* The Sun-Times takes a look at the gay marriage bill. Not much new here…
[Longtime gay-rights activist Rick Garcia] said perhaps the main impediment facing Illinois is the political calendar. Lawmakers seeking re-election must submit their nominating petitions Dec. 2, more than three weeks after the scheduled Nov. 7 conclusion of the fall session. That leaves time for potential candidates opposed to same-sex marriage to gather enough signatures to mount primary challenges against House members who vote for Harris’ legislation.
“That’s what the holdup is,” Garcia said.
Same-sex marriage critic Bob Gilligan, executive director of the Catholic Conference of Illinois, said opponents still appear to outnumber supporters of the legislation because of its potential impact on religious liberties and that, indeed, possible primary challenges await any “yes” votes in the House.
Gilligan acknowledged the U.S. Supreme Court decisions and the pope’s statements are now “in the mix,” but local sentiment trumps those headlines. “Legislators have to respond to their constituents in their districts, and in many legislative districts, it’s an issue that’s close.”
The Sun-Times also reported that the sponsors could amend the bill so it takes effect in June, meaning they’ll just have to find a simple majority during the veto session, rather than a super majority.
* From a press release…
Gov. Pat Quinn will open the March on Springfield for Marriage Equality on Tuesday, Oct. 22 with a welcome.
He will be followed by speakers that represent the breadth and depth of the equal marriage coalition in Illinois. All speakers will deliver a common message to Illinois legislators: A majority of Illinoisans support the freedom to marry and the time for marriage equality in Illinois is now.
LGBT organizations, families and faith leaders will be joined at the podium by national and regional coalition partners for the 90 minute rally. They include:
• Michael Carrigan, president of the Illinois AFL-CIO
• Rudy Lozano, Uniting America director, Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights
• Jamie Frazier, senior pastor, Lighthouse Church
• Bonnie Grabenhofer, National Action vice president, National Organization for Women (NOW)
• The Rev. Mark Kiyimba, leader of the Unitarian Universalist Church of Kampala, Uganda
• Toni Weaver, president, Parents & Friends of Lesbians and Gays (Northern Illinois Region)
• Scott Cross, Illinois Chapter lead, President Barack Obama’s “Organizing for Action”
• Brigid Leahy, director, Planned Parenthood of Illinois
* The other side will also have a Statehouse rally, of course.
* And then there’s the money problem. Back in June, Equality Illinois pledged to raise $500,000 for a grassroots and media effort to pass the marriage bill. The group’s political action committee was supposed to raise $250,000. From a June 17th Equality Illinois press release…
The organization’s political action arm, Equality Illinois Political Action Committee (EQIL PAC), has pledged the other $250,000 in order to match marriage opponents dollar-for-dollar on the political battlefield.
“We will not shy away or be outraised in fighting for our freedom,” said Bernard Cherkasov, CEO of Equality Illinois. “Everywhere candidates turn in 2014, they’ll have to be aware that the information we bring to voters and the direct action in their campaigns might be present to help or challenge them, depending on whether they believe in the right for all couples in Illinois to have equal recognition under the state’s marriage law.”
The $250,000 political action piece of the Fight Back for Marriage plan, though formidable, is a target set to directly confront an opponent of LGBT equality, the so-called National Organization for Marriage, which threatened to spend $250,000 to oppose particularly Republican legislators who supported the freedom to marry.
“We will defend those candidates who demonstrate a dedication to the freedom to marry through their votes and campaign commitments,” said Jeremy Gottschalk, chair of Equality Illinois PAC board of directors. “And we will ensure that those who stand in the way of marriage equality are held accountable to the voters. No opponents of marriage equality can be sure that their re-election campaigns will be easy next year.”
* But as my colleague David Ormsby reported this morning…
In the third quarter, Equality Illinois raised just $25,421. A day after the reporting period closed, it added another $5,000 from Chicago Cubs owner Laura Ricketts.
Despite all the anger in the immediate aftermath of the bill stalling in the House, advocates have so far failed to convert that post-session consternation into cash.
That’s absolutely horrible and inexcusable. If you want to frighten your enemies and soothe your potential allies, you’d better raise a whole lot more money than that.
Even so, many proponents remain hopeful that the marriage bill can pass during veto session.
