Marriage Equality Approved In Maine and Maryland

LGBT history was made last night when voters in Maine and Maryland voted to approve marriage equality at the ballot box for the first time in history.

Question 1 Results in Maine:      312,021 (53%)   YES  to  272,613 (47%) NO
Question 6 Results in Maryland: 1,208,068 (52%) YES to 1,112,998 (48%) NO

The victory in Maine was particularly sweet since in November 2009 a referendum on that state's enacted marriage law was rejected by a vote of 53% to 47%.

The victory in Maryland was even more exciting because there had been numerous questions raised about the way the campaign was run with Freedom to Marry, the primary organization in charge of the campaign to win marriage equality nationwide, initially refused to engage in the battle in the state. However, as polls consistently showed that Maryland's Question 6 was ahead (albeit far less ahead than Maine's Question 1) the LGBT activist community coalesced around Maryland and important high-profile donations from billionaires raised the profile of Maryland's attempt to make history.

With wins in Maine and Maryland there are now 8 states in which marriage equality is legal (or will be soon). Marriage is also legal in the District of Columbia and there are nearly 18,000 married same-sex couples in California and there may be many more married lesbian and gay couples soon depending on the Supreme Court's decision to take up the Proposition 8 appeal.

Hat/tip to Joe.My.God

POLL: Maine Marriage Equality Fight Now Very Close

The latest poll from PPP on Maine's Question 1 to legalize marriage equality shows that  the pro-equality side has a slim 52% to 45% lead. This is a much smaller lead than has been found in previous polls of Maine which at one point indicated a nearly 22-point gap in favor of marriage equality. The margin of error in the latest poll is ±2.2 percentage points, so technically it no longer indicates a majority in support of marriage equality.

PPP characterizes the current poll this way:

Maine's referendum to legalize gay marriage is leading for passage by a 52/45 margin, numbers virtually unchanged from 52/44 in our last survey. What we've found historically with these gay marriage ballot measures though is that undecided voters tend to end up voting anti-gay so if I had to guess this is something more like a 52/48 advantage and at that point it can go either way- this is likely to be a pretty close vote. 

Maine is widely considered the best-run of the three ballot measure campaigns to enact marriage equality and the one most likely to succeed. Hopefully, the forces of equality will indeed be successful on Tuesday and finally end the streak of losing "popular votes" on whether the fundamental right to marry should be extended to same-sex couples.

Maine Has My Favorite Pro-Marriage Equality Ad

I think this is the best pro-marriage equality ad that I have seen so far this year from all of the four marriage equality ballot measure states of Maine, Maryland, Minnesota and Washington. It has a straight married couple named Eric & Jen Humphrey, clearly in love, talking directly to the camera and matter-of-factly stating the obvious: allowing the same-sex couple down the street to get married will have absolutely no impact on the lives of the straight couple. This message is delivered twice in a mere 30 seconds. First, with the sentence "Allowing the same-sex couple down the street to get married doesn't change our marriage. We know who we are and what we mean to each other." This is a devastating rebuke to the claim that marriage equality somehow impacts heterosexuals' marriages.

Then the "no impact" message is repeated again at the end with  "Allowing loving, committed couples to get married isn't going to change our relationship one bit; we're voting Yes on 1." It's also significant (and effective) that it is the husband in the couple who delivers the no impact line, since almost always, men are more opposed to marriage equality than women.

And so the ad basically summarizes a basic truth at the core of the ballot measure fights: marriage equality only impacts the people who would be able to get married. The heterosexual supremacists have to try and scare and confuse voters that somehow allowing gay people to get married is going to have some detrimental impact on children, on society, on marriage itself. But these claims are not based on facts or evidence but are appeals to simple homophobia, discrimination and ignorance. This ad rejects these appeals and re-affirms the basic principle at stake of "live and let live." I would have liked to see an inclusion of the golden rule in the ad, but it's corollary is in there and is also effective.

Maine Marriage Equality Ad Features Firefighters

The new television ad from Mainers United for Marriage features a bunch of Maine firefighters (mostly straight guys) talking about their brotherhood and camaraderie on the job and about how this closeness is not impacted by the fact that one of their members is gay.

I'm not a straight person, so the ad is not aimed at convincing me, but I found the ad singularly uncompelling because there seems to be a logical disconnect between what a group of firefighters do and what state public policy should be towards all people who want civil marriage licenses. But, then again, for straight people, maybe it's about modelling for them that there is no reason to fear or hate gay people and thus the law should treat their relationships equally. But since the ad is not really about marriage, but really social comfort with homosexuality at a visceral level, it doesn't work for me.

What do you think?

Maine: New Polls Show Race For Marriage Tighter

The polls in Maine all year have consistently shown that a majority of respondents supports marriage equality and this was instrumental in convincing activists to move forward with a pro-active campaign to enact marriage equality by ballot measure in that state.

