November 21st, 2009
 

365 Gay: News

Marriage in Maine is down to the wire

, Keen News Service

Less than two weeks away from the vote on Maine’s marriage equality law, things are looking up for marriage equality supporters, but they’re not letting down their guards.

“Nobody’s being cocky, I can tell you that,” said Pat Peard, who has been a leader in many of the LGBT community’s ballot battles in Maine over the past decade.

“Personally, I’m extremely cautiously optimistic,” said Peard. “We have done very well raising money, and we have these endorsements, but the poll numbers mean nothing to me.”

The latest poll, released Tuesday, shows voters evenly split—48 percent to 48 percent, with four percent undecided and a margin of error of +/- 2.9 percent. The firm of Public Policy Polling surveyed 1,130 “likely voters” between October 16 and 19. Prior to that, a poll conducted between September 30 and October 7, showed 51.8 percent of “likely” voters in November would vote “No” on Measure 1, 42.9 percent would vote “Yes,” and less than 6 percent were undecided.

Measure 1 seeks to repeal the state’s newly approved law allowing same-sex couples to obtain marriage licenses the same as straight couples.

The conventional wisdom among pollsters on ballot measures is that, when the “No” votes –against a ballot measure— fall below 50 percent, the proposal loses –at least seven times out of 10.

Del Ali, a pollster with Research 2000 who has surveyed in Maine and other states with anti-gay marriage measures, says the numbers look good for gay civil rights supporters in Maine right now. But he, too, was cautious about relying on the so-called “50 percent rule.”

“On any other ballot measure, there is no question that the ‘No’s’ would win,” said Ali. “But on this issue, it’s hard to say for sure. I think it’s close.”

Opponents of California’s Proposition 8 could toss in a large measure of caution, too. In October 2008, two weeks out from voting, only 47 percent of all voters said they’d support Proposition 8. But then, on November 4, 52 percent did and the measure passed.

Still, the polling numbers in Maine this month are an improvement over last month. In early September, Research 200’s poll of 600 likely voters found “Yes on 1” with a thin lead: 48 percent were ready to vote yes, and 46 percent to vote no, with 6 percent undecided.

That’s the thing about polls: They tell only what the temperature is in the voting pot at that moment; not whether there’s about to be a fire ignited or put out and, thus, change the political temperature dramatically and quickly.

One fire that the “Yes on 1” campaign is now stoking is a television ad –similar to one used for Proposition 8 in California— that warns parents that allowing same-sex marriage will mean that gay marriage and “gay sex” will be forced into the curricula of public schools.

The “Yes on 1” ad most recently hitting the airwaves uses a broadcast from the well-respected National Public Radio to make it’s point.

In the 30-second spot, an NPR reporter says that, four months after gay couples could marry in Massachusetts: “Already, some gay activists are working on a gay friendly curriculum for kindergarten and up.” She talks to a Brookline, Massachusetts, teacher, Deb Allen, who tells her the debate around gay marriage has prompted kids to ask a lot more questions, “like what is gay sex.”

The reporter then says Allen answers the students’ questions “thoroughly and explicitly.”

The television ad shows a Maine teacher listening to the NPR segment then turns to the camera and says, “Vote yes on Measure 1 to prevent this from happening in Maine.”

(The Stand for Marriage website no longer carries the television ad, indicating, “This video is no longer available due to a copyright claim by National Public Radio.” However, it can be viewed on youtube. In the search window, type in “Yes on 1 tv ad” + “give me a break”).

It’s a powerful tactic for the anti-gay marriage side, one that has gotten considerable traction in California and elsewhere. A poll in Maine this month of 401 “likely voters” found it was gaining some traction there, too. The poll showed that 75.6 percent of those prepared to vote “Yes” to repeal the state’s new marriage equality law said they believe the law would require gay marriage to be taught in the public schools. (Of those prepared to vote “No,” only 23.9 percent believed gay marriage would be taught in schools.)

“We knew this was coming,” said Peard, “ and we prepared for it.”

The “Yes on 1” campaign in Maine is being run by the same public relations firm, Shubert Flint, as was the pro-Proposition 8 campaign in California. “So, we knew a lot of the California ads were being recut and used again,” said Peard.

When the “Yes on 1” “gay sex” ads started airing, “No on 1” quickly prepared and rolled out their counter-ads. Those ads, showing a wide variety of family configurations –straight and gay— and urges voters to use their “common sense” — that “Maine schools wouldn’t allow something inappropriate to be taught.”

The ad also highlights an October 17 endorsement for the “No on 1” campaign from the well-respected Bangor Daily News, which called the fears about school curricula “baseless.” And it noted that the Attorney General on October 15 issued a report saying the marriage equality law has “no impact” on school curricula.

The counterpunch was also helped by a youtube message posted October 11 by Belinda Carlisle, former lead singer for the Go-Gos, who asked voters, “as a mom” of a gay son, to reject Measure 1 and donate to “No on 1.”

The Bangor Daily News endorsement said Maine’s new marriage equality has “moved Maine toward tolerance and fairness.”

