(Good work, Larry! – promoted by Brian Leubitz)

Larry Handerhan is an employee of the California Democratic Party who runs Chairman Art Torres’s San Francisco office. This weekend, he and some friends decided that it was time to take the fight for equality to Sacramento. Larry wanted to share his experiences from the weekend, and we thought the folks at Calitics would be interested.

By Monday, April 21st, organizers of a discriminatory anti-marriage initiative must submit enough valid signatures to qualify for the November ballot. By most reports, they are within reach of that goal.

That was sufficient motivation for me and three fellow members of the San Francisco based Alice B. Toklas Democratic Club to brave I-80 early Saturday morning and join Equality for All’s “Decline to Sign” Campaign in Sacramento.

L to R: Larry and his friends, David, Jason and Cecilia

Upon arrival at the SEIU-UHW Union Hall in Midtown, we were greeted by strong coffee and enthusiastic organizers. As volunteers filled up the seats in advance our 10 AM training, an Equality for All Staffer proudly acknowledged that this was their first “standing room only” training session.

Introductions established that our group – 40 strong – hailed from all across Northern California. They included GLBT parents, straight allies, Sacramento activists, a young couple ready for marriage, and the President of a South Bay PFLAG Chapter and her husband – “the other half of a lesbian parent.”  

Most impressively, nearly half of the group was affiliated with a church congregation – highlighting the deep GLBT support in California religious communities that is often underappreciated.

Each volunteer cited different personal and political motivations for their attendance, but everyone agreed stopping the ballot initiative now would allow activists and community leaders to focus on the myriad of other challenges facing California in the upcoming months.

Our Trainer Kelly – an eight-year field organizing veteran – explained our plan: stop paid signature gatherers from collecting names and identify supporters by having them sign an equality pledge. She emphasized the importance of working as a team and not engaging our opponents. The 45 minute training was one of the most organized I have attended, and I felt very prepared to tackle my turf: the Wal-Mart in Roseville, CA.

My group of six had only positive experiences with community members despite the conservative slant of Roseville’s Saturday afternoon Wal-Mart patrons. One woman explained her son was gay, while another signed our pledge despite disapproving looks from her husband. About fifty percent of those who stopped signed, and many others alluded to their support even if they were hesitant to put their name on it. It was a successful exercise in grassroots field work, hampered only by a disapproving Republican registering voters at the same location.

At the afternoon Debrief, we learned that our shift secured 863 “decline to sign” pledges, recruited 21 new volunteers, and ran off 4 paid-signature gatherers. Those numbers – coupled with the hundreds of additional people we engaged in dialogue and the camaraderie facilitated between volunteers – make me confident in our chances come Monday.

There are 6 days left; what are you waiting for?

Penny

Online Organizing Director

California Democratic Party

Speaking on behalf of John McCain, our our Governor dropped a bombshell:

California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger says that if an initiative to ban gay marriage qualifies for the November ballot, he’s prepared to fight it.

[…]

Schwarzenegger said he was confident a ban would never pass in California and called the effort “a waste of time.”

Welcome aboard, Governor.

UPDATE (by Dave): The LAT has this too.  Notice of course who he was speaking to.

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger says if an initiative to ban gay marriage qualifies for the November ballot, he’s prepared to fight it.

California’s governor was in San Diego today speaking at the annual convention of the Log Cabin Republicans, the nation’s largest gay Republican group.

Schwarzenegger said he was confident that a ban would never pass in California but called the effort “a waste of time” — joking that he wished activists would focus on allowing naturalized citizens to run for president instead.

Arnold, of course, has vetoed bills legalizing gay marriage on two occasions.  

(Decline to sign. – promoted by Brian Leubitz)

It’s becoming predictable every election season. California’s anti-gay groups are attempting to put a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage on the November ballot. They presume Californians will agree with them and flock to the polls, erasing years of progress.

My hope is this November California voters will be galvanized and electrified by a sense of hope for the future, not limiting it. That’s why I am STRONGLY supporting the “Decline to Sign” campaign fighting to keep the same-sex marriage initiative off the ballot. Whether or not they succeed, California voters will be put on notice that this potential ban would write discrimination into the state’s Constitution.

