I have spent a number of years complaining about the interactions between Democrats and Republicans, but after the recent events involving the Keystone XL and civil liberties cave-ins, I've decided it's time to stop complaining and embrace the madness.
But I also feel like there's an ugly edge to all this...that hasn't really been fully exploited.
I mean, Republicans have tried to force through a lot of disgusting ideas this Congress as they've held various bills hostage, but it seems like, if they really tried, they could do so much more.
But I'm not here to complain, I'm here to help; that's why today we'll be trotting out a few ideas of our own that Republicans can attach to bills throughout 2012, with the assistance of certain errant Democrats.
It'll be fun, it'll be festive, but most of all...it'll be an exercise in Civic Responsibility, and in these difficult times, that's something we could sorely use.
Earlier today, Equality California announced Roland Palencia would be its new executive director. Unless you follow the travails of LGBT politics, this might not seem like big news. But if you care about the battle for LGBT equality, and for the broader cause of social justice, this is cause for celebration.
When Proposition 8 passed in November 2008, California's LGBT community was shell-shocked. The loss of our marriage rights prompted finger-pointing, caused plenty of soul searching, and widened divisions between grassroots activists and the California arm of "Gay Inc.", the more established LGBT organizations.
Many people called for new leadership, saying California's LGBT organizations were too insular, too corporate, too wedded to the status quo, and - to put it bluntly - too controlled by upper middle class white men from West Hollywood or San Francisco. They demanded leadership that was open, transparent, and concerned with forming a diverse and progressive coalition. They wanted leadership that came from and understood Oakland, Fresno, and East LA.
Evan Low is one of a rare breed-a true public servant and a progressive leader we all need to start paying attention to.
For those who don't know him, Evan is a local boy done good. A Silicon Valley native, Evan graduated from De Anza Community College and San Jose State before graduating from the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard. While attending college, Evan served on the Santa Clara Commission on Senior Care, and also worked with the Volunteer Center of Silicon Valley and the Campbell Chamber of Commerce.
Hi. I'm sure if you're reading this site, your e-mail box must be stuffed by now with pleas to volunteer for the election. But I want to let you know about one more volunteer opportunity that I think is really important, just in case it's a good fit for you.
I volunteer with Equality California, the group trying to repeal Proposition 8 and bring marriage equality back to California. I want to let you know that every weekend until the election Equality California will be holding phonebanks at each of its statewide offices doing get-out-the-vote calls for pro-LGBT candidates like Jerry Brown and Kamala Harris-- and we have a huge need for volunteers right now.
In their Opinion LA blog, the LA Times calls Governor Schwarzenegger "the gay friendly governator." Sure, he has recently been getting a lot of respect for declining, repeatedly, to get involved on behalf of Proposition 8. But how much is that worth?
Here's the Times take on the issue:
Who could have called it in 2003: Arnold Schwarzenegger, the body-building terminator who originally showcased his brutish masculinity as a campaign centerpiece and once called Democrats "girlie men," could go down in history as California's most gay-friendly governor to date. Sure, Schwarzenegger's done more for gay men and women when he's done nothing: Though he vetoed then-Assemblyman Mark Leno's bill to legalize same-sex marriage in 2005 (legislation that was almost certainly illegal under Proposition 22), he and Atty. Gen. Jerry Brown have refused to defend Proposition 8 in federal court.
This is in the context of a bill, AB 2199, that would delete from the state law books an official policy of curing homosexuality that recently passed out of the Legislature and is now heading for the Governor's desk. He'll likely sign the bill, as, truthfully, it isn't all that controversial. It sailed through both houses, with but one dissenting vote. The one vote would be the anachronistic and bigoted Assemblyman from San Diego, Joel Anderson.