“Repealing this law,” said the paper, “would move the state backward while denying guaranteed rights to a small minority.” It went a dramatic step further, too –chastising the Roman Catholic Diocese of Portland for attempting “to force its views on all Maine’s residents, whether they are Catholic or not.”

The Diocese is currently the largest funder behind the “Yes on 1” campaign. According to the most recently filed campaign disclosure statements, the Diocese has contributed $634,367 in cash to the campaign –38 percent of the $1.7 million cash raised. The second largest chunk has come for the National Organization for Marriage, which is under investigation for alleged violations of campaign disclosure laws. NOM has reported donating $340,000 –or 20 percent of the “Yes on 1” campaign coffers.

Campaign finance reports show that the “No on 1” campaign has raised significantly more cash: $3,747,646. Its largest contributor is the Equality Maine group and political action committee –which has funneled $924,515 into the campaign, representing 25 percent of “No on 1” cash. The Human Rights Campaign is the second largest contributor to “No on 1,” with $229,347, or 6 percent.

Absentee voting has already begun around the state, and “early voting” –when voters can go to town hall and cast their votes on a voting machine—begins October 26.

“We’re assuming nothing but that this race is going to be a tight race,” said Peard, “and that we’re going to have to do everything in our power to turn out our voters.”

© 2009 Keen News Service


Login or Register to comment.

or Login with Facebook:

  • Scott T. Littlefield Said: October 22nd, 2009 at 10:22 am
    • I think the votes could be there for a win, but turn out will be everything. The liberals do not always turn out for off-year elections and that is what may sink us in the end. The anti-equality churches will have busses to get people to the polls so it is CRITICAL that we ask/beg/prod/cajole all persons liberal on this issue to get to the voting booths on election day. We should be identifying and assisting supporters who may need a ride to their polling locations as well!

  • Gerry Fisher Said: October 22nd, 2009 at 10:01 am
    • IMO, if we lose Maine, it won’t be due to poor organization from pro-marriage-equality forces. From what I’ve seen, they’ve run an excellent campaign.

      It’s *really* *hard* to campaign against fears of what “might” happen should a state get marriage equality. People really need a year or two of experiencing it before they can let go of irrational fears. For example, there’s no way they’ll be able to reverse Iowa, because they can’t attempt to take it away for a year or two…by then, the truth will win out, because they will have had the experience of marriage equality.

  • Gerry Fisher Said: October 22nd, 2009 at 9:57 am
    • I dunno. People tend to poll “I’m cool” and then vote more conservatively. It doesn’t *always* happen that way–we didn’t see that when Deval Patrick was elected as governor here in MA. But it’s often the case.

      Every time it’s been close in the polls, we’ve lost.

      I *hate* that our rights are up for a vote….

  • randy Said: October 21st, 2009 at 7:38 pm
    • “when the No votes –against a ballot measure— fall below 50 percent, the proposal loses –at least seven times out of 10.”

      With math like this, it’s no wonder Bush got elected in 2000.

  • Yukkuri Said: October 21st, 2009 at 6:53 pm
    • I’ve been following this from the start, and I cannot stress how good of a job the No on 1 campaign is doing. Jesse Connolly is doing a GREAT job of managing the campaign. This is not Prop 8, everyone has learned their mistakes from that dilemma.

      Honestly, the best way you can keep up with our movement is to visit blogs. Personally, I frequent Pam’s House Blend (pamshouseblend.com) and they have Mainers covering it on an almost daily basis.

      If you want specifics on how we’re doing this? People are flying in from across the country on ‘volunteer vacations’ to help canvass, phone bank, etc. Several Blenders are doing that, themselves. The ActBlue page donating to No on 1 from PHB is in the top 10 or so contributors, I think.

      Every ad that Yes on 1 has rolled out has been immediately, quickly and succinctly countered by the No on 1 campaign. We have outfunded them by millions of dollars. They are $460,000 in debt right now and we are still going strong.

      The National Organization of Marriage is now being investigated by the Maine Council of Ethics. They are the second largest donor, as stated in this article.

      Catholics are leaving their churches in droves to protest against the Diocese, forming the ‘Catholics for Marriage Equality’. Did I mention that Evanna Lynch, the girl that plays Luna Lovegood in the Harry Potter movies, is coming to Maine on the 23rd to host a concert with the ‘Harry Potter Alliance’, asking ‘What Would Dumbledore Do?’ to support No on 1?

      Just about every major newspaper in Maine has come out with full-fledged, front-page articles pointing out the lies of the Yes on 1 campaign.

      Various legal and psychological associations stationed in Maine have released statements endorsing the No on 1 campaign.

      No on 1 realizes that this is an off-year election, so they’ve been specifically visiting college campuses to speak to the students and phone banking single people- the ones least likely to vote in this situation.

      Seriously- WE CAN WIN THIS. I CANNOT stress how powerful a statement it will be if we, for the first time ever, successfully defend our civil rights. It’ll be a total trifecta- it was approved by the legislature, approved by the executive governor, AND withstood the will of the people!

      And again, one last plug: pamshouseblend.com . Probably the best place you can go to get real, by-the-hour updates on gay-related and political news.

