Tweet
I’ll definitely remember this when I’m hit up for cash, promotion or Tweets by Freedom To Marry, an organization I supported because of its work fighting for marriage equality. Apparently the feeling is not mutual. Only certain battles are willing to be fought, and it’s willing to leave LGBTs here behind.
Seeing the press release (below) in my inbox was not only disappointing but offensive, given NC is a battleground state, is hosting the DNC in Charlotte, and the President last Friday specifically came out against Amendment One. Freedom To Marry has chosen to omit North Carolinain its plea for cash to fight not only marriage equality fights, but to turn back a similar amendment that will be on the fall ballot in Minnesota. I’m glad Minnesotans fighting the good fight have been included, but for FTM to turn its back on North Carolinians is pitiful.
New York – Today Freedom to Marry announced the Win More States Fund to raise at least $3 million dollars, every penny of which will be spent directly on the work of winning in five 2012 marriage battleground states: Maine, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, and Washington.
“Winning marriage at the ballot in even one state will take away the last desperate talking-point our opponents use to disparage the gains we are making across the country,” said Evan Wolfson, founder and President of Freedom to Marry, the campaign to win marriage nationwide. “In each of our battleground states, Freedom to Marry is taking a lead role alongside local families and leaders, adding talent and resources on the frontlines to do the critical work necessary to win.”
Donations to the Win More States Fund will be channeled strategically into targeted campaigns where and when most needed, supporting grassroots organizing, television and radio spots, new media programs, and more, aimed at winning in these five states. Yesterday saw the first victory in a Win More States Fund battleground when the New Hampshire House of Representatives voted down legislation that would have repealed the state’s two year-old freedom to marry law. Freedom to Marry was the largest financial investor in the campaign with staff deeply involved, and will continue its work to preserve the freedom to marry in the Granite State.
“There are many challenges and opportunities tapping donors this election year, and by maximizing donations strategically through the Win More States Fund, contributors and state campaigns will get the added bang for the buck of Freedom to Marry’s team and the lessons learned from prior battles,” Wolfson added. “Our bipartisan victory in New Hampshire shows we know the winning recipe.”
Freedom to Marry has already raised $700,000 toward its initial $3 million goal – including a kick-off donation of $250,000 from Freedom to Marry supporters Sean Eldridge and Chris Hughes – and, in turn, has already invested $350,000 into ongoing campaigns to defend marriage in New Hampshire and win the freedom to marry in New Jersey. “With numerous marriage cases heading to the Supreme Court, there is nothing more important than growing momentum and winning the freedom to marry in more states. Freedom to Marry is leading the charge to win marriage in more states in 2012, which is why Chris and I are proud to contribute to the Win More States Fund,” said Sean Eldridge, president of Hudson River Ventures.
Richard Carlbom, Campaign Manager for Minnesotans United for All Families, the campaign to defeat an anti-gay amendment at the MN ballot in November said of the fund, “Freedom to Marry has been a key partner in paving the way for a victory in Minnesota at the ballot box in November. They’ve rolled up their sleeves, built bridges for our campaign, and are committed to fighting to win. I am thrilled that Freedom to Marry is adding this powerful way to encourage more donors to contribute more urgently needed resources into the work we’re doing together.”
In addition to these battleground efforts, Freedom to Marry has long invested in public education that creates the climate for changing hearts and minds, as well as the law. In 2011 Freedom to Marry launched its national persuasion campaign, Why Marriage Matters, raising and spending an initial one million dollars on message development and delivery, including the creation of television spots and videos and deployment of powerful messengers and personal stories. Freedom to Marry also seeks to triple that level of investment to continue making the case for why marriage matters across the country, growing the national majority for marriage that creates a climate for elected officials and judges to rise to fairness.
This North Carolinian gave to fight for equality in Maine and in California, for instance; because it benefits us all to show support for all states in the struggle for civil equality and social justice — and that includes fighting discriminatory measures that will hurt families and children. We may not agree with all tactics and strategies, but the money poured into other states through asks like this Win More States Fund is important because it matters – getting on the air is key to winning. It’s sad to see politics and pettiness enter the picture.