It is great that Arnold has been on our side in the last few years. But, he has never been willing to put any of his own political capital on the line. Instead, he's content to wait it out. He vetoed the Harvey Milk Day bill before signing it. And with Mark Leno's marriage bills, he ran for the hills. His rationale was that somebody, the judges, the people, anybody but him, should say something first. Regardless of whether he thought Prop 22 was unconstitutional back in 2005 or not, he was not willing to take the lead by just signing the bill. If marriage inequality was odious to the constitution 6 months ago, it was odious in 2005 as well. Would it have stirred up some controversy? Most definitely. But real leaders have a tendency to do that.
Or perhaps he could have expended a bit of energy in 2008 campaigning against Prop 8? He did make a token endorsement of Prop 8, but beyond that was out of the picture.
But, LGBT issues go beyond the single issue of marriage, and on transgender rights he hasn't been quite so good, even of late:
On 12 October 2009, California Governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger, fell short of ensuring full protection of LGBTQ people in the California's prison system. Choosing to veto the LGBT Prisoner Safety Act (AB 382, Ammiano) and the Equal ID Act (AB 1185, Lieu), he has failed to cement two crucial policies into law. Needless to say, the LGBTQ community has been failed, and must now overturn the Governor's cruel and unusual decision.
First and foremost, the Governor's reasons for vetoing the LGBT Prisoner Safety Act (AB 382, Ammiano), was due to the fact that California's prison system already takes gender identity and sexual orientation into account when housing prisoners. Whilst that is very likely the case, GLBTQ inmates shall remain vulnerable until this becomes actual law. Until then, human rights violations may continue.
As for the vetoing of the Equal ID Act (AB 1185, Lieu), the Governor's reasons were similar. Thanks to a past landmark victory, Somers v. Superior Court, it had already been ruled unconstitutional to deny transgender inmates the right to petition a gender change. Despite this fact, the Transgender Law Center asserts that the "Equal ID Act would have alleviated any confusion in the statutory language itself." (Examiner blogs)
These veto messages are hardly the stuff of civil rights heroes. You hope, you think gender identity is considered in jails and prisons? Well, that might be nice in theory, but in reality the situation isn't quite so smooth. Transgender prisoners face very difficult conditions in the prisons, and very little extra caution is given to them.
In the end, I find it difficult to call this Governor gay friendly. Real friends are there for you, good times or bad. This one swoops in when the tide is clearly turning. At best, I would call him a frenemy.
(A hearty welcome to EQCA - promoted by Brian Leubitz)
By Chris Moore, Deputy Director of Political Affairs, Equality California
Last night's elections were invigorating! The outcomes are generally very favorable for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Californians and could prove to be history making. There are, however, some dangerous candidates on the horizon that will require our community to be energized and cohesive in order to beat them.
Nearly every single EQCA endorsed candidate won their primary yesterday, and we were hard at work helping to make that happen. Our Political Action Committee and its many donors directly contributed to candidates' campaigns. Our volunteers and staff made over 20,000 phone calls to urge support of our candidates and to get out the vote. We sent over 140,000 pieces of mail to every corner of the state. And to ensure that our candidates succeeded, we closed our offices yesterday and our 44 staff spent the day working on the most critical campaigns.
Hi there, Nicholas Hatten here. Ye of McNerney '06 and '08 campaigns and Stockton's Drinking Liberally. First time poster but long time lurker. What's got me so excited that I've decided to break my lurking streak? Well, the awesomeness that is San Joaquin County's LGBT community.
A year ago this month I moved back to the lovely city of Stockton after a decade long love affair with the Bay Area and re-discovering the Central Valley during my time with Team McNerney. Now I was already aware of how progressive leaders like Councilmember Susan Eggman (LGBT icon), Jerry & Carol Bailey (single payer icons), Martha Gamez (uber-grassroots icon) and others had helped change the landscape of politics in the Central Valley. What I wasn't aware of was how much the LGBT had matured and evolved into a political force during my time away.