  • audlindal Said: October 21st, 2009 at 6:31 pm
    • Because the polls looked good in California, $$ was raised and endorsements came from news sources, government figures and even celebrities, I thought Prop 8 would be close but would not pass.
      This one scares me to death.

      Please comment on the “get out the vote” efforts that are being organized in Maine. And what are they doing to counter the red herring education commercials?

      We can’t let another group defeat us, deny our basic rights through the use of lies and misrepresentation and fear! especially cloaked in religion and morality…

      I donated and now I’m holding my breath and hoping for all of you.

      Could someone post addresses of places we can write? Op/ed letters, letters to the ed, etc.? Is there something we can do from the midwest to support the fight in Maine?

  • DaveW Said: October 21st, 2009 at 3:47 pm
    • Roberto Cucina: I would happily get involved with your national movement. Please advise. I’ve been doing this with my own phone and computer for years.

      However, I need to clarify, as you say, they cannot endorse candidates or tell their flock who to vote for if they want to remain tax exempt.

      But you say they cross that line every time an equality issue comes up. I don’t see how, they are issue advocating, not candidate advocating. This is ok by IRS rules.

      It is a very important distinction, because if we are going to use tax exemption as a stick, we need to change the law so they can’t do issue advocacy either. I happen to think that is very, very difficult. If they give a Leviticus sermon, or they advocating for a yes on 1 vote for example?

  • AndreasLights Said: October 21st, 2009 at 12:54 pm
    • The issue of school curricula is a red herring: Equal rights for all citizens SHOULD be axiomatic or “given” and not open for discussion.

      Gay people exist, as we know, and children will ask questions. It is better to develop age-appropriate responses to real questions students may ask than to leave it up to teachers to decide how deeply to delve or how accepting to be.

      Marriage equality exists, regardless of Maine’s unconstitutional use of the referendum process or the result either way. So why wouldn’t teachers answer children’s questions about this or any other subject?

      This exact same discussion, by the way, came up in the 1980s over HIV education.

  • Robert Katz Said: October 21st, 2009 at 12:52 pm
    • It might have been helpful to point out that the reason the most recent “Yes on 1″ ad no longer appears is that NPR filed a “cease and desist” order to prevent their footage being used in the campaign.

  • Kari Said: October 21st, 2009 at 11:10 am
    • robertocucina: All citizens are allowed to stand as candidates in elections, their affiliations to any particular groups notwithstanding.

      If it were any other way, our status as a republic would be fully and unambiguously compromised.

  • Doug Hubbard Said: October 21st, 2009 at 10:38 am
  • robertocucina Said: October 21st, 2009 at 10:22 am
    • Actually, its not illegal for a tax exempt religious cult to lobby, they cross the line when they publicly endorse a candidate and telling their parishioners who to vote for. Its a fine line but they cross it every time an equality issue is up for a vote. I’ve been advocating for a national movement with straight allies on board to force the IRS to remove tax exemption from any cult meddling in the political process.

      Another thing, I don’t think a religious leader should be running for local mayoral elections or in any election for that matter. Yet its allowed. It proves there is NO separation of church and state.

  • DaveW Said: October 21st, 2009 at 10:06 am
    • Hi JB, I’ve been lobbying against the catholic cult for years. I’m connected to Mass and Maine and have called both bishops directly. Google the archdiocese and find the contact info on their official web site. Call to say you are reporting them to the IRS and that their unchristian behaviour is not only going to be judged by the court of public opinion, they will likely be denied the salvation they so earnestly want for having lied to people, spread hate and ignored Jesus’ message of compassion.

      Be polite but firm. You will likely be giving this information to a secretary who has heard it all before. They’ve always been professional with me.

      Then hang up and call the IRS tax fraud tip line, easy to find at irs.gov. Tell them you would like to report illegal political activity by a tax exempt religious organization. They’ll ask for details and eventually for who you are reporting…give the name of the archbishop and the diocese of Portland.

      To be clear, the church has broken no laws. The law is very grey on this but due to court decisions it is fairly clear they can advocate for issues but not individual candidates.

      You can ignore the fact that you know this. Just get them reported so the IRS hears complaints increasing.

      Then call your congressperson and senators and demand they change the tax exemption law to exclude ALL political activity.

      Anyone in CA call Pete Stark, the only out atheist we have. He should sponsor such a bill. There are many, many more atheists in congress but only one has outed himself. You never know if you are talking to a rationalist or not, so give it a try!

  • jb Said: October 21st, 2009 at 9:48 am
    • Who do we contact and lobby to have the Catholic Church no longer declared a tax-free, tax deductable organization?? They have done more than almost any single group to harm us – all while enjoying a tax exempt status. I thought the law prevented them from such meddling. Can we start a petition drive? Contacting our Senators and Representatives won’t do any good, none of them are going to take on the Catholic Church. It’s up to us, but please, someone, tell me how!!!

  • Kari Said: October 21st, 2009 at 9:20 am
    • If we assume referendum voting behavior is the same as amendment voting behavior, the probability of Prop. 1 passing should only be around 27%.

      It’s not a sure thing, but probability is on our side.

 
Login

Register
Lost your password?


or Login with Facebook