Cleary said. “And I think we have a moral obligation to overturn this.”

[..]

But some national leaders are dismissive of such arguments.

“A slapdash effort based on wishful thinking, rosy scenarios, and passion, is not enough to win on,” said Hans Johnson, a board member of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force.

Under California law, language for a 2010 proposition would need to be submitted to the secretary of state by late September, and then some 700,000 signatures gathered to qualify for the ballot.

Opponents of the 2010 campaign say that window is simply too small to change the opinions of enough voters to win, including groups in which Proposition 8 was popular, like African-Americans, religious conservatives and the elderly.

“What we’ve learned is that yes, you can change hearts and minds, but it takes time, focused energy, and money,” said Matt Foreman, the program director of the Evelyn and Walter Haas Jr. Fund, a frequent donor to gay rights causes. “And once a measure is on the ballot and the campaign begins, its almost impossible to change anyone’s mind, because people are being bombarded with lies.”

The article even quotes from the original Prepare to Prevail statement, which you read here first at MadProfessah.com over two weeks ago:

The argument against 2010 was expressed by a new coalition of groups known as Prepare to Prevail, which announced in a statement on July 13 that going back to the ballot next year “would be rushed and risky.”

“We should proceed with a costly, demanding and high-stakes electoral campaign of this sort only when we are confident we can win,” the statement read.

The issue of timing has increasingly divided gay rights advocates, with larger, more established groups seemingly favoring a more cautious approach and grass-roots groups — some of them formed since the November election — more vocal in support of a quick return to the polls.

As I told y'all on Saturday MadProfessah spent most of the day in lovely San Bernardino, where I addressed the crowd as part of a presentation of alternatives to going to to ballot in 2010 representing the Prepare to Prevail coalition. The picture at the top of this post captures me in mid-thought and is by intrepid lesbian reporter Karen Ocamb.

Amusingly, the group that wants to go forward in 2010 (regardless of what POC LGBT groups, The Task Force, the ACLU or anyone else says), and is seemingly unconcerned with what the consequences to LGBT service organizations of LGBT families and youth to waging and losing a multimillion-dollar scorched earth ballot campaign for marriage equality in the worst economic climate in nearly 75 years has been dubbed "The Coalition of the Willing."

Sound familiar?

I kid you not.

MadProfessah is in San Bernadino Today!

There's a statewide leadership summit in San Bernadino today, where the issue of when and how to go back to the ballot to restore marriage equality in California will be hotly debated.

The summit is from 10am to 4pm at:

The First Congregational United Church of Christ, San Bernardino 3041 N. Sierra Way, San Bernardino, CA 92405.

Check my Twitter feed for updates: http://www.twitter.com/madprofessah

EQCA Releases Political Consultant Reports on 2010 vs 2012

Last week, in response to Prepare To Prevail: Why We Must Wait In Order To Win, Marc Solomon, Marriage Director for Equality California asked the following question of some of the top political consultants in California:

Based on the research and data that is presently available, when do you recommend returning to the ballot to try to overturn Proposition 8: 2010, 2012, or other? On what do you base your conclusion?

What do you believe are the most important steps that the LGBT community and its allies must take to prepare to return to the ballot?

The consultants asked were

• Mark Armour
• Sue Burnside
• Rick Claussen
• Jill Darling
• Dave Fleischer
• Gale Kaufman
• Richie Ross

None of the consultants advised moving forward in 2010 with a ballot measure to legalize gay marriage in California. You can read their full, multiple-page reports by clicking on their names highlighted above.

Here are some excerpts:

Gale Kaufman

Many may feel that the environment is ripe because of the backlash that occurred after Prop 8 passed. I don’t want to discount this because I know the backlash was real. But we need the atmospherics to change quite a bit to secure a victory. By atmospherics I mean the external environment. We need to harness talent, draft the correct messaging, get all players together in one fluid group and ensure that the public is ready and willing and open to our cause before launching a campaign. I don’t see enough evidence of that at this point. If 2012 is the agreed upon target, there is time to
set a much more careful stage, there is the time to put the best possible organization in place and there is the time to do all of the incredible outreach it will take to build and hold the margin we will need.

I would not discount what is happening around us. The victories occurring in other states are a tremendous help to a future California win. Shouldn’t we be organizing financial support for the fight in Maine; sending donations and other resources to make sure that we help secure a victory and learn all the lessons there that can help us moving forward?

