The Marriage Myth: Why Democrats still run scared on gay issues
By KERRY ELEVELD
New York Blade
Jun. 26, 2006
The anti-gay Marriage Protection Amendment (MPA) was defeated handily in the U.S. Senate earlier this month. Senator Lindsay Graham (R-SC) has said that gay marriage is not going to be a "magic bullet" for Republicans in the upcoming elections. Polling across the country suggests that opposition to same-sex marriage is steadily decreasing, and yet the Democratic party still treats any gay-related issue like a hot potato.
Though several U.S. senators spoke eloquently about LGBT people and discrimination during the MPA floor debates, most senators simply argued that the Senate had more important issues to focus on. Both New York Senators Hillary Clinton and Charles Schumer sidestepped the debate entirely, choosing not to speak at all.
"I continue to feel that Democrats are being frightened mistakenly,"
said Ethan Geto, a Democratic political consultant and president of Geto & de Milly. Politicians misread the same-sex marriage controversy of the 2004 elections, said Geto, "and people got very scared to touch anything gay politically."
He has been circulating a white paper among leaders of the Democratic party—including Sen. Clinton and DNC Chairman Howard Dean—that argues that Sen. John Kerry did not lose the election to gay marriage and that voters never equated "moral values" with LGBT issues.
"The whole moral values thing was completely misinterpreted by the news media in 2004. What moral values meant to most voters was compassion and taking care of the poor, not all this anti-gay stuff," Geto said.
"It's pretty irrefutable when you really look at the data and the statistics."
Geto's white paper cited a post-election Zogby International poll that asked voters, "Which moral issue most influenced your vote?"
The paper noted, "Gay marriage came in a distant last, with a 9 percent response; nearly five times as many people (42 percent) cited the Iraq war. Among Catholics, only 11 percent chose gay marriage, while nearly six times as many people chose "poverty" or "greed," which tied for first with 31 percent each."
Analysis of state voting patterns also indicated that gay marriage didn't hurt John Kerry, and he actually did better in states with same-sex marriage referenda on the ballot.
Geto wrote, "Only two of the states Gore won in 2000 (New Mexico and
Iowa) switched to Bush in 2004, and neither of these states had a gay marriage question on the ballot. But three key swing states (Michigan, Ohio and Oregon) did have gay marriage proposals on the ballot–and John Kerry outperformed Gore in all three."
Sen. Kerry won both Oregon and Michigan in the 2004 election. Though he lost Ohio to President Bush, Kerry came two points closer to winning it than Gore had in 2000.
Getting Clear
Empire State Pride Agenda executive director Alan Van Capelle said that gays and lesbians have to work harder to beat back the myth that Kerry lost on LGBT issues.
"Gay marriage is not why John Kerry lost the 2004 elections. Having six positions on the war in Iraq is why John Kerry lost the election," Van Capelle said.
A Pew Research Center Poll from October of 2004 centered on Kerry's lack of decisiveness: "Of the criticisms lodged against Kerry, the 'flip-flop' charge has the greatest impact. Nearly a third of swing voters (32 percent)—and 37 percent of all voters—say hearing this criticism makes them less likely to vote for Kerry."
Matt Foreman, executive director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, noted that Kerry's message on same-sex marriage was also muddled. "I couldn't understand John Kerry's position on marriage equality, and I follow this stuff pretty closely," he said.
Which speaks to a bigger issue. "The Democratic party needs to develop a coherent and compelling message around LGBT equality and start speaking that message clearly, authentically and fearlessly," said Foreman, adding, "I say this because it's in the Democratic party's best interests."
Foreman said the candidacy of George W. Bush proves that speaking to a party's base gives candidates an edge. "George Bush became more right than John McCain," he said.
Perhaps even more confounding than the fact that the Democratic party has misread the "values" debate of the 2004 election, is that it's not clear how sidelining gay issues helps woo new votes. Same-sex marriage is not an issue that wins over swing voters.
"People conflate different things," Foreman said. "Marriage is not an issue that moves the movable. The people who feel so strongly against marriage are already way on the right. They are never going to move toward the Democrats, period. The people in the middle—marriage equality does not register with them on any scale taken."
The risks outweigh the benefits. On this point, ESPA's Van Capelle is unequivocal.