It’s certainly not lost on most voters that the anti-gay marriage initiative is also a shameless tactic used by Republicans before to get voters to the polls. Recently, Arizona voters saw they were being played for fools by the Republicans and defeated a similar same-sex marriage ban.

It’s becoming predictable every election season. California’s anti-gay groups are attempting to put a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage on the November ballot. They presume Californians will agree with them and flock to the polls, erasing years of progress.

My hope is this November California voters will be galvanized and electrified by a sense of hope for the future, not limiting it. That’s why I am STRONGLY supporting the “Decline to Sign” campaign fighting to keep the same-sex marriage initiative off the ballot. Whether or not they succeed, California voters will be put on notice that this potential ban would write discrimination into the state’s Constitution.

It’s certainly not lost on most voters that the anti-gay marriage initiative is also a shameless tactic used by Republicans before to get voters to the polls. Recently, Arizona voters saw they were being played for fools by the Republicans and defeated a similar same-sex marriage ban.

The proposed constitutional amendment specifies that only marriage between a man and a woman be valid or recognized in California. The arguments by anti-gay groups are glaringly weak.

I have always supported same-sex marriage because I believe in a person’s civil rights, the United States Constitution and separation of Church and State. This country is not based on one faith or one moral code. Race, sex, religion and sexual orientation must never affect our civil rights. We all have equal rights under the law.

In March 2005 a Superior Court judge in San Francisco ruled that the law denying same-sex marriage was unconstitutional. The state appealed and the California Court of Appeals in a split decision overturned the ruling. It was then appealed to the California Supreme Court. In March the justices heard arguments in the case and a decision is expected in the next three months. I believe the California Supreme Court will rule that the equal-protection clauses of the state’s Constitution trumps the state law defining marriage as being between one man and one woman.

Throughout this legal wrangling, the California Legislature also passed several bills allowing same-sex marriage but they were vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger. I have been a co-author on each of them and am proud to be part of that history-making moment.

Same-sex couples are as likely as straight couples to live healthy, happy, productive lives and provide a good environment to raise children. The arguments offered by opponents to equal rights are retreads of the rhetoric used about Catholics marrying Protestants or Protestants marrying someone of the Jewish faith. We should remember that it wasn’t too long ago that California state law prohibited interracial marriage.

The proposed measure has yet to qualify for the ballot and we as Californians have the ability to stop it. If anyone asks you to sign a petition to “protect marriage” tell them no.

And frankly it should go without saying, but if anyone asks you or your friends to sign a petition to qualify something, anything for the ballot, make sure you read it first. I know that sounds obvious, but you would be amazed at the number of people I talk to or see signing petitions without first reading what they are signing.

California is the most progressive, innovative state in the nation and I refuse to go anywhere but forward on this civil rights issue.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    

Coming soon to a ballot near you: A constitutional amendment banning marriage equality. Duh-duh-duh.

Every month for the last year or so, the hateful groups of California send Jerry Brown an initiative (PDF). Among this group, Randy Thommason, of the intolerant, anti-gay, and totally inaccurately named group Campaign for Children & Families, seems to be the leader.  But don’t forget about Sen Dennis Hollingsworth, who pretends to serve the 36th Senate district, is among the proponents of the initiative. And finally, Gail Knight, wife of the late Pete Knight who authored Prop 22 is also amongst the group. Incidentally, Pete’s son David Knight was married to his husband in the San Francisco marriages in 2004.

They’ve been waiting for the iron to get hot enough to strike. In other words, they need something to catalyze fundraising. With the recent marriage hearings, it appears they have found their go-time.  Before December 31, 2007, the proponents had only raised about $44,000, nowhere near enough to qualify the initiative.  Since that time, they have raised over $1.1 million in Late $5000+ contributions alone. While that amount of money does not guarantee ballot access, $2 million almost certainly does.

Equality for All is organizing a “Decline to Sign” campaign, and I have nothing but respect for the effort. However, we have to face the facts that this initiative is almost certain to get on the ballot with that sum of money. It seems the battle has been set for November 2008. Given that we very may well get a positive ruling on the marriage cases at the CA Supreme Court, we would be losing some very real rights.