However, in the past week two new polls were released (from PPP showing a 52-44 race and from Maine's People Resource Center showing a 53-42 race) which indicates that the margin of victory may be narrowing significantly, which is eerily similar to what happened in the 2009 Question 1 campaign in Maine and the 2008 Proposition 8 campaign, which were widely perceived to be well ahead in the polls before election day but ended up with the pro-marriage equality side losing on Election Day.

I'm not convinced that is what is going to happen in Maine, but it should be a wake-up call for supporters of marriage equality nationwide who were getting complacent about winning marriage equality at the ballot box. This is an incredibly difficult task, to ask the privileged majority to vote to end their exclusive access to civil marriage, just because it is the right thing to do.This is the central issue in civil rights battle, but previous fights for equality did not occur in the venues of superheated  electoral rhetoric.

However I am optimistic that this will occur, and sooner rather than later.

Maryland: Poll Shows Support for Marriage Equality

Another poll confirms that support for marriage equality in Maryland is becoming a majority position, which is good news for supporters of equality as a referendum on the state's marriage equality law looms on the November 2012 ballot. A key result in the latest poll from Hart Research Associates indicates that African-Americans are split almost evenly about marriage equality.

In the above figure I have indicated the last four public polls about marriage equality in Maryland. 3 of the 4 have shown greater support for marriage equality than opposition. The latest poll, which was releases in early August, shows 54% support the marriage equality law as opposed to 40% who do not. This is good news, but since the margin of error is ±4.5 percentage points this indicates that there may not (yet) be a majority for marriage equality in Maryland.

Advocates such as myself for marriage equality are nervous about polls which indicate support for marriage equality prior to public (secret ballot) votes on the issue, because the public has repeatedly rejected the right when they had the chance. However, there are good indications that 2012 will produce more favorable results than we have previously had in 2008 (Proposition 8 in California) and 2009 (Question 1 in Maine). Critics of the latest poll results in Maryland point out that Hart is Governor Martin O'Malley's polling firm and is not an unbiased observer of the referendum fight since O'Malley has expended so much of his political capital in promoting nd enacting marriage equality in his state.

Only time will tell which side is correct about the true level of support for marriage equality at the ballot box and among the Maryland electorate.

POLL: Majority of Maine Voters Want Marriage Equality

Joe.My.God highlights a new Public Policy Polling poll of Maine voters which has very encouraging news for supporters of marriage equality. As you may recall, Maine is trying to become the first state in the history of the United States to enact marriage equality by a public vote of the people. In 2009, Maine voters rejected a referendum on a marriage equality law called Question 1 by a margin of 53% to 47%.

However, the new poll from PPP shows that Maine voters now support a law allowing "marriage licenses for same-sex couples that protects religious freedom by ensuring no religion or clergy be required to perform such a marriage in violation of their religious beliefs" by a margin of 47% to 32% with 21% undecided.

The more important question is that in the more basic question of "In general, do you think same-sex marriage should be legal or illegal?" a whopping 54% say it should be illegal compared to 41% who say it should be illegal.

Happily, the margin of error is a mere ±2.8 points, so this demonstrates a clear majority of Maine voters support marriage equality. This does not guarantee that the forces of good will win the electoral campaign to enact marriage at the ballot boxm, but it dramatially illustrates the difference in the terrain LGBT advocates now face in making their case for marriage equality to all voters.

WA Referendum 74 and 2012 Marriage Equality Outlook

Referendum 74 is the name of the potential ballot measure which voters in Washington State will face on November 6, 2012 to determine whether they want to APPROVE or REJECT the marriage equality bill recently passed by the Washington State legislature and signed by Governor Chris Gregoire on Monday February 13.

According to the Washington Secretary of State, what voters will see is:

Ballot Title
The legislature passed Engrossed Substitute Senate Bill 6239 concerning marriage [and voters have filed a sufficient referendum petition on this bill.] 

This bill would redefine marriage to allow same-sex couples to marry, modify existing domestic-partnership laws, allow clergy to refuse to solemnize or recognize marriages and religious organizations to refuse to accommodate marriage celebrations. 

Should this bill be 

___ Approved 

___ Rejected

Ballot Measure Summary
The bill would redefine marriage to allow same-sex couples to marry, apply marriage eligibility requirements without regard to gender, and specify that laws using gender-specific terms like “husband” and “wife” include same-sex spouses. Clergy could refuse to solemnize or recognize any marriages. Religious organizations and religiously affiliated educational institutions could refuse to accommodate weddings. The measure would not affect licensing of religious organizations providing adoption, foster-care, or child-placement. Domestic partnerships for seniors would be preserved. 