* The Question: When do you think the gay marriage bill will pass? Take the poll and then explain your answer in comments, please.
survey software
- train111 - Tuesday, Oct 15, 13 @ 12:37 pm:
After Jan 1st and before the March primary. Too many are nervous about potential primary opponents. Once December 2 is gone and that ‘unknown’ has passed, then reps will be alot more free to vote their conscience. The general election is too meaningless in too many districts for it to be of any effect
- Give Me A Break - Tuesday, Oct 15, 13 @ 12:37 pm:
Had to vote for after the General Election. Which is also when I think you will see a true pension reform bill move. Have to have some lame ducks cast votes on the tough issues on their way out the bronze doors.
- OneMan - Tuesday, Oct 15, 13 @ 12:39 pm:
After the primary…
The fund raising is kind of sad…
- Belle - Tuesday, Oct 15, 13 @ 12:39 pm:
I went with during the 2014 Veto Session since I lack faith in the GOP and Dem African Americans getting it together to do the right thing.
It’s just not as big a deal as some people want to make it into. Plus–it will help the event industry as we celebrate all of the weddings and showers.
- Chavez-respecting Obamist - Tuesday, Oct 15, 13 @ 12:44 pm:
I’m surprised at the optimism here. I went with #2–nobody wants a primary opponent if they can help it.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Oct 15, 13 @ 12:45 pm:
Ok, I will go first I guess…
Here is a reality that those dinging on Rep. Harris failed to think about when dealing with “head counts”, and “the Speakeer”, and “organization.”
Threats. Don’t. Work.
If you say you are going to raise $500K, you better know from Jump Street that you have the $500K in the first 30 days all lined up.
Further, you want to “impress” Speaker Madigan and the stragglers to your cause, be it SSM, or Fracking, or any bill;
Know where you stand withouth someone else telling you where you “really stand”. that goes for all the above, but also including the idea of knowing and being able to execute a plan that goes to … a second step.
It is though Heather “Vote Countula” Steans is again trying to figure out where her senate votes “all went”. If you are not one step ahead, the you are actually falling way behind.
Who looks good?
Speaker Madigan and Rep. Greg Harris. We know them. These two have been “wrong”… all along.
Now, with the coalition set, and $500K in the bank, and Lobbyist at the ready, and working with Rep. Harris and the Speaker all done …
Wait, …. the “paper tiger”, that promised all this money and influence and leverage… better get on the horn to Rep. Harris and really find out … how to get a bill passed.
Unless they can’t spare a “dime” to call.
As Speaker Madigan says, “They’ll be fine”.
Pathetic attempt to “Teach”, when all these “movers and shakers” should be “Learning” … from Greg Harris and Speaker Madigan.
- A guy... - Tuesday, Oct 15, 13 @ 12:48 pm:
IMO it will pass, but it will take a while. Sometimes swinging 15 votes is easier than swinging 5 or 6. The bill will need a little more overt muscle behind it than what currently exists. In short, they need a dam to break.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Oct 15, 13 @ 12:48 pm:
Voted “After the Primary.”
Why? Cause that might make sense to Speaker Madigan, and might give Rep. Harris enough time to work to cobble 60, and see how Leader Durkin’s Campaign Crew have the General Election candidates lined up against the HDems.
- RMW Stanford - Tuesday, Oct 15, 13 @ 12:54 pm:
After Jan. 1st but before the March Primary. With the threat of primary challengers gone they should be able to get togther 60 votes. It is in the best interest of the State GOP for it pass before the General Election
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Oct 15, 13 @ 1:01 pm:
===It is in the best interest of the State GOP for it pass before the General Election===
Unless the HGOP add 10 votes to SB10, it is not even close to being favorable to have it pass before the General Election.
Add to the “fun”, the Litmus Tester Jim Oberweis at the top of the GOP ticket, with his intolerance, and 63 “no” votes for SSM out of 66 possible in the GA, and a bill signed by Pat Quinn.
That would be a disaster.
I can see Jim Oberweis, the Senate Nominee, trying to explain away his helicopter and intolerance and that being painted as a STAIN on all in the ILGOP.
The worse case senerio is the passing of the Bill before the General Election, and I fear Speaker Madigan is going to do just that, right after he is quite sure the GOP ticket is topped with Slytherin House Republican Jim Oberweis, so he can hang his Blood Oaths and Litmus Tests around anyone and everyone running in November.