In the coming days and weeks, Calitics will begin focusing on this initiative. We may ask for your help on this in a variety of ways, but keep your eyes open. This attack must be rebuffed in November, and that will require elected leaders, grassroots activists, and people who just care about their LGBT friends and neighbors to do everything they can to do from now until November 4.  

Immediately after the 2004 presidential election results came in many political analysts floated the notion that the Massachusetts Supreme Court ruling that required the state to enact marriage equality was responsible for George Bush’s re-election.  The hypothesis was that the anti-marriage equality initiatives on the ballot energized the right to turnout and they helped push Bush over the top.  That theory was roundly rejected by the actual exit polling data.  Unfortunately that myth still lives on and is influencing political analysis to this day.  Today it appeared in Peter Schrag’s column in the Bee, which was picked up by Boi from Troy and subsequently linked by Marc Ambinder in the Atlantic.

Given its hot-button nature in an election season, there must be a lot of Democrats, from the presidential candidates down, who are hoping that the court follows Jerry Brown’s pleadings. To this day, a lot of people believe that the 2003 decision of the Massachusetts Supreme Court striking down that state’s ban on same-sex marriages was a major factor in the defeat of John Kerry in the 2004 presidential election.

Schrag really needs a phrase in there that recognizes that while people continue to believe that myth, it has been disproved.  It is something the bloggers, particularly kos harped about, but did not make it very far into the mainstream, despite the numerical evidence.

In that decision, the Massachusetts court held that that “the right to marry means little if it does not include the right to marry the person of one’s choice.”

The ban, the court found, “works a deep and scarring hardship” on same-sex families “for no rational reason.”

The backlash to a similar California ruling would make the reaction to the Massachusetts ruling seem mild.

Why?  Why would California’s reaction be any larger than Massachusetts?  The state’s electorate has been moving slowly toward support for marriage equality.  I suspect that a poll conducted now would show opposition below 50%.  The voters in this state are more likely to support marriage equality now than at any point in the past.  There has been a great deal of positive movement in the past few years, particularly as the Milenials come of voting age.

If indeed the court does rule that the state constitution requires that all persons be treated equally, then we will see an attempt by the right-wing to put an initiative on the ballot to amend the constitution in a way that the Courts cannot overrule.  That would be a big huge fight.  However, if 2004 is any guide, it would not effect the presidential election in any measurable way.

XPosted 2/14/2008 12:00 AM PST on MyDesert.com

Sen. John McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee for President has little to say about the rights of the LGBT community or its issues on his campaign website at JohnMcCain.com.

Under the link “Human Dignity & the Sancitity of Life,” McCain lists (1) Overturning Roe V. Wade, (2) Promoting Adoption, (3) Protecting Marriage, (4) Addressing the Moral Concerns of Advanced Technology, (5) Protecting Children from Online Predators, and (6) the Greatest Concern is to Serve the Cause of Human Dignity.  As you might guess from the above headings, McCain and his campaign is pandering to the so-called Religious Right community.

More below the flip…

More specifically, according to About.com: Gay Life, McCain has a spotty record at best on the LGBT issues themselves.

(1)  McCain on Gay Marriage: McCain opposes Marriage Equality, but believes the issue should be left up to the states.  McCain voted against the Federal Marriage Amendment, but according to McCain’s campaign website,

“[He] believes the institution of marriage is a union between one man and one woman. It is only this definition that sufficiently recognizes the vital and unique role played by mothers and fathers in the raising of children, and the role of the family in shaping, stabilizing, and strengthening communities and our nation.”

I am guessing that in the case of Marriage Equality, McCain does extend his greatest concern to serve the cause of LGBT dignity or, perhaps, does not include the LGBT community within the context of the Human community.

(2) McCain on Gays and Lesbians in the Military: McCain believes the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy has been effective and should be left untouched.  At the 2007 GOP debate at Saint Anselm College on Jun 3, 2007, McCain said,

“We have the best-trained, most professional, best- equipped, most efficient, most wonderful military in the history of this country, and I’m proud of every one of them. There just aren’t enough of them. So I think it would be a terrific mistake to even reopen the issue. The policy is working. And I am convinced that that’s the way we can maintain this greatest military. Let’s not tamper with them.”