Finally, at the moment the California electorate is in a collective horrible mood. The last time I saw polling numbers on “Is California going in the right direction?” the Yes number was under 10%. Going to the ballot with a Yes campaign of any kind right now – while voters have been inundated with initiatives – especially on a subject that they have recently voted on – is a particular risk.

David Fleischer

There are 66 weeks between July 25, 2009 and November 2, 2010.

66 weeks is a very brief time to raise $40-50 million. Based on my experience fundraising, and looking at the remarkable fundraising success of the No on 8 campaign, I think the minimum immediate fundraising goals to be ready for 2010 – to see if we can get on track to raise $40-50 million -- would be $2 million by October 1, 2009, and $5 million by December 1, 2009. This represents roughly the cost of qualifying for the ballot and beginning to set up a campaign. This is much less than the average weekly amount we would need to raise over the 66 weeks ($600-700,000 each week, every week). But it would cover start-up costs and demonstrate some of the breadth of support necessary to assure donors we could get to the level reached in No on 8, and hopefully beyond it.

In most of these ballot measure campaigns on marriage, our community is put in a financially brutal position by our opposition, because they control the timetable. But we control the timetable now. Let’s use that advantage, and return to the ballot when we’re financially ready.

Richie Ross "does the math"

Since the latest research shows 60%-23% support for marriage equality among voters under-30 years of age, how many more of them will be “Likely Voters” in 2012?

In 2008…

170,734 of 18/19-year-olds voted.
189,735 of 20-year-olds voted.
181,363 of 21-year-olds voted.

In 2012, we will have a new batch of 18, 19, 20, and 21-year-olds that will add 515,875 new likely voters. If 60% of them vote with us and half of the “swing” voters join them, we can expect 353,374 NEW supporters among likely voters.

Our net growth (new voters with us minus new voters against us) will be 162,501.

At the same time, records indicate that about 110,000 older voters die each year. In 2012, 440,000 of the 2008 voters will have died. If we again apply the poll to that raw number, our natural opposition will shrink by 101,200 of total likely voters.

Mark Armour

III. The Need for Time to Conduct Outreach and Persuasion
As the Binder/Simon poll shows, with so few voters persuadable, victory in the next initiative will also require the persuasion of soft opponents and “conflicted voters” instead of just undecided voters. That requires a coordinated field and outreach program that reaches hundreds of thousands of voters. In particular, as the Binder/Simon polling found, important targets are moderates, Democrats and Independents, and also Latinos, African-Americans, and Asian Pacific Islanders who are not evangelical/born-again and who attend church once a month or less. Moving conflicted voters
won’t happen overnight, and outreach to ethnic communities will be more successful over a three year period than over an abbreviated one year period.

IV. What needs to be done
So what needs to be done?
1. A decision needs to be made on moving forward on a specific ballot, and a campaign plan and team need to be put in
place.
2. Fundraising must begin for initial outreach and education as well as for the campaign.
3. Outreach to soft, conflicted voters and ethnic communities must begin.
4. Media should be used to educate and reach out to voters in the time before the election. Based on the Binder/Simon polling, messages should show that gay and lesbian couples and their children have the same hopes and dreams as everyone else and that it is unfair to deprive them or their children of dignity, responsibility and security of marriage.

Sue Burnside

• The majority of California voters do not support same sex marriage. No ballot initiative has walked into Election Day without a 50% positive polling number and won in California.
• The California electorate is angry about the budget crisis and worried about the direction the country and state are headed. In this political climate, people tend to vote NO on ballot measures. We have to get a Yes vote!
• Given the national economy, California’s deep recession and the fact that few major donors have agreed to pledge large funds to an immediate rematch, it’s hard to see how we raise the $30-$40 million it would cost to run and win this campaign.
• The Governor’s race will be the top of the ballot in 2010. Some argue that all the Democratic candidates will favor marriage equality. But in a statewide run off in November, the Democrat nominee might not be an outspoken supporter, given that we only won 13 of 58 counties.
• Anti gay-marriage forces can get more people to vote in a low turnout environment than we can. If you look at the voters by age likely to vote in a 2010 election, people over 60 represent 37% of likely voters versus 27% in a 2012 general election. Our strength lies in getting young people to vote – in November 2012 voters under 30 will represent 20% of the electorate but in 2010 they will only represent 7% of the electorate. By 2012 there will be 776,000 new voters under 21 years old added to the voter rolls (our best group). On the other end of the age spectrum, there will be fewer older voters – more than 122,000 voters will die (the opposition’s most reliable voting bloc) Take a look at historic spreadsheet below.
• We would need to be prepared to get on the ballot in just two months (the deadline to submit language for the initiative is September 25, 2009 and have the full 150 days to circulate the petition). Any ballot campaign expert will tell you that having the exact right ballot language is often the difference between winning and losing. With just two months until the deadline for submitting ballot language, we may not have time to develop the strongest possible language.
• The current poll models a 2012 electorate as it stands today, but not fully reflecting where things will be in November 2012. You cannot poll future voters if they are not on the voter file. The 2% increase suggested by the polling is nothing to be laughed at but I believe given the inability to accurately gauge the real number without using the above information (new young voters and dying old voters), the increase would be closer to 4% for a 2012 election.
• Prop 8 lost in Los Angeles, the largest urban base. Our state map looks worse than the map that recalled Governor Gray Davis (Davis got 80% in SF County but we only got 75% -- this trend continues for all urban areas in the state). This highlights that urban areas have more people of color voters and we need to do organizing in order to get a larger percentage of the vote.
  

