This could be a game-changing year for initiatives concerning marriage equality and minority rights in general. Polls show that measures in Maryland and Washington to confirm the decisions of the legislature and the governor have majority support, that Minnesota may not follow the path of North Carolina in amending the state constitution, and that Maine may re-institute marriage equality after a 2009 initiative eliminated it.
Not so fast, says the Times. In an article, Second Time Around, Hope for Gay Marriage in Maine, our intrepid reporter, Kit Seelye, reminds us that
In the 32 states, including California, in which voters have had a say, they have rejected it.
Yeah? So what? Let's parse this -- I'm out of practice anyway. Follow me below the great orange schnecken for some analysis and some ranting.
It's not that people who follow this don't know about these issues. They are recapped at the beginning of the article, in some detail, but, or course, every time voters have been confronted with this issue, we lose. The "ick" factor apparently is still with us.
Maine, of course, is different from other states:
The loss in Maine in 2009 was a heartbreak for the movement. The Legislature had legalized it and the governor, John Baldacci, a Democrat, had signed it into law. But opponents forced it to a referendum, and the public voted to repeal it, 53 to 47 percent, a difference of about 30,000 votes.
That was a surprise because polls at the time indicated that a majority of voters would approve it. And therein lies the hope of the opposition here this year; while state and national polls suggest that a majority supports same-sex marriage, voters have not always told pollsters the truth.
Well, that's some progress -- at least she didn't refer to the lying as a "Bradley effect" (which, let me remind you, doesn't exist).
HOWEVER, implicit in the article is the suggestion "don't believe the polls this year either" which flies in the face of other information. Specifically, the fact that the director of the 2009 "Yes on 1" campaign, Marc Mutty, has stated in a well-publicized documentary that most of the campaign for Amendment 1 was in fact hyperbole and not necessarily all true (Surprise! The National Organization for Marriage lies), and Mainers know this.
So we continue. As we also know, the Roman Catholic Church is apparently satisfied that the 2012 initiative won't make them perform same-sex marriages, so it's keeping its money out of the fight, it says. NOM, however, will be spending money. And the yes people?
“Normally, when marriage comes up on the ballot, it’s in response to a court case or legislative action and at most — as in 2009 here and in Maryland and Washington — you have six months to really go out and defend whatever that court or legislature did,” [Matt McTighe, campaign manager for Mainers United for Marriage] said. “Maine is the first state to proactively bring this initiative to voters, and that’s allowed us to control our own fate.”
A few quotes from Mainers, and we're done. Still, NONE of these measures have ever passed, and the
Times makes sure we know that. It could be worse. They're still
arguing over the language for the intitiative, apparently. I know that our Maine Kossacks are on top of this and well let us know when they need help, and I know I'm behind them as we wait to see what SCOTUS does about
Perry v Brown.