"The Democratic party can go on the 700 Club and they can talk to Jerry Falwell and they can do all these things to court the conservative vote, and they will never be conservative enough to win their support,"
Van Capelle said.
"But in doing so," he added, "they will alienate and isolate a group of LGBT voters who otherwise would have been out in the streets and writing checks for them and hosting house parties for them, etc."
It takes an election
Geto said that the LGBT community gives an enormous amount of money to candidates, disproportionate to its numbers in society.
"Gay people can clearly help make a national candidacy," he said, pointing to the fact gays and lesbians helped launch Howard Dean's 2004 presidential campaign. Dean received strong LGBT support because he signed civil unions into law in Vermont.
"The gay community with every single year has become more sophisticated in its political giving, in its strategizing, and I think we will see more of a payoff, particularly if we can get at least one house back with the Democrats this fall," said Geto.
And as gay giving gets more sophisticated, appealing candidates are also getting more plentiful. "When Howard Dean did civil unions in Vermont it was considered radical, revolutionary. Now, it's ho-hum,"
Geto said.
Van Capelle noted that civil unions even became the fallback position for President Bush after the 2004 elections.
"I'm sure that there were people at one point who said, 'We don't have to be terrific on queer issues because where is the queer community going to go but if not the Democratic party,'" said Van Capelle. "We are now learning from Sen. Russ Feingold that there are choices within the Democratic party—that there are Democrats who are standing up for marriage equality in a big and forceful way."
Sen. Feingold made strong pro-LGBT statements during the MPA debate and came out in support of legalizing same-sex marriage earlier this year.
Geto bemoaned the fact that politicians aren't more visionary, but said they will likely fall in step as voter behavior leads the way. He said a recent massive public opinion poll shows "overwhelming support" for repealing "Don't ask, don't tell," and that the majority of Americans support a national gay civil rights bill as well as some form of civil unions or domestic partnerships.
"The electorate has sent the signal to politicians, 'Go ahead and do it, we'll either not care or we'll say it's a plus,'" said Geto, referring to lending supportive for LGBT rights.
In the next few years, he believes, the Russ Feingolds of the world are going to become the center of the Democratic party rather than the outliers. "I am absolutely persuaded," said Geto.
New York Blade
Jun. 26, 2006
The anti-gay Marriage Protection Amendment (MPA) was defeated handily in the U.S. Senate earlier this month. Senator Lindsay Graham (R-SC) has said that gay marriage is not going to be a "magic bullet" for Republicans in the upcoming elections. Polling across the country suggests that opposition to same-sex marriage is steadily decreasing, and yet the Democratic party still treats any gay-related issue like a hot potato.
Though several U.S. senators spoke eloquently about LGBT people and discrimination during the MPA floor debates, most senators simply argued that the Senate had more important issues to focus on. Both New York Senators Hillary Clinton and Charles Schumer sidestepped the debate entirely, choosing not to speak at all.
"I continue to feel that Democrats are being frightened mistakenly,"
said Ethan Geto, a Democratic political consultant and president of Geto & de Milly. Politicians misread the same-sex marriage controversy of the 2004 elections, said Geto, "and people got very scared to touch anything gay politically."
He has been circulating a white paper among leaders of the Democratic party—including Sen. Clinton and DNC Chairman Howard Dean—that argues that Sen. John Kerry did not lose the election to gay marriage and that voters never equated "moral values" with LGBT issues.
"The whole moral values thing was completely misinterpreted by the news media in 2004. What moral values meant to most voters was compassion and taking care of the poor, not all this anti-gay stuff," Geto said.
"It's pretty irrefutable when you really look at the data and the statistics."
Geto's white paper cited a post-election Zogby International poll that asked voters, "Which moral issue most influenced your vote?"
The paper noted, "Gay marriage came in a distant last, with a 9 percent response; nearly five times as many people (42 percent) cited the Iraq war. Among Catholics, only 11 percent chose gay marriage, while nearly six times as many people chose "poverty" or "greed," which tied for first with 31 percent each."
Analysis of state voting patterns also indicated that gay marriage didn't hurt John Kerry, and he actually did better in states with same-sex marriage referenda on the ballot.