End of life situations can often be even more tragic for LGBT couples. We are far less likely to have children to care for our elderly, and the current generation of LGBT senior citizens is still dealing with a lot of entrenched homophobia from their peers. However, a recent case shows just how difficult this situation can be. Kate Kendall of NCLR wrote about the story of one Sonoma County couple that was tragically separated at the end of their lives:
Without authority, without determining the value of Clay and Harold's possessions accumulated over the course of their 20 years together or making any effort to determine which items belonged to whom, the county took everything Harold and Clay owned and auctioned off all of their belongings. Adding further insult to grave injury, the county removed Clay from his home and confined him to a nursing home against his will. The county workers then terminated Clay and Harold's lease and surrendered the home they had shared for many years to the landlord.
Three months after he was hospitalized, Harold died in the nursing home. Because of the county's actions, Clay missed the final months he should have had with his partner of 20 years. Compounding this tragedy, Clay has literally nothing left of the home he had shared with Harold or the life he was living up until the day that Harold fell, because he has been unable to recover any of his property. The only memento Clay has is a photo album that Harold painstakingly put together for Clay during the last three months of his life.
Take a moment to read the whole article, or find more information at NCLR's Elder Law Project. Basically, Harold broke his hip, and the County determined that both of them needed to go to nursing homes. They packed them off to different nursing homes that didn't respect their relationship. Furthermore, they were not granted access and the respect that they deserved, both under common decency as well as under the legal documents that they had signed.
Would such a scenario have occurred with a straight couple? It seems doubtful, and this is the crux of the problem that we face. Not only is our situation simply out of the norm for social workers, but lack of resources means that training is falling behind. There is no way to make up for such a tragedy, but Sonoma County should at the very least start with an apology to Clay and work towards helping him recover as much of his stuff as possible.
Thing is, Sonoma County was well outside of the lines of the law in this case, so legislation can only partly address the situation. The most obvious solution would be marriage equality, and the respect of same-sex marriages. But, we need to ensure that those on the front lines are adequately aware of the laws already on the books and how to treat LGBT couples. This is a shameful story that should never be repeated.
Times were different in 1967. Homosexuality was still listed in the Diagnostic And Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) and considered something of an "illness." So different in fact that the following request was made, in law, of the Department of Mental Health at the time:
plan, conduct and cause to be conducted scientific research into the causes and cures of sexual deviation, including deviations conducive to sex crimes against children, and the causes and cures of homosexuality, and into methods of identifying potential sex offenders.
There, listed amongst pedophiles, was our community. The worst part is that this mess is still on the books of California law. Hopefully, that will soon change:
Assemblywoman Bonnie Lowenthal figures 43 years is long enough to try to "cure" homosexuality. So the Long Beach Democrat has introduced a bill that would strip a section from California's Welfare and Institutions Code mandating a search for such a cure.
It's unclear how seriously the department ever heeded the Legislature's instructions. Department spokeswoman Nancy Kincaid said any research that did go on would have ended decades ago. But Lowenthal thinks the edict's mere existence on the books is odious enough to warrant its demise.
"The fact this language has survived this long is pretty amazing," she said in a news release. "We need to blot it out and make it clear we're moving forward as a society, not backward." (SacBee)
This is just one of the many laws on the books across the nation that has such out of date language. Despite their unconstitutionality as declared in Lawrence v Texas, there are still sodomy laws on the books of 14 states. Many of which are only applicable to same sex couples.
While many of these laws will never actually be erased from the books, doing so is a worthwhile use of the Legislature's resources. It reminds us of the progress we have made, and the challenges as we move forward.
URGENT ALERT! California's election districts may be drawn by a group
that is 73% white and 69% male! How will the interests of California's
diverse population be fairly represented?
This possibility could become fact, unless we encourage a diverse
group of people to apply for the Citizens Redistricting Commission
before the February 16th deadline. Click here or visit
http://www.wedrawthelines.ca.gov to apply today.
Every ten years, the state's electoral districts are redrawn following
the census. Drawing these district boundaries determines the make-up
of the legislature and influences every policy issue our state faces.
For the first time ever, this will be done by a group of citizens just
like you.