- Ahoy! - Tuesday, Oct 15, 13 @ 1:04 pm:
It’s a crap shoot, but I picked during Veto session because their just too close and there are some lame ducks that will start emerging or some that are running state wide like Tom Cross.
In the end, it might be more hope than logic, but I hope it passes in veto.
- wordslinger - Tuesday, Oct 15, 13 @ 1:04 pm:
After the primary. I doubt if the mushrooms want to do any lifting until then.
- Loop Lady - Tuesday, Oct 15, 13 @ 1:20 pm:
not gonna happen in Veto session this year rally or not…the coalition against it is very diverse and unified in IL and I say it won’t pass until that resistance is cracked…
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Oct 15, 13 @ 1:24 pm:
The most interesting result so far is that 78 percent believe it will pass by the end of next year.
- jake - Tuesday, Oct 15, 13 @ 1:40 pm:
I voted not this year or next year, but would have voted for another option if it had been on—after January 1, 2015, when there could be lame duck votes for it and it would only need a simple majority.
- wordslinger - Tuesday, Oct 15, 13 @ 1:43 pm:
–The most interesting result so far is that 78 percent believe it will pass by the end of next year.–
I’m surprised that it hasn’t happened already. The GA recently passed civil unions, a tax increase, medical marijuana (however strict) and abolished the death penalty without any real retribution from the voters.
I though gay marriage would go pretty smoothly based on that.
Proponents certainly didn’t have their ducks in line. They seem to get it now.
And the Democratic leadership — Obama, the Madigans, Quinn, Emanuel — payed lip service, but didn’t lift a finger.
Cullerton and the Senate were the only ones who walked the walk.
- Demoralized - Tuesday, Oct 15, 13 @ 1:45 pm:
==because of its potential impact on religious liberties==
I wish somebody would tell me what religious liberties are being violated. Nobody is trying to force churches to preside over gay marriages or to recognize them. If people want to throw in this crap about businesses not being able to “object” based on their beliefs on the issue then I say so what. A business shouldn’t be able to discriminate just because they don’t like somebody. We wouldn’t allow them to do it to any other group so I don’t know why gay people are any different. So enough with this “my religious liberties are being infringed on” crap.
- ChicagoR - Tuesday, Oct 15, 13 @ 1:57 pm:
Loop Lady: I think that coalition is already cracking. The Pope’s recent words on the treatment of gays and the de-emphasizing of hot button sexual issues is giving cover to many Catholics inclined to support equality but reluctant to do so under the prior regime.
- Mitch - Tuesday, Oct 15, 13 @ 2:05 pm:
The analysis of the spending in the Equality Illinois “Fight Back for Marriage Campaign” in the Illinois Observer and repeated in Capitol Fax is faulty because it analyzes an 18-month campaign by looking at just one quarter and only one part of the campaign.
To review, Equality Illinois pledged to spend $500,000 on the “Fight Back for Marriage Campaign,” $250,000 of it for educational and lobbying purposes and $250,000 in direct political action to support legislators who favored the freedom to marry and fight opposition candidates. Education and lobbying comes before the election, so that takes precedence at the moment while fundraising for the Equality Illinois PAC is ongoing and will pick up steam as the primary and general elections approach.
In the same July-September quarter mentioned by the Observer, for the education and lobbying efforts Equality Illinois raised nearly $400,000 – $396,700 to be be more precise, far exceeding our goal. That is allowing us to have very active field, political and media operations and be fully engaged in the Illinois Unites for Marriage coalition and the March on Springfield as the House prepares to return next week. Nothing too “horrible” about that.
Then comes the election. The same energy and commitment that has gone into very successfully fundraising for the vote on marriage equality will be dedicated to funding the Equality Illinois PAC and its pledge to help friends and challenge opponents.
To judge an entire campaign by looking at half of one snapshot is like viewing an entire 3-D movie by seeing only one frame with one eye closed and before “The End” comes on the screen. Come back to us after the November election–after “The End” comes on the screen. Until then, analysts should watch the movie with both eyes open.
Thank you.
Mitch Locin
Media Liaison
Equality Illinois
- cover - Tuesday, Oct 15, 13 @ 2:19 pm:
I’m with jake @ 1:40pm. This looks like a 2015 lame-duck issue, along with whatever is going to happen with the income tax rates.
