A rivalry between California's two largest marriage equality organizations to publicly define the timeline of repealing Proposition 8 has become a bitter spat that threatens to cripple the effort.
On August 12, Equality California (EQCA) announced their decision to put an initiative to repeal anti-marriage Proposition 8 on the 2012, rather than the 2010 ballot. As the self-described largest queer rights advocacy group in California, EQCA deciding to wait until 2012 received statewide coverage and was perceived as representative of the LGBT activism community as a whole.
EQCA was the defendant not only in the original 2008 California Supreme Court case in which same-sex marriage was first allowed, but also in the 2009 case to challenge Proposition 8 after its passage. EQCA has traditionally set the agenda for marriage equality in California, even passing a bill in the state legislature Wednesday night to recognize same sex marriages from other states.
Still, several organizations who were fighting for 2010 before the announcement have not backed down. EQCA's primary competitor for funds and political clout in the California marriage equality fight is the Courage Campaign, which works on myriad political issues unrelated to equality.
After meeting a $100,000 fundraising goal for the 2010 initiative and announcing intentions to move forward, Courage Campaign sent out emails campaigning for lobbying reform, health insurance reform, farmworker deaths, and fighting Maine's similarly egregious Proposition 1.
The Courage Campaign's varied public activities do not match their commendable equality agenda. Meriting no comparable newspaper headline to EQCA, Courage Campaign has quietly continued to subvert EQCA's efforts and fundraising for a 2010 campaign.
One such smaller marriage advocacy group, Love Honor Cherish, openly plans to move forward with the 2010 initiative. It could not be more obvious that Love Honor Cherish intends to fundraise, gather signatures, and put an initiative on the 2010 ballot for marriage equality. They wrote a blueprint describing exactly how it will hypothetically happen. Furthermore, the California Coalition for Marriage Equality, which includes the Courage Campaign, met in late August to strategize. Lawyers are currently vetting the language for the proposed initiative.
Equality California's hegemony over marriage equality organizations should be challenged from time to time. But, as two leaders from a San Francisco LGBT Democratic club argue:
The current situation is untenable. Both factions are working with one hand tied behind their backs. The 2010 proponents are moving ahead with an undeveloped, piecemeal strategy with very little fundraising support or infrastructure. While we commend their energy and commitment, this is an overly risky way of running a campaign when so much is at stake.
A March 2009 Field Poll showed that a constitutional amendment to allow same-sex marriage would receive 48% support, and 47% opposition among Californians. Same-sex marriage advocacy groups still have much ground to gain. Still, the lesson to be learned is that whether 2010, 2012, or both, the year that we push for equality does not matter.
Repealing 8 in 2012 has many advantages; four more years of elderly voters will be removed from the rolls and four more years of young voters will be added, two more years of Californians will come out to their families and friends, volunteers have two more years to regroup after post-2008 burnout, and the 2012 presidential voter turnout will be significantly greater than the 2010 turnout for the gubernatorial election. Yet by bringing the issue of marriage equality back into the public eye sooner, in 2010, the repeated messaging will allow for greater visibility and acceptance of queer California culture.
This conflict between organizations is why we will fail, if we fail, in 2010. EQCA and Courage Campaign both recognize why we lost in 2008, but overlook their obvious failure to collaborate now. The No on 8 support from the San Francisco Bay Area was channeled into ineffective campaign methods-- to borrow a phrase from Don't Ask Don't Tell, California's queer community lacked "unit cohesion." Bigotry was codified because its opponents ran a bad campaign, preaching mainly to supporters of same sex marriage. Visibility, or holding signs with slogans on a street corner, was considered effective campaigning. It's not.
Fortunately, both Equality California and Courage Campaign have demonstrated their commitment to a statewide ground campaign to win allies where there were none in 2008. Equality California has set up dozens of field offices and Courage has launched dozens of field teams in California counties from which to run their equality campaigns.
In college in California, I don't feel the urgency of marriage, but I do feel the urgency of my rights. Assuming the coalition pushing for 2010 is successful, there are thirteen months left before 40 million Californians vote on marriage again. If they intend to win, the Courage Campaign must stop closeting their direct involvement in the 2010 ballot measure, and sit down with EQCA to strategize. Neither organization can succeed without the other. Do it right, or don't waste the time and hopes of queer Californians.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: California marriage equality groups risk rights for petty rivalry.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/15889
Thank you for this post, Ariel.