The reference to domestic partnerships is significant (as is the use of the word "redefine" but we'll get to that in a moment). In 2009, Washington State passed a comprehensive domestic partnership statute which included same-sex couples and opposite sex couples where one partner is over 65. That law was also subject to a referendum, known as Referendum 71. Referendum 71 was approved by voters 53% to 47%.
Most people expect Referendum 74 to also be approved as well, but you never know because voters have never voted in favor of a ballot measure which would legalize marriage equality. There have been 31 statewide ballot measures since 1998 on the issue of same-sex marriage and the pro-equality side has one once (in Arizona in 2006 and that was then overturned by another ballot measure in 2008). It is true, however, that usually the issue on the ballot has been whether to ban same-sex marriage outright, not whether should same-sex marriage be illegal or legal. The only votes where that has occurred are in Maine 2009 (Question 1: No 53%, Yes 47%) and California (Proposition 8: No 52.3%, Yes 47.7%). Maine's Question 1 is basically identical to Washington's Referendum 74 while California's Proposition 8 was an initiative constitutional amendment taking away the right of same-sex couples to marry in the future (or have their out of state marriage recognized by California) 173 days after the California Supreme Court ruled that the California constitution included such a right. Proposition 8 has been declared to violate the United States Constitution by a 3-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Interestingly, Maine voters will have an opportunity to affirmatively legalize marriage equality at the ballot box again in November 2012, and it is very likely an identical situation to Washington's Referendum 74 and Maine's Question 1 will occur in Maryland this November.

So, there will most likely be 3 opportunities for voters to have the specific up or down question on ending discrimination against same-sex couples in marriage this November (Maine, Washington and Maryland).

Polling in the first two situations (Proposition 8 in 2008 and Question 1 in 2009) and subsequent polling nationally and in other states have showed that the wording of the specific question presented to voters makes a huge difference in how they respond. This is why the choice of the words "redefine marriage" by Washington State Attorney general Rob McKenna (who is a declared Republican candidate for Governor) is noteworthy (and problematic). Marriage is not being "redefined" when same-sex couples are allowed to receive civil marriage licenses in addition to opposite-sex couples. To believe otherwise is to believe in a heterosexual supremacist talking point. Exactly the same piece of paper from the government will be given to same-sex couples as are given to opposite-sex couples, if the legal ban on providing such marriage licenses is ended. This piece of paper has nothing to do with any church or mosque or synagogue.

Additionally, one's person's ability to marry has absolutely no impact on anyone else's marriage. This is self-evident. There are tens of thousands of couples who are legally married around the country. How has this impacted the other legally married couples in opposite-sex relationships? The people of Massachusetts were the first to experience marriage equality in 2004 and they readily acknowledge this truth (67% said in a poll that marriage equality in 2004 has had little or no impact on their lives). Whether same-sex couples are issued civil marriage licenses by a state has no impact on someone's religious views about what marriage should be. To believe otherwise is to impose one's own religious views on a secular society, forcing one religion's views on people who believe otherwise, and that itself violates religious freedom!

WA Legislature Passes Marriage Equality Bill!

Wow! Another day of great news in the ongoing kulturkampf about marriage equality. 15 years after the Washington State legislature enacted a defense of marriage act over the veto of Democratic governor Gary Locke, the same body has passed a marriage equality legislature bill and sent it to Democratic governor Christine Gregoire for her enthusiastic signature.

Last week the State Senate passed the marriage equality bill SB 6239 by a bipartisan vote of 28-21. Earlier today, the State House of Representatives passed the bill by another bipartisan vote of 55 to 43.

The Advocate reports:

A spokeswoman for Gov. Christine Gregoire said Wednesday afternoon that she expects to sign the bill early next week, making Washington the seventh state plus the District of Columbia to legalize same-sex marriage. 

A round of amendments from Republicans looking to stop the bill all failed. One of the failed amendments had tried to require a referendum before same-sex marriage could be approved.  

Sen. Ed Murray, the gay man who has led much of the push for same-sex marriage in the state, said he and others are already gearing up for an expected referendum in November spurred by a petition drive. He told TVW that first a "decline to sign" drive would try to keep a repeal measure off the ballot.

Interestingly, as a result of yesterday's decision in Perry v Brown, the only chance that heterosexual supremacists may have to stop Washington from becoming the 7th state to allow same-sex couples to legally marry is through the referendum process. If they allow the marriage equality law to go into effect on June 7th and use an initiative to repeal it they will be repeating the state of facts which occurred in California in 2008 and that the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals yesterday ruled are legally impermissible in the 9th circuit (which includes Washington state).A referendum puts the law on hold until the voters decide whether they want to approve it or not. In November 2009, Maine voters rejected a similar marriage equality referendum by rejecting Question 1.

Regardless, Washington state voters have previously affirmed a same-sex relationship law by referendum in November 2009 (Referendum 71 in a non-presidential year) and will almost certainly do so again in 2012 where the President and a U.S. Senator is on the ballot. Bizarrely, it is somewhat likely that both Maine and Washington will have simultaneous ballot fights going on again in November 2012.

Congratulations to Washington!

MAINE: Back To The Ballot For Marriage Equality

As expected, Equality Maine announced today that they have decided to place a measure on the November 2012 ballot which would enact marriage equality. This is a big deal, because in 2009 after an expensive Proposition 8-inspired campaign in which both sides spent over $9 million combined, Maine voters rejected a marriage equality measure enacted by the state legislature by voting down Question 1 53% to 47%.

