| The anti-discrimination ordinance (employment/public accommodation) in Kalamazoo, Michigan: Won that one, clearly, 62% to 38%. Kalamazoo is a small town (there were only 12,500 voters), of uncertain progressive character. It is more akin to some places in Texas than you might think. Yet, voters overwhelmingly backed protections for gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgender people. Generally, U.S. voters think it's wrong to discriminate against people PERIOD. In Texas, the Kalamazoo ordinance is basically the same as Rep. Mike Villarreal's HB 538 (workplace nondiscrimination) and Rep. Jessica Farrar's HB 2215 (nondiscrimination in housing and public accommodation) filed during the last Legislative Session. What little polling that has been done in Texas on this issue, shows Texas voters supporting these protections in the 50-80% range. Yes, even the low approval numbers have us winning on this in Texas. Austin, Dallas, Fort Worth, Houston, and El Paso all have similar, or more limited protections.
Washington State: Referendum 71 - "Everything But Marriage." Right now, it looks like we won that one, too. It was a statewide vote and (as of Wednesday morning) the Referendum is narrowly ahead with predictions that it will keep that lead. Essentially, the Referendum would grant same-sex couples the same rights as married couples (that is, all the rights except the ability to call themselves married). Think hospital visitation rights, family medical leave, inheritance rights, child custody, insurance benefits, etc.--you know, all those things that make living life as a family practical but are mostly denied in Texas. Those rights passed in Washington. Similar Texas efforts include Rep. Donna Howard's HB 1455 (enforcing medical directives), Rep. Eddie Rodriguez's HB 353 (hospital visitation), Rep. Elliott Naishtat's HB 861 (competitive insurance benefits for UT and A&M faculty and staff), and Rep. Rafael Anchia's HB 2080 (allowing both same sex parents on a child's birth certificate). All these have a good deal of support in the Texas Legislature. While Referendum 71 lost in the rural eastern portion of Washington, it passed in the more urban western part-which is a lesson for how equality will be achieved in Texas.
Also of note in yesterday's election are the new gay mayor in Chapel Hill, North Carolina and first openly gay elected official in St. Petersburg, Florida. In Houston, Annise Parker was the top vote getter in a four way race for mayor. Parker is now headed into a runoff and could become the first openly lesbian mayor of any of the top 25 most populous cities in the U.S. What is important about these races is that a candidates' sexual orientation is no longer a bar to holding office. People can win not because, or despite, their sexual orientation, but without regard to it at all.
In passing, did you notice that Austin just extended COBRA type benefits to city employees and their partners. And El Paso now offers domestic partner benefits to its employees?
And then there is Maine. Yes, we lost. Voters overturned a state legislative decision to allow same-sex couples the same marriage rights as everyone else. And by "we lost", I mean every person living in the United States. Maine's loss was a step back for equality, for human rights, and for the underlying dignity of every human being in this country. How can we hold our heads up when so many voters continue to hold such backwards, bigoted attitudes towards the relationships of other people that they vote to deny those other people the right to marry whom they love? It's hard, I know.
The vote in Maine was a sign post on the road to equality. Sure, the voters overturned marriage equality, but it wasn't a resounding victory for the forces of darkness. It was hardly a blow out. The final vote difference was in the low single digits. In fact, until late in the night, the marriage equality forces were winning. And it wasn't an "organic" victory-one in which the other side won without campaigning and on the moral and logical force of their argument. The other side won only with a huge effort, an influx of out of state money, and wildly deceitful claims in their advertisements. Maine was hardly a victory to soothe those who would deny others equality. Rather, it must necessarily be seen as a temporary setback to our side and the last hurrah of the narrow minded. Demographics are on our side. We will achieve marriage equality, it's just not happening as fast as we all would like it to happen.
Don't view the Maine vote in a vacuum, either. The Maine election was not a referendum that came out of the blue. It was an effort to overturn the positive act of the Maine Legislature that recognized marriage equality. The leaders in Maine get it. As do the folks in Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Vermont, Connecticut, and Iowa. All people should be treated equally. And a 52% rejection of a legislative act in Maine is not a resounding rejection, it's a difference of opinion. It is unlikely that any Maine legislator will pay a price at the polls during the next election for their support of equality. And no legislator will be scared from voting for other, frequently more popular pro-equality measures like non-discrimination, hospital visitation, anti-bullying harassment requirements for schools, equal adoption rights, etc.
Did you notice that neither of the U.S. Senators from Maine, both supposedly moderate Republicans, would say how they voted. Both were too scared, or too cautious, to take sides in the battle. Shame on them. But, when a sitting Republican elected official is too scared, or ashamed, to take a public stand against marriage equality you can bet that the days of using anti-gay measures as voter turnout mechanisms are drastically numbered.
And that should be a lesson for Texas. The days of institutionalizing anti-lgbt hatred and bigotry are extremely numbered. Sure, conservatives can turn out the base, particularly in Republican primaries, by pandering to narrow mined, bigoted, or simply scared individuals. But at what cost? Few progressives, liberals or independents--and increasingly fewer conservatives--want to think of themselves as advocating or voting for discrimination against other human beings. And the politicians leading the charge of bigotry against lgbt people smack of the same backwards, narrow-minded, and hateful attitudes that opposed the civil rights movement. Few politicians want to be remembered by history as opponents to progress. Yet, conservative politicians now face that dilemma-be remembered by history as outspoken opponents to fairness, equality, families, and love, or be remembered as champions of those timeless values. Or, perhaps worst of all for a politician, not be remembered at all.
Yes, we won, yesterday. But, more importantly, we're going to win tomorrow. |
