CalComUI Memorandum - Same Sex Marriage - We Still Need A Different Strategy
From: California Communities United Institute - Boyce Hinman <[url]b.hinman@calcomui.org[/url]>
Fri, Dec 11, 2009

California Communities United Institute
Advocacy With A Heart
Justice Commentary

Same Sex Marriage - We Still Need A Different Strategy

Bruce Hinman recently published the following commentary on our web site as a blog. If you like, you can respond to it by going to the web site at: http://www.calcomui.org and then clicking on "Blogs" on the left side of the home page.

Recently I got an E-mail from a respected LGBTI organization which outlined their strategy for winning the battle on same sex marriage in California. They work very hard on behalf of the LGBTI community and have earned the right to our respect. But, with all due respect, their strategy is deeply flawed. After more than 30 losses at the ballot box nationwide, they and we need to go back to the drawing board and create a better strategy.

Here is what they said. "How are we going to win marriage back in California? "We'll win when enough people get to hear our stories.And until everyone knows our stories, we will organize door-to-door canvasses and phone banks with our great volunteers, we'll testify in front of legislators demanding legal equality, we'll endorse fair-minded folks to help get them elected to office, and we'll speak up in court so that justice is served."

So what is wrong with that strategy?

First of all, the ban on same sex marriage has been written into California's constitution. The only way to eliminate the ban is to re-amend the constitution. And only the voters can do that, either by approving a new initiative to end the ban, or by approving the holding of a constitutional convention to amend the constitution.

As a result, we can elect as many friendly legislators and Governors as we like, and we can testify before as many legislative committees as we like. But, if we don't change the minds of the voters, all of that will be wasted effort.

It's also of no use to speak up in state courts. They are powerless to overturn Proposition 8, because our state's Supreme Court says it is valid. We could go to the federal courts (someone already has) urging them to rule that Proposition 8 violates the US constitution. But, even if we were to win in the lower US courts, our opponents would likely appeal to the US Supreme Court. Given the justices now sitting in that court, they are unlikely to rule against Proposition 8. They might even issue a ruling making things worse.

With respect, I think there is no use in doing phone banking or door to door canvassing at this time either. First we must do some very fundamental research to find out exactly why the voters oppose same sex marriage. And we need to find and test market messages to find the ones that will, in fact, change the minds of those who currently oppose us on the issue. We'll probably need to design and test market several messages because different groups have different reasons for opposing same sex marriage.

We can do phone calling and canvassing till the cows come home. But if we say the same things we have been saying in the 30 plus marriage equality votes we lost, we are wasting our time.

And frankly, I think door-to-door canvassing and phone banking are poor tools to use on this issue. I did at least 40 hours of phone banking for the No on 8 campaign, using the scripts I was given. And I don't think I changed the mind of a single person I called.

Actually, I'm usually annoyed when I get canvassing calls when I'm trying to relax at home. The call is an unwelcome interruption. Don't you feel that way? And I really hate it when someone comes to my door to persuade me of something. In fact, I rarely even open the door when that happens. I think most people react that way. We need to find other, less invasive ways to get our message across.

One of the most effective alternative methods is to be fully and joyfully out with our family, friends, and co-workers. I worked for the state for 22 years. In 1980 the state transferred me from a job in Oakland to one in Sacramento. They promised to cover all my relocation expenses including the cost moving my furniture and even the cost of selling my old home and buying a new one. When they found that my partner, Larry, was on the deed to both homes they cut my reimbursement in half. I appealed that decision and won.

Later, in 1982, when the state refused to put Larry on my employer provided health insurance, I sued them in court. I lost. But I was very open about all this with all of my co-workers. Many of them were cheering me on. I am sure many, who had been anti-gay at first, changed there minds. They knew me. They liked me. And they realized that I was as good as anyone else and deserved all the rights that anyone else had.

Please know I am absolutely not saying we should just give up. Just the opposite. We have a lot of work to do. We need to begin with the basic research needed to create an EFFECTIVE strategy. And the sooner we start, the sooner we will get the right to marry. I hope soon the E-mail messages we get will be asking for support of organizations doing the essential research needed to build an effective strategy.

Boyce Hinman

California Communities United Institute