We need you to help ensure that this Redistricting Commission is
sensitive to the nuances of California's diverse communities. We need
you to stand-up for women, children, elderly, disabled, veterans,
people of color, and the LGBT community. We need you to help steer
California's legislative and policy agenda by taking part in the
redistricting process. We need you and your like-minded friends and
family members to apply to become a Citizens Redistricting
Commissioner!
The deadline to apply for the Citizens Redistricting Commission is
Tuesday, February 16th. Even if you are unable to serve on the
Citizens Redistricting Commission, you can help by forwarding this
email to your like-minded friends and family members and asking them
to apply.
Help steer California's legislative and policy agenda by ensuring we
draw districts that represent California's interests, not the
interests of a select few.
The federal trial, Perry v. Schwarzenegger is supposed to start on Monday and Judge Walker has ruled to allow delayed YouTube posting of video. But earlier today the defendants (Prop 8 supporters) filed an emergency petition with the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals asking them to stop the trial and overturn Walkers' ruling on YouTube. Merc:
In court papers, lawyers for the Prop. 8 campaign argue that Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker did not have the legal authority to permit cameras in the trial, which is set to begin Monday in San Francisco. Prop 8 backers say that broadcasting the proceedings "is likely to negatively affect the fairness of the trial."
The plaintiffs had until 3 PM today to respond. This is all likely to move pretty quickly, given that the trial is supposed to start the next business day.
Meanwhile, NOM thinks they are going to lose the case.
Over the last few days they have been clearly communicating to their email list that Judge Walker is not friendly to them and now are blatantly saying they expect to lose the trial.
Brian Brown just sent out an email to NOM's list. Karen Occam has part of it up at LGBT POV. Brown writes:
We do not expect to win at the trial level, but with God's help, at least five members of the current Supreme Court will have the courage to defend our Constitution from this grave attack.
Their major complaint is that Judge Walker has made this a full-blown trial, complete with witnesses and a broad set of issues under consideration. It will be a full and complete vetting of the issues, motivations and law surrounding marriage and equality for all.
This is perhaps my favorite part of Brown's massive missive:
That's right, the Constitution drafted by our Founding Fathers contains a right to gay marriage--in their twisted view. This is judicial activism on steroids, and a flagrant disrespect for civility, common sense, and democracy.
Gay-marriage advocates believe they have a right to win. They think you and I don't count. NOM will be filing an amicus brief in this litigation, and will work with Protect Marriage and the lawyers for Prop 8 in every way we are asked.
My Mr. Brown your real feelings about marriage equality supporters seems to have slipped out. Usually you are so nice and polite, but now we are "twisted"? Would that be your bigoted side, showing about how you really feel about LGBTs?
So a legal trial, where there is lots of structure, procedure and rules is now disrespectful, uncivil, lacks common sense and is undemocratic? Pardon me while I laugh.
Yes, we do believe we have a right to win a court case. The judicial system creates winners and losers, shocker I know...
It isn't that we think you don't count, it's just that we think there are three branches of government with checks and balances on the other two. The judicial system has a role to play in determining the constitutionality of both federal and state law. That's exactly what will happen in the courtroom (with some luck) on Monday.
This trial is going to be full of drama. I'm very much looking forward to it. I know I've been a bit of a slacker about blogging as of late, but expect some more writing from me over the next few weeks about the trial.
John Perez is not a household name. Yet. In the coming days, Perez may well make history, becoming the first openly gay speaker of any state legislature in the United States.
This, from the California that narrowly voted to undo same sex marriage. This from the same California that faces as much as $40 billion in deficits in 2010. This from the same California that has a minority majority population, but where Latinos are fast becoming the majority. This from the same California that used to provide the best education on the planet to all and now can not graduate the majority of most high school students in Los Angeles.
John Perez is California. He's openly gay. He's Latino. He's a son of Los Angeles. He's an intellectual, a strategist, an environmentalist, a labor leader. He's an organizer, a skilled consensus-builder, a unifier and a stunningly disarming public speaker. John is that rare elected official that we know will hold the public interest at heart.
