Dale Carpenter makes an excellent case for California to wait before trying to repeal Prop. 8. I'm still wrestling with this, myself, and think he makes a very strong argument. I'd even add a point he understates. The Supreme Court was quite clear that the effect of Prop. 8 was to constitutionalize the word "marriage," and nothing else. For constitutional purposes, same-sex couples in California are and must be treated equally to opposite-sex couples, except they can't - constitutionally - be called "married." As I've previously noted, that is a sophomoric use of a state constitution, and will have little, if any effect in the broader culture, where it's just easier to call same-sex couples married - including, of course, the 18,000 who actually are married. Compared to couples in states that don't have constitutional protection for their substantive equality, California same-sex couples don't have it so bad, with the notable exception of being denied every right under federal law - something California voters can do nothing in state law to change.
But there are very potent arguments in favor of 2010. Dale mentions money, and I think he's right that the $80+ million raised on both sides for Prop. 8 could be the future baseline. But maybe not. If the right didn't win an entirely Pyrrhic victory with Prop. 8, it was certainly a puny one, particularly in light of the 18,000 married couples who will be strolling our grocery store aisles and going to school soccer games in coming years. The primary reason Prop. 8 was able to succeed was because its political proponents were savvy enough to realize that the only victory they could deliver was a superficial one. The decision at the outset to leave domestic partnership alone was a strategic concession that acknowledged the base reality in California: same-sex couples are part of our cultural fabric now.
After spending $40 million with no more than that to show for it, I can certainly see the right finding greater value in spending its money on some other state. California already has more same-sex married couples in it than any other state and it's illegal here. Given those 18,000 couples, plus our domestic partner law going forward, is a fight to hold off the marginal differential really worth the right's time and resources? They could get real discrimination in some other state for a fraction of the cost.
Dale makes a good point about our side's failures in the Prop. 8 debate, but the Meet in the Middle rally in Fresno last month was an extremely strong sign that we have learned from our mistakes. This effort, along with some fine new television ads - outside the framework of any pending election - is exactly the sort of work we need to do to secure long-term gains in the general population. Trying to move Fresno closer to the support side is the best evidence I've seen that our more left-leaning leaders are getting the message that they need help talking to people who don't support gay rights for leftist reasons. Heck, even acknowledging that there are non-leftist reasons to support gay equality is a huge step forward for us.
While Dale may be right in general that 2010 will be a better year for Republicans than 2008, I'm not at all convinced that will be true in California. The collapse of California's Republican party, and its almost complete insulation from moderates, is more advanced here than in the rest of the nation, and their alienation of pro-gay voters is more deeply entrenched than non-Californians may realize. At least so far, I don't see much of a GOP resurgence here, and if our Republicans are pressed into yet another gay battle they are unequipped to deal with, it will only help to show Californians how out of touch these folks are. Remember, our GOP has, to this day, never officially even accepted domestic partnership rights.
I would certainly be content to wait until 2012, but I can see a good case for 2010 as well. Either way, I am so amazingly gratified to know that the only question for us is when, not if we'll have full marriage for all same-sex couples in California.
2 Comments for “2010 or Bust”
posted by John Doe on
“After spending $40 million with no more than that to show for it, I can certainly see the right finding greater value in spending its money on some other state. California already has more same-sex married couples in it than any other state and itâ??s illegal here. Given those 18,000 couples, plus our domestic partner law going forward, is a fight to hold off the marginal differential really worth the right’s time and resources? They could get real discrimination in some other state for a fraction of the cost.”
No, the anti-gay movement would lose one of its most potent arguments – ‘same-sex marriage reflects the will of the people’ – if the people of a state democratically vote to recognize marriage equality. They will pour plenty of money into California for a re-match.
posted by dalea on
Good arguments, thanks for putting this up. I would add two additional points.
One is the genuine shock and fear that Prop8 supporters felt when their names and addresses were put on the internet, complete with handy maps. Reading supporters comments they were genuinely afraid of what they had gotten themselves into. Suspect that the hotel owner in SD will not be contributing much next time around. Nor will a lot of the donors be there again. Appears people are willing to be anonomously anti-gay but when they know it will be a public matter, they won’t do so.
I live in a part of LA where there is no Republican Party. Our elections are between Democrats and Greens. Hispanics make up 30% of the population and are really pissed at the attacks on Judge Sotomayor coming from the Republicans. Expect a big anti-Republican push from Hispanics in 2010.