From the press release:

Augusta – Today, advocates for allowing same-sex couples to legally marry in Maine announced plans for a Citizens Initiative to enact a marriage equality law, delivering more than 105,000 signatures from Maine voters who want the issue on the November 2012 ballot to the Secretary of State’s office.

The announcement follows two years of outreach and conversations with Mainers about the freedom to marry, statewide polling showing steadily increasing support for allowing same-sex couples to marry – which now stands at 54 percent – and intensive field organizing in preparation for the campaign.

“The number of signatures we gathered and the thoughtful conversations we’ve been having with voters tell us that Mainers are eager to speak on this question again,” said Betsy Smith, executive director of EqualityMaine. “Our polling shows a 54% majority of support for same-sex marriage in Maine. Many Mainers have changed their minds and want a chance to bring equality and fairness to our state.”

So Maine is one of the states where advocates for marriage equality will be playing offense in the fight to end the exclusion of same-sex couples from civil marriage. Others are Maryland, Washington and New Jersey.

There will be anti-equality efforts in North Carolina and Minnesota.

EQME Says They Have Signatures For 2012 Marriage Initiative

Game on! Equality Maine has announced that they have gathered twice as many signatures as needed to put an initiative on the November 2012 which would legalize marriage equality.

The specific ballot question language is:

Do you favor a law allowing marriage licenses for same-sex couples that protects religious freedom by ensuring no religion or clergy be required to perform such a marriage in violation of their religious beliefs?

The Portland Press-Herald reports:

Betsy Smith of EqualityMaine says 396 volunteers collected more than 36,000 signatures on Election Day, bringing the total number to 100,000. That's more than enough petitions to get gay marriage onto the statewide ballot if the group chooses to do so. Smith says the group will make its decision on a referendum in January. 

Maine is currently the only state in New England that doesn't allow either gay marriage or civil unions. Maine lawmakers approved a gay marriage law, but it was overturned by a statewide referendum in 2009.

Recent polls in Maine have shown support for marriage equality at 53%. Hopefully Maine goes forward with a pro-marriage equality measure in 2012, which will at least counter-balance the anti-marriage equality measures in Minnesota and North Carolina.

POLL: Support for Marriage Equality in Maine

Well, well! Despite being rejected at the polls on election day 2009 when Maine's Question 1 (voiding that state's recently passed marriage equality law) was approved by voters 53% to 47%, marriage equality is now enjoying majority support in the state as the 2012 federal elections approach, and Equality Maine considers going back to the ballot with a marriage equality measure.

A new poll from PPP shows that 51% of Maine respondents think that same-sex marriage should be legal, but before one gets too confident, I would point out that this is within the margin of error of ±3.8 percentage points of this poll (673 voters contacted between 10/28-10/31/2011).So, it is true that more Maine voters support marriage equality than oppose it, but the poll does not indicate majority support for marriage equality in Maine yet. Hopefully, that will be the case one year from now, on election day 2012!

Hat/tip to Joe.My.God

EQME Plans 2012 Marriage Equality Ballot Measure

Well, well, well! The LGBT community will not only be playing defense of our civil rights in the 2012 election in Minnesota but will also be playing offense in Maine. 

Equality Maine has announced that they will be attempting to put this question before voters on the November 2012 ballot:

Do you favor a law allowing marriage licenses for same-sex couples that protects religious freedom by ensuring no religion or clergy be required to perform such a marriage in violation of their religious beliefs?

More interestingly, Equality Maine also released the information that marriage equality is a majority position in Maine, according to recent polls.

The Bangor Daily News reports:

“We’ve changed hearts and minds during ‘No on One,’ and since then, many more Mainers have changed their hearts and continue to change their minds,” said Smith in a Thursday release. “We have been going door to door, talking to them and hearing their journey toward support. In two separate polls, conducted over the last five months, 53 percent of Mainers surveyed said they support letting gay and lesbian couples marry here.”

[...]

Supporters must get 57,277 signatures to get the question on the November 2012 ballot.

Gay marriage supporters hope to build on momentum in Rhode Island and in New York, which earlier this month became the sixth state to allow gay marriage.

In 2009, Maine voters used a People's Veto to overturn a marriage equality bill by a vote of 53% to 47% on Question 1 that had been passed through the legislature and signed by Governor Baldacci at the time.

Question 1 Documentary Shows Homophobe Expressing Regret

There's a new documentary about the 2009 electoral fight to repeal a marriage equality bill in Maine called Question 1. You can watch the trailer above. One of the highlights is the admission, on camera, by one of the heads of the Yes on 1 campaign, Marc Mutty, admitting his side had engaged in hyperbole and expressing regret for the tactics used during the heated campaign.

