Maine gay marriage debate heats up, differs from Vermont
Toolbox
By DANIEL BARLOW Vermont Press Bureau - Published: October 24, 2009
MONTPELIER – Maine is now embroiled in the same-sex marriage debate that Vermont mostly avoided.
Maine lawmakers approved same-sex marriage this spring, shortly after Vermont lawmakers did the same, but that state now faces a Nov. 3 ballot referendum to appeal the new law.
The result has been same-sex marriage supporters and opponents raising and spending millions of dollars, near-constant television advertising from both sides and political accusations tossed back and forth – a more rural version of the volatile Proposition 8 battle in California this year.
"Special interest groups got the Legislature to approve homosexual marriage and tried to prevent Mainers from voting …" states one television advertisement, which claims that same-sex marriage will result in churches losing their tax-exempt status and "homosexual marriage being taught in public schools."
That advertisement was produced and aired by Stand for Marriage Maine, one of the organizations fighting to repeal the state's same-sex marriage law, which would have taken effect Sept. 1 if not for the upcoming ballot vote.
Unlike same-sex marriage opponents in Vermont, Stand for Marriage Maine is well-organized and funded. The Web site is flashy and interactive and the group has raised more than $1 million so far to spend, including contributions from national conservative groups such as Focus on the Family and the National Organization for Marriage.
The final financial reporting deadline before the Nov. 3 vote was Friday at midnight and activists on both sides said they expected to report more money flowing into the tiny rural state as the battle over same-sex rights continues.
"I think both sides are seeing money coming in from within the state and outside of it," said Scott Fish, the communications director for Stand for Marriage Maine. "Our opponents, for example, have raised money or received help from people and organizations in 46 other states and territories."
Indeed, the organization Maine Freedom to Marry, which recently renamed itself "No on 1/Protect Marriage Equality," has raised $2.7 million – a number that does not include the additional funds raised during the most recent campaign reporting period.
Among the groups donating to the Maine cause is Vermont Freedom to Marry, the organization that lobbied for same-sex marriage at the Statehouse this year. The group has given its Maine counterpart more than $35,000 so far this year and urges its supporters to join local phone banks to help get out the vote.
Judy Bevans, the chairwoman of the Vermont Democratic Party, is urging party members to join in too. In an appeal to supporters sent this week, Bevans wrote that "while two months ago, marriage equality was officially enacted into law here in Vermont, it is now under attack in Maine."
"Vermont Freedom to Marry supported the Legislature and now we are supporting them," Bevans said Friday. "We are providing our supporters with a portal to Freedom to Marry."
While Vermont's legislative debate this year was mostly civil, Maine's has gotten heated. Same-sex marriage supporters have aired television advertisements accusing opponents of "false statements" for allegedly claiming that the new law would lead to mandatory gay education of public school students.
Meanwhile, National Public Radio has objected to opponents' use of a four-year-old radio interview in their advertisements. And the National Organization for Marriage is challenging the state's campaign finance laws, which requires them to reveal who their donors are.
"We expect this vote to come down to a razor-thin margin," said Mark Sullivan, the communications director for Maine Freedom to Marry. "We knew from the beginning that this could easily end up as a referendum before the voters."
Vermont could have headed down this road. During debate over the same-sex marriage bill at the Statehouse this year, opponents frequently called on officials to put the referendum before the state's voters as a ballot question.
But the Vermont Constitution forbids such statewide referendums, according to the Secretary of State's Office, which oversees elections. The Vermont Legislature could have called for a statewide preference vote, according to Bill Dalton, the state's deputy secretary of state.
"But that vote would have been non-binding," he said.
In Maine, the process is much different. The state has a provision for what is calls a "people's vote" or a "people's veto" – which allows residents of the state to vote on any new law if enough signatures are gathered to trigger a referendum within 90 days of the end of the latest legislative session.
That number for same-sex marriage opponents in Maine was 55,087 signatures – equal to one-tenth of the number of people who voted in the state's last gubernatorial election. Fish, the communications director for the group opposed to same-sex marriage, said they had nearly twice that number of signatures – more than 100,000 – in half the time.
"We had 90 days," he said. "This only took us 45 and we had twice as many signatures as we needed."
With less than two weeks to go before the Nov. 3 vote, the rest of the country is watching what happens. Maine was the first state in the nation to have same-sex marriage passed by its Legislature and signed into law by its governor (in Vermont, lawmakers overrode Gov. James Douglas' veto of the marriage equality bill by a razor-thin margin).
The battle comes after months of successes for same-sex marriage supporters in Vermont, New Hampshire and Iowa. But it also comes after two back-to-back failed attempts to retain same-sex marriage rights in California.
"There is no question that there is a lot riding on the Maine vote, although the whole movement does not rise and fall with a single state," said Beth Robinson, an attorney with Vermont Freedom to Marry. "This is the first time that voters at the ballot box will have their say, so this decision will be very important."
Daniel.Barlow@timesargus.com
51