Hardly anyone seems aware of it, but on Nov. 8 Texans will vote
on an unusually far-ranging state constitutional amendment banning
gay marriage and anything "similar" to it. Since it's an off-year
election, the turnout is likely to be very low. It's an
excellent-almost unique-opportunity to make a strong showing in a
state where we should be blown away. But the campaign against the
amendment has been lackluster and marred by poor tactical and
substantive decision making.
The proposed state constitutional amendment would define
marriage as the union of one man and one woman. Nothing surprising
there. But its second sentence goes on to prohibit the state and
any of its political subdivisions (like counties and cities) from
creating or recognizing any status "identical or similar" to
marriage.
That means civil unions are out, and it probably prohibits broad
domestic partnership programs, too. The amendment might also make
enforcement of some private agreements between same-sex partners
more doubtful since enforcing them might require a judge to
"recognize" a relationship "similar" to marriage.
The Texas Marriage Amendment is thus among the most sweeping
amendments proposed anywhere in the country. The damage it would do
is huge and long-lasting. Short of a ruling that it violates the
federal constitution, it could not be reversed except by another
state constitutional amendment. That would require a 2/3 vote in
both houses of the state legislature, followed by another popular
vote. It will be a very long time before a majority, much less a
super-majority, of the Texas legislature supports gay marriage or
anything like it.
Around the country, state marriage amendments have passed by
wide margins. The closest margin came in relatively liberal Oregon,
where 56 percent of voters approved it. The largest came in
ultra-conservative Mississippi, where 86 percent of voters approved
it. In states that border Texas-Louisiana, Oklahoma, and
Arkansas-anti-gay-marriage amendments passed with votes of 78
percent, 76 percent, and 75 percent, respectively. Needless to say,
fighting the amendment in Texas is an uphill battle.
But two factors make the Texas marriage fight somewhat
different, offering the potential of at least a closer margin than
in neighboring states. First, the Texas amendment is coming up for
a vote in an off-year election in which perhaps only five to seven
percent of registered voters would ordinarily bother to show up.
This means that a motivated and well-organized minority of voters
(like gays or religious conservatives) could make a difference.
Most of the other state-marriage referenda around the country have
coincided with high-turnout general elections, like the fall 2004
presidential race, where even an intensely concerned minority is
overwhelmed.
Second, the only major city in Texas that will decide important
local elections in November is Houston. Houston voters, already a
huge portion of all voters statewide, should therefore be an even
larger factor in this election. And Houston voters are more
socially tolerant than voters elsewhere in the state.
When Houston's disproportionate voice and its relative
gay-friendliness are combined with a depressed turnout elsewhere in
the state, we have an almost ideal circumstance for a marriage
vote. With a smart campaign, we could be in a position to keep the
"yes" vote under 65 percent, which would have to be counted as a
moral victory.
But, alas, the anti-amendment campaign has been inept. Start
with the campaign director, Glen Maxey. In the 1990s, Maxey served
a few undistinguished terms as a Democratic state representative
from a liberal district in Austin. He was the first (and so far
only) openly gay person to serve in the state legislature. But
whatever laurels he earned from that status have long since
wilted.
The anti-amendment campaign is running under the alliterative
but oblique slogan, "No Nonsense in November." While Houston should
clearly be the focus of anti-amendment organizing, the No Nonsense
organization is based in Austin.
Evidence of gay-community apathy is everywhere. There are hardly
any yard signs visible in Houston's heavily gay neighborhoods. (No
Nonsense is trying to sell the signs instead of giving them away.)
Go to a gay bar and few of the patrons have even heard there's an
amendment on the ballot.
Maxey and his friends among the Texas gay civil rights
establishment are fond of coalitions. In a conservative Republican
state, here's the coalition they have put together to defeat the
amendment: Among the eight "featured sponsors" of the
anti-amendment campaign are three partisan Democratic groups, two
leftist groups that promote "social justice," one statewide gay
group that barely pretends to work with Republicans, and another
that was founded by the daughter of former Democratic governor Ann
Richards. This is, to be sure, a "coalition." It is a losing
coalition.
Go to the No Nonsense website and you find a confused,
unattractive jumble of logos, icons, and blinking mantras. Click
"talking points." There, the very first argument against the
marriage amendment is one that practically cribs from press
releases of the state Democratic party. No Nonsense argues that
instead of passing a marriage amendment, the Republican-dominated
state legislature should have concentrated on "real solutions" like
child healthcare and equalization of public-school financing.
There is not one word under "talking points" arguing that gay
marriage itself is a good idea. An opportunity to educate people
about gay marriage is being lost. And so is another amendment
campaign.