What I can say is the often-derided Human Rights Campaign, for instance, has been a key player by providing support and funds in NC to fight the amendment. That was a strategic decision it made to support the work needed to win votes here on May 8. I should also note that there are LGBT-owned and non-LGBT-owned businesses here in NC who are all-in because it’s the right thing to do for our state’s future.
At some point soon it will be necessary for me to blog about just who has given to help us win here – and notably who is absent from that list. Organizations and individuals who worked for equality in other states, but refuse to put any $kin in the game here.
Money bomb blogswarm next week
But right now, I’m moving on to the positive — the Blend is going to be part of a blogswarm next week to 1) raise awareness about the progress being made here in NC, 2) show why a campaign on the air to educate NC residents about the harms of A1 is key to getting our base of voters out to win, and 3) how you can help.
21 Comments
Hey Pam. This question is in earnest to anyone here. Can someone please explain to me how the NC campaign spokesperson’s word’s are a direct statement from the President? To me it sounds like the spokesperson said the President would be against the amendment based on his earlier statements regarding equality. I get that the campaign spokesperson’s words were probably green lit by someone up the ladder but still, it seems like a stretch to say the President directly commented.
It appears that Maryland was left out of this fund as well. What is their problem with NC and Maryland?
In light of this revelation any money I donate to the fight here in MN will go to local activities fighting the measure – http://www.mnunited.org/ , not to FTM.
I have to stop this nonsense before it gets out of hand.
HRC’s token donations now should not be lauded as some great heroic effort in this NC amendment fight.
HRC could give a million dollars a day for the next 4 days to the fight in NC, and it still wouldn’t match what they’ve sucked out of this state over the years.
I’m not wholly anti-HRC. HRC has its uses. In fact, I worked in the national office many years ago. My statement above isn’t hyperbole. I worked in the Major Gifts Dept at HRC. They are (well, were) very good at some things. Raising money is/was one of those things.
Heaping praise on HRC for chipping in $100K, $200K or even $500K worth of resources AFTER the amendment made it to the ballot in NC is downright insulting.
Don’t do it.
There appears to be a lot of negativity about the campaign against Amendment One outside of NC. I’ve read a lot of opinions on LGBT blogs that are stating a defeatist attitude that this fight is a lost cause and that the amendment will pass easily. Even Matt Baume, who does the weekly videos on Marriage Equality seen on many LGBT blogs, last week reported that the polls don’t look good in NC and chose not to mention the most recent poll from Elon University showing 54% against the amendment. He had a rather snarky comment about the Amendment One campaign and I quote:
“I think there are a lot of interesting things to be said about the Amendment One campaign, and will just leave it there for now.”
So, apparently, there are those who don’t approve of the way the campaign is being handled. But, they are not forthright enough to actually say what they mean.
Echo this.
I worry that characterizing Team Obama’s NC communications staffer’s summary of Obama’s previous opposition to similar amendments as
might very possibly lead to a crushing walk-back by the White House. At this point, if someone asks Jay Carney, he’s just as likely to parse it in a way that’s terribly destructive to the fight against Amendment One.
I’m not questioning MD being left off in the same way.
MD is in the same boat with WA and NJ: state leaders with the influence to get state policy shaped around the needs of same sex couples have decided to go for broke in their state…but those couples already had a lot of protections.
My read is, MN and NC are in the same boat with each other, and there’s no rationale I can grasp to fund the other 3, where our side is picking a fight we hope to win, before fully investing in the two states where those who want our families to have nothing are picking a fight at the last demographic moment they can hope to squeak out a win.
The polling in NC looks stronger than expected and I don’t get why our national leaders are failing to fund the best fight we could put on, before giving NJ and WA yet another round.
It’s not heaping praise to say that it’s on the Yes side of providing resources and not in the MIA column, which it could easily have been. Would I like to see more — yes. But I’d like to see the folks sitting on the sidelines stop complaining about messaging and get some yard signs, talk to their neighbors and help get some commercials on the air.