Rick Claussen

We recommend a multi-year campaign that culminates in an election when the time is right – when the numbers have moved enough to give you some assurance of success.

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. And rather than looking at a 2012 fight, you may be forced to look at 2014, 2016 or beyond before a ballot victory would become viable. For these reasons, we recommend spending time and resources to lay the groundwork for a successful reversal of Proposition 8 when conditions are right.

Jill Darling

Binder and Simon provided models of their findings based on projections of electorates in a gubernatorial election like 2010 and found marriage equality behind by four points (46% to 50%). In a presidential electorate projection for 2012, voters would split 47% favor to 48% opposed. If we allocate them using the exit poll estimates for late deciders, support for marriage equality could be at 48% right now among a 2010 electorate and 49% among voters in 2012. In other words, support for marriage equality is almost exactly where it was
a year and a half ago no matter how you model it, and opposition remains nearly as strong as it was last November, despite a hard-fought campaign and the emotional and intellectual discussion and media coverage in the aftermath of our loss.

Binder and Simon remind us that their models show what future elections could look like, if nothing other than electorate composition were different than it is now. The researchers pointed out in their Get Engaged presentation materials that other ballot measures and the top-of-ticket races have impact on voter turnout as well as on the composition of the electorate. From my own history of exit and pre-election polling I know that voter turnout
and the composition of the electorate are variables that we can model but cannot truly predict and there are other things that effect elections as well. Few would have foreseen Obama’s candidacy and its effect on the demographics of the electorate, on turnout, or on the issues that were being discussed, for example.

While thinking about this, I wondered what the vote on Proposition 8 might have been in an electorate that looked more like the voters of 2004. So I used demographics from the 2008 exit poll, PPIC’s 2008 December survey of general election voters, and demographics from the 2004 Los Angeles Times exit poll to put together a quick model. It shows that if voter turnout and demographic makeup had been more like it was in 2004 but the vote in
those demographic groups remained the same, support for Proposition 8 could have run two points higher.

The overall summary is that we need to start the work NOW to win marriage equality once and for all, as soon as we can.

Task Force Releases Statement in favor of Prepare to Prevail

Last Thursday the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force became the first national organization to release a statement in support of the now-famous Prepare To Prevail: Why We Must Wait In Order To Win;a joint statement from the leading people of color LGBT groups API Equality LA, HONOR PAC and Jordan Rustin Coalition. The statement cautions against a return to the ballot in 2010 unless several benchmarks are met.

Here's the statement from The Task Force:

"As a state that has often served as a political and cultural trendsetter for the rest of the country, what happens in California has national significance for the LGBT movement. That's why for well over five years the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force has devoted significant human and financial resources to winning the freedom to marry in California. This commitment remains steadfast as we continue to work on the ground in California with the Vote for Equality Project of the L.A. Gay & Lesbian Center and Equality California to build effective models of person-to-person voter persuasion about marriage equality.

"We support the soonest possible return to the ballot box to repeal Prop. 8 that gives the LGBT community a fighting chance to win. The priorities expressed in 'Prepare to Prevail' are about the hard work it will take at the grassroots to move towards a solid victory, and we look forward to continued work with our partners in California to build a strong, diverse and successful campaign for marriage equality."

Before returning to the ballot, the Task Force believes it’s important to:

• Build solid majority support for the freedom to marry before returning to the ballot. Multiple polls have shown that support for marriage equality has remained flat since November 2008. The LGBT community will be in a stronger position to win if we’re defending, and not attempting to create in the midst of a campaign, majority support at the ballot box for the freedom to marry.

