2008 State Ballot Initiatives: May 2008 Archives

Now that California Supreme Court has struck down the ban on marriage for gay and lesbian couples, the question becomes: What will happen to these families if the proposed ballot initiative amending the state’s constitution to deny marriage to committed gay and lesbian couples passes?  There is the possibility that if the initiative passes couples who are already married might suddenly have their recognition taken away, though the potential impact on the ruling is still unknown. The so-called Campaign for California Families – the organization pushing for the marriage ban – has asked the California Supreme Court to not let gay and lesbian people marry before the November election.

This November, voters in various states will not only be voting for president; they may also be voting for ballot initiatives that seek to prevent marriage for gay and lesbian couples or adoption by gay families.  However, as the Associated Press reports, such ballot measures are failing to gain as much traction as they had in the 2004 and 2006 elections.  At least five proposed initiatives have not received sufficient signatures to be placed on the November ballot.  And, though Florida will have an initiative to prohibit marriage for gay and lesbian residents on its ballot and similar measures may still be placed on the Arizona and California ballots, the AP notes that political experts believe these efforts will not be as successful in 2008. “The right wing is organizing around the same old bag of tricks on social issues, but I don’t think that they’ll deliver as much as they expect,” said Kristina Wilfore of the Ballot Initiative Strategy Center. 

The AP article illustrates how media coverage of these ballot initiatives has changed substantially since the 2004 and 2006 elections. Rather than play up the idea of a “culture war,” journalists are reporting on the reality that in 2008, many people across the country are not supporting divisive ballot initiatives that prevent Americans from being able to take care of and protect their families.

Too often politicians use the LGBT community as a “wedge issue” in political campaigns, but it is inexcusable when the media assists politicians in this task.

A proposed constitutional amendment in Arizona would forever prohibit loving, committed couples in that state from achieving their hopes and dreams and the basic freedoms and protections their families need.   The proposal cleared the state house on Monday, May 12. 

Rather than focusing on the impact of such legislation, and the harm it will cause to gay and lesbian people in Arizona, the media turned the conversation into one about political gamesmanship, partisanship, and talked of legislative maneuverings. One columnist, Amanda Crawford, went so far as to turn the argument around and imply that trying to stop this legislation was actually an attack on straight couples.  Instead, it was an attempt to try and stop a constitutional amendment aimed at forever limiting the ability of gay couples to protect themselves (and maintain the status quo in the state).  This columnist along with the news media throughout the state dropped the ball on really highlighting the news story here.  GLAAD will continue to challenge the media to do a better job of telling the real news stories behind this political gamesmanship.

Paul Karr is Director of Media Field Strategy