WATCH:

One of the problems that I have: I know what we need to do and what we need to do is slam people over the head, not only with a two-by-four, but a two-by-four with nails sticking out of it. ... Unfortunately, I think it's a lousy approach, but it's the only thing we've got and it's the only way. That's the way campaigns work. And we use a lot of hyberbole, and I think that's always dangerous. You know, we say things like 'Teachers will be forced to (teach same-sex marriage)!' Well, that's not a completely accurate statement and we all know it isn't, you know? ... Let's look back at our ads and see what we say. And I think we use hyperbole to a point where, you know, it's like 'Gee-ee-eez!'

Hat/tip to Freedom To Marry.

Maryland Marriage Equality Bill Survives By 1 Vote

Tiffany Alston, a co-sponsor of the bill voted against marriage equality
after her amendment to create civil unions was defeated

Drama at today's Baltimore House Judiciary Committee vote on HB 175. The bill squeaked through to the House floor by a vote of 12-10 with wavering supporter Sam Arora voting yes while another fickle co-sponsor of the legislation, Del. Tiffany Alston, voted no. The measure was only saved from an 11-11 defeat by the House Judiciary Committee chair Joseph Valliaro,  Jr. voted in favor to send the measure to the whole body even though he does not support marriage equality!

Here's the vote tally on the legislation. People voting YES should be thanked by marriage equality supporters:

Joseph F. Vallario, Jr., Chair (410) 841-3488, (301) 858-3488 - YES
 Kathleen M. Dumais, Vice-Chair (410) 841-3052, (301) 858-3052  - YES

Tiffany T. Alston _ NO Curtis S. (Curt) Anderson _ YES Sam Arora - YES Jill P. Carter - YES Luke H. Clippinger _ YES John W. E. Cluster, Jr. _ NO Frank M. Conaway, Jr. - YES Don H. Dwyer, Jr. -NO Michael J. Hough - NO Kevin Kelly - NO Susan C. Lee - YES Susan K. McComas - NO Michael A. McDermott - NO Keiffer J. Mitchell, Jr. - YES Neil C. Parrott - NO Luiz R. S. Simmons - YES Michael D. Smigiel, Sr. - NO Kriselda Valderrama - YES Geraldine Valentino-Smith - NO Jeffrey D. Waldstreicher  - YES

The bill now goes to the House floor where Democrats outnumber Republicans 98 to 43 but the Marriage Protection Act does not have 71 co-sponsors, and as we have seen, being a co-sponsor does not guarantee that you will actually vote YES on the legislation!

Even if the measure does become law, heterosexual supremacists like the National Organization for Marriage have vowed to collect signatures for a referendum on the measure in 2012. They'll need to collect 55,736 signatures by June 30 and 18,579 by May 31st. Thus would prevent HB 175/SB 116 from going into effect until after the vote, a similar situation to what happened in 2009 in Maine. Voters that November passed Question 1 by a vote of 52.8% to 42.2%

Top 10 Most Significant LGBT Events of 2009

It's that time of year! No, I'm not talking about Chrismuhkwanzakkuh, I'm talking about the annual ritual of making of Top 10 lists. Herewith is my list of the Top 10 Most Significant LGBT Events of 2009 in the United States.

10. Sonia Sotomayor is confirmed to the United States Supreme Court: August 6, 2009.

Hey, the United States Supreme Court doesn't get new members every year. Lots of presidents don't get to appoint any justices, and their influence can extend far beyond a presidential quadrennial or octennial term of office. So it must have been music to the ears of former University of Chicago Law School professor Barack Obama when Associate Justice (and confirmed bachelor) David Souter announced he wanted to return to New Hampshire and leave the nation's highest court. With 60 votes in the majority caucus, Obama could have forced almost anyone through the Senate (including openly gay law school deans Elana Kagan and Kathleen Sullivan) but he chose the person at the top of everyone's short list: Sonia Sotomayor, the New Yorker of Puerto Rican descent who went to Princeton and Yale Law School and went on to become the the first female, Hispanic justice. Although she was asked (and politely declined to answer) her thoughts on LGBT issues there's no question that Sotomayor's vote will be key to achieving full equality under the federal constitution for LGBT Americans in my lifetime.

9. The Vermont Legislature overrides the Governor's veto to enact marriage equality: April 7, 2009.

In a breathtakingly brief period of a few weeks late this Spring, the legislatures of Maine, New Hampshire, Connecticut and Vermont all passed marriage equality measures.Vermont was particularly stunning, because the Republican governor had the temerity to veto the measure and the Legislature was able to achieve a two-thirds majority in both Houses (by a margin of one vote in the lower body) to enact the law ending discrimination against same-sex couples having their relationships recognized by civil authorities in the Great State of Vermont.

8. The District of Columbia becomes the first Southern jurisdiction to pass marriage equality legislation: December 18, 2009.

Just squeaking in before the end of the year, the District of Columbia, which has a population slightly larger than the state of Wyoming and slightly less than the state of Vermont, passed a marriage equality ordinance through its unicameral legislature, the DC City Council 11-2. What makes the action so significant is the fact that the District of Columbia is below the Mason-Dixon line, which means that it is the first jurisdiction in the Southern United States (which also has a majority African American population) to affirm the principle that equality for all includes gay and lesbian couples access to civil marriage.

