|
The
Boston
Globe
Gay-marriage coalition debates its next mission
By Lisa Wangsness,
boston.com from the Web, October 29, 2007
MassEquality, the gay-marriage
advocacy coalition, created one of the most effective political campaigns
Massachusetts has ever seen, leading a battle that attracted national attention
and culminated in a historic victory last June, when the Legislature defeated an
amendment to ban same-sex marriage.
But four months later, the group is agonizing over a question born of its own
success: What, if anything, should it do now?
The debate is creating tensions among onetime allies. Some gay leaders
believe MassEquality should broaden its mission to include issues such as
transgender rights and HIV/AIDS, while others disagree and say expanding
Mass-Equality's agenda to other gay and lesbian causes could dilute its
effectiveness, crowd out smaller groups that advocate for gay rights, and
alienate some lawmakers and donors who supported same-sex marriage. They
believe the group should stay focused on its original mission and perhaps share
its expertise with gay-marriage advocates in other states.
Some involved with the group are raising concerns that the organization has been
spending more than $100,000 a month since June without a clear mission. A
confidential survey of Mass-Equality "stakeholders" leaked to the newspaper Bay
Windows last week found little consensus about what the group's role should be.
Susan Ryan-Vollmar, the newspaper's editor, argued in a column that some
MassEquality board members have conflicts of interest because they do paid work
for other gay advocacy groups that might view a larger MassEquality as
competition, a situation she called troubling.
"This is a highly sensitive" discussion, said one person familiar with the
group's internal discussions. "It's one that's very charged, and it's
difficult. Everybody involved knew this was a conversation we were going
to have to have at the end of what we all hoped would be a victory, and now
we're having it."
One thing everyone seems to agree on is that the group must keep its promise to
help lawmakers in the 2008 elections who supported gay marriage. Thanks
partly to the group's massive fund-raising and grass-roots efforts, not a single
one of the 195 lawmakers who have run for reelection after voting in favor of
gay marriage since the group's birth has lost a seat, said Marc Solomon,
executive director of the organization.
"We told legislators we'd stick with them if they stuck with us," he said.
But, beyond that, the future is an open question.
MassEquality evolved from a group of gay organizations that had been working
together on rights issues since 2001; the group began in earnest in late 2003,
after the Supreme Judicial Court handed down its historic decision legalizing
gay marriage, and advocates knew they would have to work together as never
before to fight attempts to pass a constitutional ban.
The heat of battle encouraged cooperation, and many smaller groups set aside
their own agendas to focus on marriage. Mass-Equality pulled in millions
of dollars from local and national donors, established 11 affiliates across the
state, and, at its height, employed 22 full-time and 35 part-time staff members.
"All the organizations worked together brilliantly," said Arline Isaacson,
co-chair of the Massachusetts Gay and Lesbian Political Caucus and a leader of
the Mass-Equality lobbying team. "All the groups set aside their
differences to focus like a laser beam on defending marriage."
After the Legislature's June 14 vote, and the announcement by foes of same-sex
marriage that they would shelve plans for another ballot petition,
MassEquality's board decided to do some soul-searching about its future.
It hired a consultant, conducted focus groups, interviewed donors and leaders,
and held a public brainstorming session. The board decided to keep only
its core staff -- about eight full-time positions -- while it deliberated its
mission, said David Wilson, chairman of the MassEquality board.
Wilson said the group has discussed many options, from disbanding -- which no
one wants to do, he said -- to working only on same-sex marriage, not just in
Massachusetts but in other New England states, to taking on other issues of
concern to gays and lesbians in Massachusetts. The board plans a final
vote on the organization's future on Nov. 3.
Wilson said he personally would like to see MassEquality build on its success by
taking on new issues.
"I believe that we should not let go of the power and the leverage we have built
over the last three years, and we should use that to improve the lives of GLBT
folks in this state," he said, referring to the gay, lesbian, bisexual, and
transgender community.
Two groups of lawmakers echoed that sentiment in letters to the MassEquality
board earlier this month, emphasizing that Mass-Equality had built up
considerable credibility at the State House. "MassEquality is the known
and respected 'brand' in the Legislature," wrote Jarrett Barrios, a former state
senator from Cambridge, and Senators Edward M. Augustus Jr. of Worcester and
Stanley C. Rosenbergof Amherst, both Democrats.
But other leaders in the community worry that MassEquality could compromise its
relationship with some lawmakers if it embraced other issues.
"I think it's naive for us to wander around in other areas that may have
different levels of controversy and may dilute our ability to support
legislators who are with us" on marriage, said one significant MassEquality
donor and fund-raiser. "The value of this organization is that it has
meant what it has said, so it can't say, 'Well, we're supporting transgender
rights, but -- wink, nod -- we will stay with you even if you don't."
The donor voiced the fear that MassEquality could alienate some of its more
conservative donors, creating the chance that the gay community would have to
build a new coalition should a threat to same-sex marriage resurface in
Massachusetts.
Tom Lang, a North Shore activist, said he would like to see a statewide gay
advocacy group, but one that is more attentive to the grassroots than
MassEquality is now. "What issues are going to be addressed and who is
going to choose what issues are important?" he said. "When something
becomes a major lobby group ... it's difficult for little people to have a
voice."
Others worry that MassEquality might compete with the very advocacy
organizations that built it.
"It doesn't make sense for it to replicate what other organizations are already
doing," said one person involved in the talks who was torn over what direction
the group should take. "An organization shouldn't look for a mission to
continue its existence."
But many leaders of the small organizations that advocate for gay rights counter
that they would appreciate MassEquality's help. Gunner Scott, who cochairs
the Massachusetts Transgender Political Coalition, which is working on a
transgender bill now before the Legislature, said his small, all-volunteer group
is ill-equipped to lead a major State House lobbying effort and would benefit
dramatically from the staff and expertise of MassEquality.
Rebecca Haag, executive director of the AIDS Action Committee of Massachusetts,
said her organization, too, would love to see a bigger, broader MassEquality.
"This is about expanding our political sophistication," she said.
|