And yes, Freedom to Marry and the naysayers have said their piece. I have been up front that I don’t agree with all of the messaging in this campaign — just look through the archive. And I’ve made my case for why the Amendment needs to be defeated — because it harms LGBTs, period. The campaign has chosen to focus on the harms to families and children, and IMHO that’s not enough. This is not about collateral damage, but direct harm that was the intent of those who got this on the ballot.
But we have to fund this media campaign to have a chance. To be left out purposely — esp when MN is included — is something FTM should be explicit about why NC isn’t worthy.
But, Washington and Maryland are in the same position. So, why is Washington being funded and not Maryland?
This isn’t the first (or second, or third) time that I’ve heard the “Isn’t HRC so great for what they’re giving in NC now” crap.
It’s insulting to years long efforts keeping the amendment off the ballot, factually ill-informed from a financial perspective, and it’s time to put an end to this bullshit talking point.
Your post happened to rile my ire because you posted it on what I consider the largest platform where I’ve heard this talking point recently.
I’ll withhold commenting on Freedom to Marry and the Amendment One campaign itself… for now.
I’d venture to say that they’re funding Washington because the situation here is a near-certain win — the state legislature already passed a marriage equality act, so all that’s left is defeating the voter referendum challenge (Referendum 74) which the anti-equality side is trying to advance. The similar referendum two years ago which sought to overturn the civil unions law was not only soundly rejected by the voters of this state but barely even got enough signatures to make the ballot, giving us a very real shot at winning this fight right now instead of having to go to the ballot in November.
Maryland is in the same exact situation as Washington. The Maryland legislature passed marriage equality. The Maryland Governor signed the law. The bigots are now trying to collect enough signatures to put a referendum on the ballot. No difference in these two situations.
I disagree that there are no important differences between WA and MD. For starters, as stated above, WA already had a ballot win in 2009 with the domestic partnership law. MD hasn’t faced the ballot yet regarding relationship recognition for same-sex couples, so that electorate is untried. I’m not saying that this should have in itself disqualified MD from FTM receiving funds, just that the states can’t be treated as similar even though they passed marriage equality laws at the same time.
The difference is that the previous fight on domestic partnerships gives us hard, reliable numbers on the Washington electorate. . . and those numbers are strongly in favor of marriage equality. The people here voted down Referendum 71 by a comfortable margin of 53% to 46% . . . but that’s only half the picture, because despite bringing in SCADS of out of state money, Referendum 71 barely scraped onto the ballot with just 122,007 signatures out of 120,577 required. And on top of that, the social conservatives are in epic disarray this time; there are two rival anti-gay coalitions both accusing each other of financial malfeasance and competing for resources.
So yes, there are many completely sensible reasons that Washington is a priority state for LGBT orgs at this time.
I’m not suggesting that WA shouldn’t be receiving monetary assistance. But, both MD and NC should be receiving funding as well. As far as that goes, what is the reason for including NJ? The fight is over for now in NJ. The bill was vetoed. There is no upcoming vote.
It’s not over in NJ. The veto can still be overridden. I think they have until early 2014 to take the override vote. NJ isn’t a referendum state, so if the vote is overridden, the marriage equality law should be safe.
Each of you keep coming up with reasons why the states like WA and NJ deserve to be participating in this project. But, not one of you has come up with a reason yet for why NC and MD, the only other two states that are currently in these marriage battles, were left out.
I get being strategic and maybe proportional with the funds, but if there is ever to be a southern win before scotus gets into it, this is it. And imagine what victory in a southern state in may could do for momentum around the nation. So don’t leave NC out.
pam, will evan wolfson contact you to explain his rationale?
if so, please ask him about maryland too.
it sure is good to look at those marriage equality maps and see at least one southern state that isn’t blood red.
That’s blatantly shifting the goalposts, dude — you were the one who argued that there was no difference between Washington and Maryland.
I haven’t shifted any goalpost. Look at my post #2 for my original question. What’s their problem with NC and MD?