Geto wrote, "Only two of the states Gore won in 2000 (New Mexico and
Iowa) switched to Bush in 2004, and neither of these states had a gay marriage question on the ballot. But three key swing states (Michigan, Ohio and Oregon) did have gay marriage proposals on the ballot–and John Kerry outperformed Gore in all three."
Sen. Kerry won both Oregon and Michigan in the 2004 election. Though he lost Ohio to President Bush, Kerry came two points closer to winning it than Gore had in 2000.
Getting Clear
Empire State Pride Agenda executive director Alan Van Capelle said that gays and lesbians have to work harder to beat back the myth that Kerry lost on LGBT issues.
"Gay marriage is not why John Kerry lost the 2004 elections. Having six positions on the war in Iraq is why John Kerry lost the election," Van Capelle said.
A Pew Research Center Poll from October of 2004 centered on Kerry's lack of decisiveness: "Of the criticisms lodged against Kerry, the 'flip-flop' charge has the greatest impact. Nearly a third of swing voters (32 percent)—and 37 percent of all voters—say hearing this criticism makes them less likely to vote for Kerry."
Matt Foreman, executive director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, noted that Kerry's message on same-sex marriage was also muddled. "I couldn't understand John Kerry's position on marriage equality, and I follow this stuff pretty closely," he said.
Which speaks to a bigger issue. "The Democratic party needs to develop a coherent and compelling message around LGBT equality and start speaking that message clearly, authentically and fearlessly," said Foreman, adding, "I say this because it's in the Democratic party's best interests."
Foreman said the candidacy of George W. Bush proves that speaking to a party's base gives candidates an edge. "George Bush became more right than John McCain," he said.
Perhaps even more confounding than the fact that the Democratic party has misread the "values" debate of the 2004 election, is that it's not clear how sidelining gay issues helps woo new votes. Same-sex marriage is not an issue that wins over swing voters.
"People conflate different things," Foreman said. "Marriage is not an issue that moves the movable. The people who feel so strongly against marriage are already way on the right. They are never going to move toward the Democrats, period. The people in the middle—marriage equality does not register with them on any scale taken."
The risks outweigh the benefits. On this point, ESPA's Van Capelle is unequivocal.
"The Democratic party can go on the 700 Club and they can talk to Jerry Falwell and they can do all these things to court the conservative vote, and they will never be conservative enough to win their support,"
Van Capelle said.
"But in doing so," he added, "they will alienate and isolate a group of LGBT voters who otherwise would have been out in the streets and writing checks for them and hosting house parties for them, etc."
It takes an election
Geto said that the LGBT community gives an enormous amount of money to candidates, disproportionate to its numbers in society.
"Gay people can clearly help make a national candidacy," he said, pointing to the fact gays and lesbians helped launch Howard Dean's 2004 presidential campaign. Dean received strong LGBT support because he signed civil unions into law in Vermont.
"The gay community with every single year has become more sophisticated in its political giving, in its strategizing, and I think we will see more of a payoff, particularly if we can get at least one house back with the Democrats this fall," said Geto.
And as gay giving gets more sophisticated, appealing candidates are also getting more plentiful. "When Howard Dean did civil unions in Vermont it was considered radical, revolutionary. Now, it's ho-hum,"
Geto said.
Van Capelle noted that civil unions even became the fallback position for President Bush after the 2004 elections.
"I'm sure that there were people at one point who said, 'We don't have to be terrific on queer issues because where is the queer community going to go but if not the Democratic party,'" said Van Capelle. "We are now learning from Sen. Russ Feingold that there are choices within the Democratic party—that there are Democrats who are standing up for marriage equality in a big and forceful way."
Sen. Feingold made strong pro-LGBT statements during the MPA debate and came out in support of legalizing same-sex marriage earlier this year.
Geto bemoaned the fact that politicians aren't more visionary, but said they will likely fall in step as voter behavior leads the way. He said a recent massive public opinion poll shows "overwhelming support" for repealing "Don't ask, don't tell," and that the majority of Americans support a national gay civil rights bill as well as some form of civil unions or domestic partnerships.
"The electorate has sent the signal to politicians, 'Go ahead and do it, we'll either not care or we'll say it's a plus,'" said Geto, referring to lending supportive for LGBT rights.
In the next few years, he believes, the Russ Feingolds of the world are going to become the center of the Democratic party rather than the outliers. "I am absolutely persuaded," said Geto.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home