7. Barack Obama becomes 2nd sitting President to address LGBT rights fundraising event, reiterates promises to end "Don't Ask, Don't Tell": October 10, 2009.

After an increasingly impatient LGBT community complained that the Obama administration's moves towards institutionalizing LGBT progress were distressingly slow, the President agreed to attend the Human Rights Campaign's annual DC gala, which this year was occurring a few hours before hundreds of thousands of LGBT citizens would walk the streets of DC for the National Equality March. At the dinner, Obama gave a typically stirring speech where he reiterated his opposition to Don't Ask, Don't Tell and the Defense of Marriage Act and called for Congress to pass the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, the Domestic Partner Benefits and Obligations Act and the federal hate crimes act for his eager signature. Obama became the first president to attend an LGBT fundraising event in the first year of his first term (Clinton attended in 1997 after his re-election the year before) but it was not enough. LGBT critics complained that Obama did not layout a timeline for when his legislative accomplishments would be achieved.

6. Openly lesbian Annise Parker is elected mayor of Houston, the nation's 4th largest city: December 12, 2009.

After being elected by her hometown six consecutive times statewide in races for City Council and as City Controller, Annise Parker built up a resume and reputation that one would expect for a leading contender to be elected mayor of the nation's fourth largest city. That she was also openly gay and had been so for her entire electoral career gave the race against African-American Gene Locke extra media attention. In the end, Parker was elected handily. Whose to say that she will stop at Mayor? What her election does show is that there is no lavender ceiling for openly LGBT politicians in electoral politics.

5. California Supreme Court refuses to strike down Proposition 8 but affirms marriages of same-sex couples entered into prior to its passage: May 26, 2009.

Almost exactly one year after the California Supreme Court released its landmark ruling In Re Marriage Cases (which struck down Proposition 22 and the state's 1974 marriage statute, legalized marriage for same-sex couples and elevated sexual orientation to a category receiving the highest level of judicial analysis) the same court disappointed millions of people by refusing to exhibit similar judicial courage to invalidate Proposition 8. In a 6-1 vote (only Justice Carlos Moreno, under consideration by President Obama for the United States Supreme Court at the time, was willing to strike down the constitutional amendment which stripped same-sex couples of the right to marry) the Court upheld the legality of Proposition 8 under the California constitution. The Court also unanimously upheld the legal principle that all people married during the 173 days between June 15, 2007 and November 3, 2008 had all the rights and responsibilities of civilly married couples. This will not be the last word on whether Proposition 8 will remain in the California Constitution, however, the legal superduo of Ted Olson and David Boies have filed a federal lawsuit against the measure, and a full trial has been scheduled for January 11, 2010.

4. The Iowa Supreme Court unanimously rules in favor of marriage equality: April 3, 2009.

In the last three years all of the half-dozen or so state Supreme Court decisions which have decided marriage equality prior to Iowa's unanimous Varnum v. Brien decision had been 4-3-vote majorities (Favorably: Massachusetts, 2004; California, 2008; Connecticut, 2008. Unfavorably: New Jersey, 2005; New York, 2006; Washington, 2006; Maryland, 2007). That's what makes the ruling by the Iowa State Supreme Court so significant. The logic that there is no rational basis or legitimate state purpose for preventing same-sex couples from being issued civil marriage licenses is unassailable. The decision went into effect three weeks later, and same-sex couples have been getting married ever since without much publicity. In Iowa, the state constitution can only be amended by passing through the state legislature and the Democratic majority is refusing to consider such a measure. Iowa puts paid to the idea that gay marriage is an idea that is a purely liberal or geographically centered. If same-sex couples are getting married in Iowa, can Kansas be far behind?

3. On election day, Maine voters reject marriage equality law while Washington voters retain "everything but marriage" comprehensive domestic partnership statute: November 3, 2009.

The weeks and months leading up to election day were dominated by the "Proposition 8-redo" in Maine called Question 1 where heterosexual supremacists again forced a public vote on whether private relationships would be treated equally by the state. Another public vote, another devastating loss. For the 31st time in 32 tries, the public voted against marriage equality for LGBT couples, this time by a margin of 52.75% Yes to 47.25% No (even larger than Proposition 8's 52.3 Yes to 47.7% No in 2008). However, thousands of miles away in Washington State, voters overwhelmingly Approved Referendum 71 (by a margin 0f 53.15% to 46.85% or 113,00 votes) to retain a recently enacted comprehensive domestic partnership law modeled after California's landmark AB 205 from 2003. (Interestingly, Nevada was able to enact their comprehensive domestic partnership act over their Republican governor;s veto on May 31, 2009.)

2. John A. Pérez is named the next Speaker of the California Assembly, the first openly gay person of color to head a state legislative body: December 10, 2009.