• Demonstrate a proven ability to move former Yes on 8 voters to support marriage equality. Both polling and real-world testing door-to-door have shown that following the public debate over Prop 8, many voters’ positions have hardened; consequently, few voters remain undecided about whether same-sex couples should be allowed to marry.

• Develop persuasive messaging capable of moving former Yes voters that can also withstand vigorous campaigning from the opposition.

• Build a campaign infrastructure that’s able to raise the significant amount of money and recruit the army of volunteers needed to prevail. The LGBT community could measure its readiness to return to the ballot by establishing a set of benchmarks to be met, over time starting from now, for fundraising, volunteer recruitment and other campaign infrastructure goals.

More about the Task Force’s commitment to California

For more than five years, the Task Force Foundation and its sister organization, the Task Force Action Fund, have invested heavily toward winning the freedom to marry in California.

Throughout this period, the Task Force Foundation:

• Contributed combined grants of more than $130,000 to state and local lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) advocacy organizations, including Equality California and the L.A. Gay & Lesbian Center, to launch statewide public education efforts in support of the freedom to marry.

• Held two Power Summits in California, one in 2005 and one in 2007, which trained more than 170 leaders and volunteers in fundraising, volunteer recruitment and speaking persuasively to promote the freedom to marry in California.

• Worked closely with Equality California to assist in assembling a coalition of more than 45 national, statewide and local organizations to support a statewide public education campaign promoting the freedom to marry known as Let California Ring.

• Continued our five-year partnership with the Vote for Equality Project of the L.A. Gay & Lesbian Center in early 2009 to provide ongoing support and technical assistance for its door-to-door canvass program promoting the freedom to marry. Task Force staffers are continuing to work with the project to organize a robust door-to-door canvassing program focused on persuading former Yes on 8 voters to support the freedom to marry. Additional staff are working with Equality California’s field director to recruit, hire and train several organizers to launch similar persuasion canvasses statewide.

Throughout this period, the Task Force Action Fund:

• Dedicated all Task Force Organizing & Training staff to work on the ground in California within the No on 8 campaign's field operation last year. The Task Force team assumed vital leadership roles by directing statewide, regional or local field offices.

• Organized the "Equality Calls" project in 2006, which recruited hundreds of volunteers across the state to call thousands of members of LGBT groups and progressive allies and educate them about the importance of the freedom to marry.

This Saturday in San Bernardino there will be a statewide meeting at which attendees will be deciding on a process by which a decision will be made on whether to go to the ballot in 2010. According to the Secretary of State, the deadline for submission of proposed ballot language is September 25, 2009 in order to make it to the November 2010 election.

Courage Campaign Sticks To 2010; Task Force Says No

There are more developments in the intra-community debate over whether there should be an attempt to repeal Proposition 8 in 2010 or later. Rick Jacobs of the Courage Campaign has issued a statement re-iterating its support for going forward in 2010:

"We welcome the 'Prepare to Prevail' letter from API Equality, HONOR PAC, the Jordan Rustin Coalition and so many others as an honest, open contribution to the deliberations through which the community is participating.

"The 'Prepare to Prevail' letter, along with Love Honor Cherish's compelling statement on moving forward in 2010, is part of a healthy, vigorous debate that should help to inform the community as we begin the process of choosing the best path to victory.

"We encourage everyone engaged in this movement to put forward their portions of the road map to victory so that together, we can all win.

"Back in May, we asked our members to vote on which year -- 2010 or 2012 -- the Courage Campaign should support going back to the ballot to restore marriage equality. The response was overwhelming -- 82.5% expressed support for a 2010 ballot measure.

"The Courage Campaign is doing its part by helping to build an electoral road map to victory, as are several other organizations that are laying the groundwork necessary to win back marriage equality. It is our responsibility to our members, who overwhelmingly told us that they want to go to the ballot in 2010, and it is our responsibility to the marriage equality community."

"That's why the Courage Campaign announced support for a 2010 initiative in May. While we respect other organizations discussing and deliberating this very important question, we have been building the infrastructure to win marriage equality rights at the ballot box sooner, rather than later. Our members are ready to do the hard work needed to win.

"Since January, the Courage Campaign has been training and empowering marriage equality activists across the state at 'Camp Courage' training events as well as building 44 "Equality Teams" in 23 counties across California -- serving the organizations and individuals that are fueling the movement toward marriage equality.

Meanwhile, several other organizations that were actually involved with trying to defeat Proposition 8 in 2008 have joined the Prepare to Prevail statement.

Three California chapters of the ACLU have released a statement opposing 2010 and today the first national LGBT organization, the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force has signed on.