H/T Herb x 10

Last month, the anti-equality New Hampshire legislator Rep. David Bates (R-Rockingham) introduced bills to strip the Granite State of marriage equality.  HB 1590 would repeal the recently-passed marriage equality law, and Constitutional Amendment Concurrent Resolution (CACR) 28 proposes an anti-gay amendment to the New Hampshire constitution.

Considering that the legislature just passed the marriage equality law in June of 2009, neither of these bills is expected to pass.  This is especially true of CACR 28, which requires support of three-fifths of both legislative chambers, and then approval by two-thirds of state voters. Similar amendments were defeated in 2006 under Republican leadership and in 2007 under Democratic leadership.

Enter town meetings.  In an effort to pressure pro-equality legislators to vote for his bills, Bates has orchestrated a campaign of getting non-binding resolutions in support of his bills on the Spring ballot in dozens of New Hampshire’s towns.  The is done** via something called a warrant article.  Warrant articles are sort of like town-level bills, and they may be submitted for consideration by the town meeting by simply gathering 25 or so signatures in support.  In other words, the bar is really low.  Anti-gay warrants have been filed in about three dozen towns.  The warrant language reads

The citizens of New Hampshire should be allowed to vote on an amendment to the New Hampshire Constitution that defines “marriage”

Town meetings happen in March or April, but about 30% of towns, called “SB2” towns, have a pre-town meeting event called a deliberative session, where citizens in attendance can amend warrants prior to final consideration at the spring town meeting.

Over the past week, dozens of New Hampshire towns have held deliberative sessions, and taken votes on their anti-gay warrant.  According to a press release from Granite State Progress (see below), the fun part is that many towns have amended the anti-gay warrant language in creative ways.  Several towns replaced the original language with the words “to see”, while Wolfeboro amended the language to “The citizens of New Hampshire commend the governor and legislature for supporting equal rights for all New Hampshire citizens.”

But… we know from painful experience that when you’re LGBT, you can take nothing for granted.  The price of liberty is eternal vigilance is a recently validated truism.  While it is exciting to see so many SB2 towns rejecting this mean-spirited ploy in such delightful ways, the fact is that other SB2 towns have failed to do so, and the warrant will be voted on as-is at the spring town meeting.  In most of the latter cases, only a handful of citizens actually showed up to the deliberative session, the vote was very close and the vote total was tiny.  

We need to get out the vote for the spring town meetings.  If you live in New Hampshire, call your town clerk and find out when and where your town meeting will be, then inform your pro-equality neighbors what is at stake.  Many people are unaware that this is even happening.  Contact Granite State Progress to coordinate with others in your town and state.

**New Hampshire has a complex array of types of town governance.  NHPR has a brief but excellent primer for the uninitiated.  Listen: Windows Media | MP3

Press release from Granite State Progress

Town Meeting: New Hampshire Says NO to Vote to Discriminate

Attempt to vote on definition of marriage rejected by towns throughout New Hampshire

Concord, NH – New Hampshire towns are saying no to the vote to discriminate – an attempt to pressure for passage of a constitutional amendment in New Hampshire that would allow a statewide vote on the definition of marriage.

The non-binding town meeting resolutions state: ‘The citizens of New Hampshire should be allowed to vote on an amendment to the New Hampshire Constitution that defines “marriage”.’ A petition of just 25 people in each town allows the resolution on the spring ballot.

“This is about taking away rights and overturning marriage equality, pure and simple,” said Zandra Rice Hawkins, director of the organization Granite State Progress, which is running the education campaign to expose the vote to discriminate. “It’s wrong to vote on rights. In New Hampshire, we don’t vote on taking away the rights of our fellow citizens.”

Towns in New Hampshire began deliberative sessions this week for town meeting, a process which allows amendments to town warrant articles. In the last week, voters in Rindge, Rye, Winchester, Alstead, Deerfield, Bethlehem, Goffstown, Wolfeboro, and Londonderry (town charter) all rejected the vote to discriminate.

Wolfeboro amended the language to: “The citizens of New Hampshire commend the governor and legislature for supporting equal rights for all New Hampshire citizens.” Other towns struck most of the language, leaving “To see” or “The voters of New Hampshire should be” to appear on the March 9 ballot.

Londonderry, a charter town with a different process, hosted a public hearing on Monday night to discuss the petition put forward by Rep. Al Baldasaro (R-Londonderry), one of the figureheads behind the resolutions. Following a student rally and a standing-room only public hearing, the town council rejected the petition. Baldasaro has indicated that he will try to collect signatures from 5% of registered voters, which would automatically place it on the ballot.

“This issue has already been decided in New Hampshire and I’d rather we spent the time talking about jobs and the economy,” said Londonderry resident Lisa Fersch, whose teamed up with other stay-at-home moms to challenge the petition. “New Hampshire is the live free or die state. Al Baldasaro thinks it’s the live free or die state unless you’re gay.”

Other towns expressed similar sentiments. Winchester resident Mary Gannon told her neighbors, “It is a mockery to take away the rights of others under the guise of the right to vote. I encourage my fellow community members to vote yes on this amendment because the warrant article, as currently worded, encourages our community to vote to discriminate.”

“Despite all the protestations to the contrary, the underlying purpose of this movement is to discriminate against gays,” Bethlehem resident David Wood said at his deliberative session. “We do not discriminate against our neighbors here. Many years ago, Bethlehem ended its discrimination against Jewish people and we are not about to go back there again. Not in this town, not tonight.”

Granite State Progress worked in a set number of towns for the first swing of deliberative sessions. Wakefield, Pelham, Swanzey, Littleon and Charlestown also offered amendments but the resolution remained as submitted. Votes in these towns were largely quite close; the amendment in Pelham was defeated by seven votes, in Charlestown it lost by three votes.

In these towns, most people had been unaware that the petition was on the agenda before Granite State Progress alerted them. Towns with advance notice have fared better.

“People are coming together to expose the vote to discriminate for what it really is,” Rice Hawkins said. “Granite State Progress has been fielding calls all week from communities that want to challenge the vote to discriminate and ensure that marriage equality continues to be a proud New Hampshire civil liberty. We’re proud that New Hampshire neighbors are standing together and saying no to discrimination.”

Related:

New Hampshire Marriage Law ALREADY Coming Under Fire