John A. Pérez is someone I have hung out with at parties and sat next to at banquets and stood next to at rallies. He is also the first LGBT person of color ever to be elected to the California legislature (in 2008). In January 2010, he will become the Speaker of the Assembly, one of the Top 3 positions in California politics. Yes, he's the cousin of the Mayor of Los Angeles and had to defeat my own Assemblyman Kevin de Leon in order to win over a majority of the California Democratic caucus as a first-term legislator in order to have up to 4 years of eligibility to serve as head of the lower body of the California Legislature, the first gay and third Latino to do so. His elevation among his peers, along with Annise Parker demonstrates the assimilation of sexual orientation into the mainstream of Democratic politics. It is more likely John's sexual orientation helped him rather than hurt him in becoming Speaker of the California Assembly and that speaks volumes for the trajectory of the LGBT civil rights movement in the future.

1. President Barack Obama signs the federal hate crimes bill (the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr Hate Crimes Prevention Act) into law: October 28, 2009

Despite the carping from some corners that the legislation only gives rights to LGBT people only after they are victimized or dead, the historic echoes of the President's signature on H.R. 1913 should not be under-estimated. The federal hate crimes bill became the first piece of federally enacted legislation to ever include the words "gender identity" and only the second to expand rights based on sexual orientation. Yes, the measure was attached to a "must-pass" piece of legislation, the Defense Reauthorization Act of 2009, instead of a stand-alone bill. But this did not make Republican opposition any less fierce or morally questionable.

2010 Absolutists File Five Initiatives To Repeal Prop 8

TowleRoad is reporting that the Attorney General has released its title and summary of five nearly identical ballot measures filed by what I call "2010 absolutists" that would repeal Proposition 8 in 2010, if the measure qualifies for the ballot (694,354 valid signatures collected in 150 days--April 12) and passed by voters on November 4, 2010.

Here is what they look like (pdf):

The Attorney General prepares the legal title and summary that is required to appear on initiative petitions. When the official language is complete, the Attorney General forwards it to the proponents and to the Secretary of State. The Secretary of State then provides calendar deadlines to the proponents and to county elections officials, and the initiative may be circulated for signatures. The Attorney General’s official title and summary for the first measure is as follows:

REINSTATES RIGHT OF SAME-SEX COUPLES TO MARRY. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. Repeals the current provision in California’s Constitution that states only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California. Provides that marriage is between only two persons and shall not be restricted on the basis of race, color, creed, ancestry, national origin, sex, gender, sexual orientation, or religion. Clarifies that the initiative shall not be interpreted to require any priest, minister, pastor, rabbi, or other person to perform a marriage in violation of his or her religious beliefs. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local government: Over the long run, this measure would likely have little fiscal impact on state and local governments. (09-0036.)

The Secretary of State’s tracking number for this measure is 1385 and the Attorney General’s tracking number is 09-0036.

The Attorney General’s official title and summary for the second measure is as follows:

REINSTATES RIGHT OF SAME-SEX COUPLES TO MARRY. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. Repeals the current provision in California’s Constitution that states only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California. Provides that marriage is between only two persons and shall not be restricted on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, gender, sexual orientation, or religion. Clarifies that the initiative shall not be interpreted to require any clergy person to perform a marriage in violation of his or her religious beliefs. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local government: Over the long run, this measure would likely have little fiscal impact on state and local governments. (09-0039.)

The Secretary of State’s tracking number for this measure is 1387 and the Attorney General’s tracking number is 09-0039.

The Attorney General’s official title and summary for the third measure is as follows:

REINSTATES RIGHT OF SAME-SEX COUPLES TO MARRY. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. Repeals the current provision in California’s Constitution that states only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California. Clarifies that the initiative shall not be interpreted to require any priest, minister, pastor, rabbi, or other person authorized to perform marriages by any religious organization to perform a marriage in violation of his or her religious beliefs. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local government: Over the long run, this measure would likely have little fiscal impact on state and local governments. (09-0040.)

The Secretary of State’s tracking number for this measure is 1388 and the Attorney General’s tracking number is 09-0040.

The Attorney General’s official title and summary for the fourth measure is as follows:

REINSTATES RIGHT OF SAME-SEX COUPLES TO MARRY. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. Repeals the current provision in California’s Constitution that states only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California. Clarifies that the initiative shall not be interpreted to require any clergy person to perform a marriage in violation of his or her religious beliefs. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local government: Over the long run, this measure would likely have little fiscal impact on state and local governments. (09-0041.)

The Secretary of State’s tracking number for this measure is 1389 and the Attorney General’s tracking number is 09-0041.

The Attorney General’s official title and summary for the fifth measure is as follows:

REINSTATES RIGHT OF SAME-SEX COUPLES TO MARRY. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. Repeals the current provision in California’s Constitution that states only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California. Provides that marriage is between only two persons and shall not be restricted on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, gender, sexual orientation, or religion. Clarifies that the initiative shall not be interpreted to require any priest, minister, pastor, rabbi, or other person to perform a marriage in violation of his or her religious beliefs. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local government: Over the long run, this measure would likely have little fiscal impact on state and local governments. (09-0042.)