The only real question is why John would want the job? If he becomes Speaker of the California State Assembly, he'll face the worst problems this state has seen since the depression or even before. But he wants the job -- and I can't imagine a better leader in Sacramento to take it on. John has all of the qualities, and from what I hear, most of the support necessary to win. If the Democrats in the assembly unify behind John and avoid the "speaker wars" that have often marred the period since term limits passed, he will become the speaker.
I've known John for nearly six years. We met in March 2003, when I was a relatively inexperienced but highly motivated supporter of Howard Dean's candidacy for the White House. I had, for years, been involved in politics, but never so deeply as Dean's inspiring campaign to reverse the direction of our country.
At the suggestion of a mutual friend, John met with me at a restaurant at Universal City Walk right after one of the first Dean "Meetups" that would propel that campaign forward. He sat with me, very patiently explaining the who and the what of California labor and progressive politics. He did not need to do that; he could easily have looked at this relative neophyte in state politics and said, "if this is what Dean has to offer, I'm out of here." But he did not. And he was always there to help, after I became Chair of Dean's presidential campaign in California and then went on to found the Courage Campaign.
California rarely has the opportunity to place the assembly in the hands of a speaker for more than a year or two. John would follow Karen Bass, who has lived through one of the worst imaginable times in our history. Karen is a true progressive, and she supports John. So do I. And while these leadership battles seem very arcane and insider, it's time for all of us in this state who support progress to understand that we have a stake in who leads our assembly.
In the next few days, John Perez may well make history. And, as progress marches on, he will eventually live in a state that allows him to marry the man he loves.
The SF Chronicle says that John Perez has locked up the Speakership and the transition will start shortly:
We're hearing that Assemblyman John A. Perez, D-Los Angeles, has the votes to grab the speakership -- if he does, he would become the Assembly's first openly gay leader in California history. (SF Gate blog)
As a gay man myself, such a result would once again remind me why I love this state. Despite Prop 8 and all the ridiculousness surrounding it, I put up with the mess in this state because it offers such opportunity. California has been a leader in civil rights, and will continue to be a leader. This would be just one more step along the road to full equality for the LGBT community.
That being said, Perez, or whomever is the next Speaker, will only continue to preside over the continuing downward spiral. The system is set up to fail. The gridlock, the supermajority, the budget twisted in knots, these are the issues that face the incoming Speaker. Why anybody would want that job is still somewhat beyond me.
Congratulations on that. Perhaps there's still time for a recount.
I am thrilled to be going, not to watch history being made, but to watch a history finally start to be written that includes LGBT people, their lives, their stories and their achievements.
Harvey's nephew Stuart Milk will attend the ceremony on behalf of his uncle, along with family members of Mayor George Moscone, Assemblymember Tom Ammiano and Senator Mark Leno. The Hall of Fame exhibit at the California Museum will be toured by scores of California students who will finally get in touch with a key piece of LGBT history. Also, one of the winners of this year's California Dreamers Challenge, a scholarship for high school students, will be announced tonight who is a gay youth who was inspired by Harvey Milk.
EQCA worked hard to pass a bill in 2009 creating Harvey Milk Day in California to commemorate Milk's legacy across California and in our schools, but we still need you to help make it happen. Leading up to the first official Harvey Milk Day on May 22, 2010, EQCA plans to work with local groups and educators to develop educational materials and plan appropriate commemorative events across the state (May 21 and 22 in San Francisco, May 22 in Los Angeles and May 23 in Palm Springs). Every child should grow up knowing they are valuable.
Watch out for our organizing kit, prepare to attend one of our events across the state, and start talking to people you know about why Milk's legacy matters.
LOS ANGELES, CA - The Courage Campaign today called for more research and time to change hearts and minds before returning to the ballot to restore marriage for gay and lesbian couples in California. At least one initiative to restore same-sex marriage is currently circulating that, if it qualifies, would appear on the November, 2010 ballot...
