Collective Wisdom of Our

Grassroots Community
Summary of Community Town Hall
and On-Line Survey Findings
January 24, 2009

Pamela Brown, Marriage Equality USA Policy Director

pamela@marriageequality.org
Molly McKay, Marriage Equality USA Media Director
molly@marriageequality.org
Our collective wisdom is
presented through two reports.
 “We Will Never Go Back”
presents grassroots feedback on
No on 8 campaign
 “Prop 8 Hurt My Family – Ask
Me How” presents stories that
illustrate the harm caused by
initiative campaigns like Prop 8
 Town hall input from over 10
town locations in the Bay Area,
Sacramento, and Southern
California
 On-line survey responses from
over 3,100 participants
 Available for download at
www.marriageequality.org
Time to reflect and plan how
we can best move ahead…
 Looking back on No on Prop 8 campaign, we
did amazing things:
 No on 8 exceeded fundraising goals.
 Field staff and volunteers worked non-stop.
 Election results show:
 Gained support in every county in California
(comparing Prop 22 and Prop 8 results).
 Lost by 2 percent; a gap that polling shows
would have disappeared if the election was
held after the November 15th Join the Impact
rallies.
 We have an amazing legal team that is
presenting a strong case that Prop 8 should
be overturned.
 We provide this constructive feedback to
ensure:
 Input from the grassroots community is heard
on best practices for messages, messengers and
grassroots field strategies.
 Mistakes made don’t happen again.
 Help us move ahead.
Clergy leaders were underutilized
by the No on 8 campaign.
 Clergy leaders, particularly those
who had performed marriage
ceremonies, were the best
spokespeople to counter faith leaders
used by the Yes on 8 campaign.

 Over reliance on focus group findings

directed clergy to phone banks,
instead of visibility actions and
outreach to congregations.

 CA marriage case and now Prop 8

amicus briefs identified supportive
clergy across California.
Leaders of color were
underutilized by the No on 8 campaign.
 There is a deep bench of Leaders from the Black, Asian,
Latino and Native American communities. We must have a
campaign where all communities are well-represented as
leaders, spokespeople, and in campaign literature.
 “We need to engage with all people and not just people
“like us”…to ensure we are not acting in unintentionally
marginalizing or discriminatory ways.”
 “I feel that some of the language used in the ads,
particularly „unfair and wrong‟ was very Caucasian
centric. Most people of color live in a world that is
unfair and wrong, so this washed right over us.”
 Funding to distribute Spanish and Asian language materials
and ads were needed at the outset of the campaign.
 We must make institutional changes so that the LGBTI
leadership and organizations reflect the natural diversity of
our communities.
No on 8 ads lacked heart and
inexcusably excluded LGBTI people.
 Survey respondents and town hall
participants agreed:
 “The decision to „hide‟ gay
people was unacceptable.”
 No on 8 messaging was “swift
boated” by the Yes on 8 campaign.
 No on 8 ads were too abstract and
“lacked heart.”
 We can’t take the personhood out
of a human rights campaign.
 In moving ahead, community input
emphasized the need to present
personal stories.
“Prop 8 Hurt My Family, Ask Me How”
presents stories we must share.
 Prop 8 hurt real people & frightened children of same-
sex parents.
 “My 6-year old, the day after we lost Prop 8, asked me with
tears running down his face if we were still a family.”
 Prop 8 caused straight allies to face homophobia and
tore families apart.
 “I am a the loving parent of two young women who happen
to be gay. But my opposition to Prop 8 led to my home
being vandalized.”
 Prop 8 promoted bullying in schools and destroyed
neighborhoods.
 “Students at my high school harassed me…they would
chase me down the hallways yelling „Yes on 8‟ and called me
derogatory names.”
 Prop 8 must be overturned so no individual or family
ever has to endure such painful experiences.
The No on 8 field plan lacked visibility
and missed potential volunteers.
 Though many people enjoyed their volunteer experience,
others expressed frustration at top-down control of field
campaign and early restrictions to phone banking at
central offices limited volunteer participation early on.
 Our survey respondents put phone banking at the bottom
of the list as an effective strategy in promoting marriage
equality and instead highlighted importance of visibility
actions to put a human face on this issue.
 Election Day action was cited as memorable, was it as
effective as Get Out the Vote activities?
 November 15th’s Stonewall 2.0 illustrated what can be
done on a national scale. Our February events provide an
opportunity to do it again: MEUSA Marriage Counter
actions (2/12), Capital Rally (2/16), EQCA Lobby Day
(2/17)
The No on 8 campaign abandoned
our Central Valley supporters.
 Central Valley supporters not only felt isolated in their
own communities, but betrayed by their own
campaign.
 “We were drowning in a sea of yellow Yes on 8 signs
and ads, and the only thing we hear from the No on
8 campaign is more requests for money.”
 “We donated all our wedding money to the No on 8
campaign and got nothing out of it. I felt sold up
the river.”
 Every major Central Valley newspaper came out with a
No on 8 endorsement, but the first No on 8 TV ad
wasn’t seen until the weekend before the election.
 Central Valley supporters need leadership support to
organize public education efforts to erase the ugly
stereotypes that remain.
What can we do today to win
marriage equality tomorrow?
 Learn how we can create an Obama nation…
 Respect, empower and include.

 Merge our old-school grassroots organizing with the

power of new technology.
 Get organized locally/regionally starting with Equality
Summit participant list and build list from there
 Engage youth and others to help maximize use of social
networking tools, blogs, etc.

 Re-establish an independently funded Freedom to

Marry Coalition.
 Create a central website with our organizations, roster
of leaders, and calendar of events.
 Moderate monthly teleconference call.
 Create task forces to advance targeted outreach work.
What do we do if we have to
face another ballot initiative?
 Clergy leaders must be utilized as major spokespeople for
the campaign.
 People of color must be major campaign spokespeople and
multilingual ads and materials must be easily accessible from
the start.
 LGBT families, including children, telling their personal
stories must be featured in ads.
 Advertising must be shown in all 58 counties.

 A properly funded grassroots effort must include local

canvassing and volunteer recruitment teams and out-of-state
phone banking managed via the web.
 Mailers for absentee voters and a door-to-door Get Out the
Vote effort must occur.
What do we do to support
marriage equality nationwide?
 We must share our collective wisdom and
strategies with other states so other states
don’t go it alone.
 We must develop a calendar of visibility
events to promote earned media
nationwide.
 We must identify projects specifically aimed
at building support to overturn the Defense
of Marriage Act.
 “Never doubt that a small group of
thoughtful, committed citizens can change
Be The Change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that
You Want To See in the World ever has.” Margaret Mead