I've had this debate with friends. I think its a mistake to wait until 2012 & let the momentum & passion seep out of the moment. As I told my Cali friends before the 2008 vote last summer, the LGBT Rights community is sitting on the sidelines & not doing nearly enough "in your face" protests, marches & activism. The stance against equal marriage rights reflects deep seated biases & religious beliefs. Its at least akin to the biases faced by blacks in the '60s. Hence, the activism needed to overcome it is at least as great.
I think the reasoning for the 2012 is that a lot of people tend to only vote when there are presidential elections. Which, I think, is why they chose 2008 for the prop 8 vote.
Too often people in activist groups want to have their own kingdom and their own unique sphere of influence. In instances like these, it holds back reform when both groups work at cross-purposes to each other. Egos must be kept in check since the point is to bring marriage equality to California, not squabble over petty details motivated purely by selfishness.
I doubt Prop 8 can be repealed in 2010, so the question is whether a failed effort moves the ball down the field any. With homosexuality, lack of familiarity breeds contempt. Most people don't have strongly held and deliberately thought out ideas of why gay marriage is bad, just a vague sense that it's against the natural order. So the key is education, and the question is whether a failed repeal effort can be a teaching opportunity. Get the issue out there, make the case, show healthy normal gay couples, speak to people's specific fears - your church won't be forced to marry gays. If the anti-8 groups get their acts together, they could make some headway even in defeat. If they don't, maybe another failure will help dislodge the inept leadership and let some more committed or talented people take over.
As a Californian, I can tell cattrack2 that "in your face" protests will not help overturn prop 8, but will in fact annoy voters and have the opposite effect. The LGBT community better figure out how to communicate better with those who are uncomfortable with homosexuality, and that's not going to happen if you continue to ridicule people's religious beliefs, and make comments that imply you're hoping old people die, because they're standing in your way. I supported prop 8 because of my religious beliefs and no one is going to "educate" me out of them. I wish women's groups would focus on gaining equality for women AS women, not just as lesbians, because the majority of women are straight and the majority of women need pay equity, healthcare and childcare. As usual, feminists ignore the majority of women and focus on a small interest group. No wonder women have little interest in feminism today. I"m a feminist, but I have nowhere to go because of bias among feminist groups against straight women, religious women, and wives and mothers.
So Feministing has tons, and tons, and tons, and tons, and tons, and tons... of stories that aren't related to the LGBT movement in any way but you choose this particular post to comment on and try to call us all lesbians? How dare there be ONE post this month about the struggle for marriage equality in California! Classy.
Since I'm tragically late on this anyways I'll just give my opinion, unrelated to Janeasher's comment: The non-EQCA same-sex marriage advocates are pissed that EQCA screwed it up when fighting proposition 8. That's why they are slow to work with and compromise with EQCA. They don't think they were organized or aggressive enough in their strategy; they want it done differently. Most of the post-election rallies and responses were non-EQCA affiliated.
Both sides have their weaknesses and strengths. I think momentum can be recreated in 2012 or 2016, 2020, whenever equal marriage advocates have it together. Obviously no one wants to wait that long; but you can't deny that younger people are more open to full LGBT rights and they will be voting in the place of their grandparents in 10 years. Hopefully we'll end up taking the best from groups that want to be more aggressive and the EQCA which seems to want to play it safer.
*I'm coming off very anti-EQCA but I respect them very much. Mistakes were made.
Thank you, Ariel, for this post. I am a member of Courage Campaign and was a volunteer for EQCA in 2005 while I was in college. These days I am more active in the antiwar movement and I see this a lot - divisions among factions and lack of coordination and coalition building amongst groups working on the same issues. It eats away at a movement's effectiveness and can be frustrating to those working with in it.
I want to point out that the fact the Courage Campaign works on other issues could be a strength - bringing in people who might not normally be drawn into this fight although they probably agree with its principles - that is, IF there was an effective coalition. They can't do it alone. So it is a shame that there is this division.