How is including LGBT community members in the Armed Forces “tampering” with the military?  McCain fails to explicate his position or clarify his terminology.

Allowing LGBT community members to serve openly in the U.S. military is a matter of Human Dignity, and McCain refuses to accord respect to the LGBT community in a fashion similar to that accorded to the heterosexual community in the military.  McCain also does not address the fact that the U.S. military loses millions of dollars of tax payer money each year in attempts to enforse the DADT policies.

McCain fails to address the fact that many Arabic-English and English-Arabic translators are discharged from the U.S. military each year due to DADT.  Finally, the United States is one of the few Western countries to disallow LGBT members from serving in the its Armed Forces, yet, the military leadership is coming around to a more progressive perspective.

McCain on Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA): McCain voted against ENDA and prohibiting job discrimination based upon sexual orientation.

McCain on Federal Hate Crimes Legislation: While in the Senate, McCain voted against extending the definition of hate crimes to include sexual orientation and opposed the so-called Matthew Shepard bill on the floor of the U.S. Senate.

McCain on HIV/AIDS: McCain’s stance on HIV/AIDS is ambiguous at best. When asked in the New York Times political blog McCain Stumbles on H.I.V. Prevention about the use of contraceptives or counseling to help prevent the spread of HIV and AIDS, McCain said,

“You’ve stumped me. I’m not informed enough on it. Let me find out. You know, I’m sure I’ve taken a position on it on the past. I have to find out what my position was.”

“You’ve stumped me?”  “I’m not informed enough on it?”  “I have to find out what my position was?”  The United States, California and the Coachella Valley have been ravaged by HIV/AIDS, and McCain is either uninformed or incompetent on the issue.

How can a World Leader be unaware of the impact of HIV/AIDS on the Nation?  Oh, I forgot, the Republican Party has a long history of neglect on the people affected by and infected with HIV/AIDS from former President Ronald Reagan who refused to utter the words “HIV” or “AIDS” throughout most of his Presidency, to President George H.W. Bush and so-called President George W. Bush who attempted to either reduce funding for HIV/AIDS, attempted to pit the HIV/AIDS community against other chronic illness communities, or attempted to gut HIV/AIDS programs in this country.

McCain is more of the same.  Ignorant, ill-informed, AIDS-phobic, and incompetent on the issue.

So, it’s Valentine’s Day, and the CDP is doing a push to send SoS Debra Bowen a “kiss” for the occasion. Any other thoughts about who else deserves such an honor?

I have some thoughts on who doesn’t. Every now and again in my inbox I receive press releases from groups which are pretty anti-progressive. I trash them and move on usually. But today I got one attacking my relationship, on Valentine’s Day, yet! So, who is this grinch? Well, I give you the so-called Institute on Religion and Democracy, ie people who think they are holier than thou. I won’t include any of their press release or the link, but suffice it to say that they are opposed to churches acknowledging same-sex relationships at all.  So, to spite them, how about everbyody click through on the ad to the right for Equality California’s Let California Ring campaign.

Any other thoughts, say on the Calderon flower campaign or the Planned Parenthood condom drop on the legislature?

Yesterday, I interviewed San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom. We spent a lot of time talking about health care in San Francisco, the state, and the nation. We moved on to marriage equality, livability issues, and the election.

On health care, the Mayor made the announcement that 10,000 people have now signed up for Healthy San Francisco. (By the way, that’s a Calitics exclusive, until it’s not) Healthy San Francisco is an innovative single payer lite program built by the Mayor and Supervisor Tom Ammiano. It brings the focus back onto preventive care rather than constantly chasing our tails on acute care. We discussed ABx1 and the hope that we can salvage some of the good parts of that bill. Of course, ABx1 is similar to Senator Clinton’s plan, so we took some time to discuss that as well.

On marriage, the Mayor came out swinging. I was prepared to tease the 2004 post-election finger-pointing out, but he came right out with it. And added that separate but equal, is just not equal. We’ve moved a tremendous distance since 2004 even, when President Bill Clinton told Howard Dean that he had disqualified himself from being president simply for passing civil unions, to where we are now where civil unions are a consensus viewpoint. The tide of history is moving quickly.