The Secretary of State’s tracking number for this measure is 1390 and the Attorney General’s tracking number is 09-0042.

The proponents for the ballot measures are LGBT (and ally) activists: John Henning, Jordan Krueger, Raphael Farrow, Andrew Klayman, Jo Hoenninger, Peter Nguyen, Thomas Watson, Edwin Rivera, Angie-Marie Hancock and Fredy Ceja.

WATCH: Maine NO ON 1 Documentary

PART ONE:

PART 2:

Maine Question 1 Money Total: Over $9m

Joe.My.God has the details of the more than 9 million dollars that was spent to support and oppose Maine's Question 1, which was passed by voters on Tuesday and repealed LD-1020, which would have legalized civil marriage for same-sex couples in that state.

Proponents

The committees that supported Question 1 got their funding almost entirely from churches and conservative Christian organizations and their employees, who gave $3 million, which is 89 percent of the proponents' total. Almost half of proponents' contributions came from the National Organization for Marriage, a conservative Christian group based in New Jersey, which gave $1.6 million. Focus on the Family gave $179,500. The Roman Catholic Diocese of Portland, another large donor, gave $285,988—all to its own ballot committee. In total, dioceses and churches provided $578,904. Out-of-state churches sent in $269,650. Out-of state donors from 45 other states gave $2.1 million to support the measure. New Jersey topped the list at $1.6 million. In a distant second place, Colorado donors gave $143,070, and those from the District of Columbia gave $75,275.

Opponents

The committees that opposed Question 1 relied less on the support of a few major organizations. Opponents of the measure raised money from over 10,000 donors—12 times more than proponents reported. Gay-rights groups and their employees gave $1.8 million, or 31 percent of the total raised by opponents. The Human Rights Campaign topped the list, giving $367,067. The Gill Foundation contributed $275,000. Freedom to Marry gave $200,000 and another $30,000 came from the Vermont affiliate. The National Gay & Lesbian Task Force gave $159,056, and EqualityMaine gave $152,151. Out-of-state donors contributed $3.3 million to oppose to the measure. Donations came from all 50 states; the top locations were New York ($761,498), Massachusetts ($653,889), and the District of Columbia ($619,566).

I suppose it is progress that the donors for supporting the denial of fundamental rights to a minority group are not coming from large groups of people, but only a small cadre of religiously motivated heterosexual supremacists.

Thoughts On Maine: We Will Prevail (Eventually)

Yesterday's election results are in and it is becoming pretty clear that Maine voters have voted to prevent their state's marriage equality law passed by the Legislature and signed by the Governor from going into effect.

With 96% of precints voting, Question 1 is passing:

Yes	296289	52.79%
No	264970	47.21%

As my fellow blogger Greta Christina says, I hope that people looking at these results will give up the fiction that Proposition 8 passed last year because of the No On 8's alleged incompetency (or Black voters' alleged homophobia). Everyone agrees that Maine's No On 1 ran an excellent campaign and most rational people understand that religiosity not race is the most significant factor in voters' position on marriage equality. And she also makes the point that people who are gunning to return to the ballot in 2010 might want to reconsider that notion:

It could well be that Prop 8 won in California because the No on 8 campaign made mistakes. But it could also be that Prop 8 won in California because same-sex marriage has never, ever won at the ballot box in the U.S. It could be that Prop 8 won because same-sex marriage is just a really hard sell right now. I do think time is on our side... but when it comes to the ballot box, it isn't on our side yet.

Two: I hope the people who want to put same-sex marriage back on the ballot in California in 2010 take a long, hard look at whether that's really a good idea, and whether the timing is right.

Same-sex marriage is just really hard to win at the ballot right now. I think we need to accept that. We stand a much better chance of winning in 2012 than we do in 2010. To be blunt about it: Support for same-sex marriage skews, more than with almost any other demographic, according to age. The younger people are, the more likely they are to support it. To be brutally blunt: As more old people die, and as more young people become old enough to vote, the odds skew more and more in our favor. Also, the economy in California truly and profoundly sucks right now, and people just won't be able to donate the kind of money to a political campaign that they did in 2008. And 2012 is a Presidential election year, when voter turnout is always higher -- and high voter turnout almost always means more young voters, and almost always favors liberal candidates and causes.

I bolded the key sentences in the excerpt above. Greta Christina is just saying what MadProfessah and others have been saying since July: 2012 is the earliest Californian's should consider returning to the ballot to restore marriage rights to same-sex couples.

There are now 32 states where voters have been faced with the question of whether to be pro-gay or anti-gay with regards to relationship recognition for same-sex couples. The anti-gay side has won 31 times and lost twice (Arizona voters defeated a ballot measure that would have banned marriage for same-sex couples AND domestic partnerships in 2006 but then approved an initiative that only banned same-sex marriage in 2008. In 2009 it looks like we are winning Referendum 71 in Washington State).

On the question of marriage equality itself without domestic partnership or civil unions in the picture LGBTs have lost 31 statewide elections.

Do we really want to make it 32 in 2010?