"For months, we have laid out the criteria for moving forward. Like the Obama Campaign, we understand that we need a combination of powerful and clear research that informs an expertly run campaign, an unstoppable movement that harnesses the new energy we have seen since the passage of Prop. 8 and the connections through personal stories and outreach in order to win at the ballot box," said Rick Jacobs, the Courage Campaign founder and Chair. "We are taking the lessons learned from last year's Prop. 8 campaign, the campaigns in Maine and other states to understand the fundamental work that must be done before moving forward in California. We also must come together as a community to create a broad coalition and governance structure, put in place a strong manager and secure the resources to win. Right now, the pieces are not all in place to do so confidently."
I am understanding this to mean that the Courage Campaign is no longer on board with a 2010 campaign and will be shifting their resources to a 2012 effort (although the language is oddly vague-- if any Courage Campaign people are reading this, any clarification would be appreciated greatly). At a minimum the clear message of this release is that Courage Campaign does not at this time support the specific 2010 ballot filing by Love Honor Cherish, which they reference in the first paragraph.
Courage Campaign is currently soliciting volunteers for their Prop. 8 repeal and "Equality Team" efforts here. EQCA is also soliciting volunteers to canvass for their 2012 repeal campaign here.
(I wrote about this last week, but moving beyond partisanship, this is important. I would argue that we should be looking for progressives to fill those non-partisan seats, and maybe even a centrist Republican for those seats. - promoted by Brian Leubitz)
Drawing our legislative districts used to be the job of elected officials, but now it's up to YOU. That's because of a voter-approved measure last year that called for the creation of a new Citizens Redistricting Commission. Last Thursday, the State Auditor launched a new website for the effort: http://WeDrawTheLines.ca.gov.
It's absolutely critical that pro-LGBT citizens apply for the commission to ensure that the new boundaries are drawn to empower our community--not gerrymandered to divide us.
There are a few lessons to take away from last night's elections. The main one is that Democrats should act like Democrats if they want Democrats to show up and vote. Low-turnout elections are base elections: you have to turn out your base or you will lose.
Here we are a year later and where do we find ourselves in the fight for marriage equality in California? Two major camps debating on whether to return to the ballot in 2010 or 2012 and we have to ask ourselves the question, "Have we learned from our mistakes?" Are egos and attitudes being altered in order for power to be shared and different voices heard? Has a clear strategy been created and presented? And what about our motivation - are we still angry and humiliated from our loss a year ago that we are planning to return to the polls with revenge?
While Rev. Stringfellow suggests some answers, he more importantly calls on us to self-evaluate. We are asking voters and society to recognize the dignity of LGBT people, but are we recognizing the value and dignity of those different from us? Of those who live on the East side, over the bridge or in the middle? Of those with whom we disagree about 2010 or 2012? Even of those who do not yet recognize our inherent human dignity as LGBT people?
We politicos are strategic thinkers and implementers who focus much of our energy on winning campaigns, but to achieve permanence in our victories we must ask and answer these questions.
I'm at a beautiful retreat house on a hilltop in the mountains north of San Luis Obispo as thirty volunteers led by Courage Campaign's brilliant field team learn the skills to be community organizers. The spirit and energy in the room outshine the magnificent California countryside.
Every four years, California exports labor and capital for presidential campaigns. I witnessed that firsthand as chair of Howard Dean's presidential campaign here in California when, in 2003/4, we sent hundreds of people to Iowa, New Mexico and Arizona to fight in the early primaries. And we raised millions online from California to make Howard Dean the voice that forever changed the Democratic Party. But then what?
Ready for a video break? Here is the premier ad that the Washington anti-domestic partnership org Protect Marriage Washington has unveiled. And yes, this is for real. Donate now to help us drown out this rubbish with some sanity.
In the beginning, GOD created the heaven and the earth,and formed man. And he made a woman and brought her unto the man. Thus God established, and defined marriage between a man and a woman. What god has joined together, let not man put asunder.
Senate bill 5688 violates God's mandate. On November 3rd, vote to preserve marriage and protect our children on Referendum 71. Reject senate bill 5688. Paidforbyportectmarriagewashington
They say history is written by the victors. Well, tonight we should all feel victorious as