There’s plenty more on transportation, violence in the City, and affordable housing. At the end you’ll see my attempt to try to get him to talk about his electoral future. No luck on that one. But one thing is clear, Mayor Newsom is trying to position himself as a progressive champion of the California party. While he’s sure to find some resistance here in the City (and there’s plenty), he’s saying the right things and voicing the right opinions to move himself to the left edge amongst such prominent politicians in the state.

At the Google Video page, you can download a video for your iPod or other mobile device.

“LGBT Americans are entitled to equal respect and dignity under our laws. Discrimination is morally wrong. All Americans should have the same freedoms and the same responsibilities.”

— John Edwards

John Edwards has been a consistent supporter of the LGBT community, unlike most of the other candidates.  And, as we know, Elizabeth Edwards is an even bigger supporter.

Edwards supports the same rights, benefits, and responsibilities for LGBT couples and supports the repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act which was enacted under Pres. Bill Clinton.  Elizabeth Edwards goes even further, supporting Marriage Equality.

Edwards also opposes workplace discrimination against the LGBT community and, while still in the Senate, co-sponsored the Employment Non-Discrimination Act.

Edwards supports the rights and privileges of the LGBT community to serve in the Armed Forces and opposes the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policies of the Pres. Bill Clinton Administration.

Edwards also believes that same-sex couples should enjoy the same adoption and family privileges as opposite-sex couples.

Edwards supports additional Hate Crimes legislation and while in the Senate, co-sponsored legislation providing law enforcement with tools to investigate and prosecute hate crimes based on perceived and actual sexual orientation and/or gender identity.

Finally, Edwards supports full funding for research and treatment of HIV/AIDS.  Edwards was the first Presidential candidate to propose a comprehensive program regarding HIV/AIDS.

More below the flip…

The following are Edwards’ positions on the major issues challenging the LGBT community:

Equal Rights for Same-Sex Couples

Edwards believes that all couples in committed, long-term relationships should have the same rights, benefits, and responsibilities, whether they are straight couples or same-sex couples. He supports civil unions to guarantee gay and lesbian couples the same rights as straight couples, including inheritance rights, hospital visitation rights, equal pension and health care benefits, and all of the 1,100 other legal protections government affords married couples. Edwards supports the full repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act. He also believes same-sex families should be treated in the same manner as other families by our immigration laws. Edwards believes the right president could lead the country toward consensus around equal rights and benefits for all couples in committed, long-term relationships and he opposes divisive Constitutional amendments to ban same-sex marriages.

Workplace Discrimination

Workers should be judged by the quality of their performance, not their sexual orientation or gender identity. While in the Senate, Edwards cosponsored the Employment Non-Discrimination Act. He also believes that stronger enforcement is necessary to prevent employment discrimination by federal agencies.

Military Service

Edwards opposes the current “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy on gays and lesbians serving in our military. The military ought to treat all service members equally and in a way that promotes national security, without regard to their sexual orientation.

Adoption

Edwards believes that gay and lesbian parents should be able to adopt children just like any other parents. There are over 120,000 children waiting for homes in our nation’s foster care system. Adoption placements should be decided by judges and adoption agencies based upon the best interests of the children. Both members of a same-sex couple raising children together should be able to form a legal relationship with their children.

Hate Crimes

Everyone is entitled to live in dignity without fear of violence. We should strengthen the ability of law enforcement to investigate and prosecute hate crimes based on race, gender, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, disability or gender identity. While in the Senate, Edwards cosponsored legislation to give law enforcement agencies the tools they need to investigate and prosecute hate crimes.

HIV and AIDS

The loss from HIV/AIDS is almost beyond understanding. Edwards believes we have a moral imperative to do much more, and do it much better. He is the first presidential candidate — Democratic or Republican — to propose a comprehensive strategy this year to stop the HIV/AIDS epidemic at home and around the world, building on his plan for true universal health care with specific proposals to expand Medicaid to cover HIV-positive individuals before they reach later stages of disabilities and AIDS and increase support for the Ryan White CARE Act and HOPWA programs. He will also fight the disease in the African-American and Latino communities where the harm is now greatest and employ science-based prevention strategies — including comprehensive, age-appropriate sex education and harm-reduction programs that provide high-risk individuals with access to clean syringes.