- walkinfool - Tuesday, Oct 15, 13 @ 2:37 pm:
Greg Harris and Mike Madigan know what’s going on. Rick Garcia does not. Amazing reporters still talk to him.
- Precinct Captain - Tuesday, Oct 15, 13 @ 2:40 pm:
I chose “After the March primary, but sometime during session.” Unfortunately, a lot of people are cowards and bigots.
- Johnny Q. Suburban - Tuesday, Oct 15, 13 @ 2:41 pm:
I have to say, the way Equality Illinois has squandered all the momentum SSM had in Illinois is baffling. You would think the support the issue has would lead to more $ or at least better organization.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Oct 15, 13 @ 2:50 pm:
Mitch,
Have you met the finanacial goal, period?
Further,
===In the same July-September quarter mentioned by the Observer, for the education and lobbying efforts Equality Illinois raised nearly $400,000 – $396,700 to be be more precise, far exceeding our goal.===
Is that in a D-2? How do we know?
===To judge an entire campaign by looking at half of one snapshot is like viewing an entire 3-D movie by seeing only one frame with one eye closed and before “The End” comes on the screen.===
If ya have that D-2 where you have the money, then you should point that out.
Or, how about doing some “listening and learning” instead of “teaching”. It appears that Greg Harris and Speaker Madigan, they have been correct everytime they are asked how things are going …
More “listening and learning”, less “teaching”.
Thanks.
- Grandson of Man - Tuesday, Oct 15, 13 @ 4:28 pm:
I voted for veto session because of misplaced optimism, but I’m hopeful it will pass during session after the March primary.
I’m wondering whether SSM passage before the general election would help the GOP gubernatorial candidate. If a GOP candidate supports SSM during the election campaign, he risks turning off its voters. If a GOP candidate opposes SSM during the campaign, he risks losing moderate voters. If the issue is off the table, then the GOP can focus more on fiscal issues. Just some thoughts…
- 47th Ward - Tuesday, Oct 15, 13 @ 4:33 pm:
===To judge an entire campaign by looking at half of one snapshot…===
If you were the media liason for a group that wanted to change the Illinois Constitution to allow for, I don’t know, a graduated income tax say, and this was your first report after making such bold pronouncements in June, I think Rich would be covering this the same way. I’m pretty sure the same is true with IO.
You’ve raised about 5% of your goal and lost a lot of momentum because you set the bar so high. You also lost about 15% of your time, assuming a six quarter campaign. So we’ve seen 15% of your 3-D blockbuster and so far, it’s John Carter. You can complain about that or you can do something to turn the numbers around. The surest sign of a losing campaign is complaining about the media coverage.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Oct 15, 13 @ 4:40 pm:
===we’ve seen 15% of your 3-D blockbuster and so far, it’s John Carter===
LOL
Had to look up that reference. From a review of the film…
“While John Carter looks terrific and delivers its share of pulpy thrills, it also suffers from uneven pacing and occasionally incomprehensible plotting and characterization.”
- Wensicia - Tuesday, Oct 15, 13 @ 4:42 pm:
I would like to say after January 1st, but I’ll play it safe and say after the primary.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Oct 15, 13 @ 4:55 pm:
- 47th Ward -!
Extremely well-played.
A “thumbs up” on your “line” there.
To your Post, specifically,
Well reasoned, and On Point.
It is as though the understanding of the Process, again, is completely lost on them, and the fact that these bold statements, and large dollars, are. today, just seen as a bunch of noise, leading up to a bunch of finger-pointing.
Work with the Speaker, and work with Rep. Harris. The you will have MY attention, along with the attention of those who are watching “John Carter” and know how it ends.
Bravo, - 47th Ward -.
- otoh - Tuesday, Oct 15, 13 @ 5:20 pm:
==Greg Harris and Mike Madigan know what’s going on.==
“When Madigan decides” I didn’t see as a choice, but walkinfool sums it up.
- Just The Way It Is One - Tuesday, Oct 15, 13 @ 7:09 pm:
Probably still just too much to overcome, let alone going on (e.g. Pensions, Quinn-Legislature TENsions, ELECTions in March and beyond) in Illinois Politics to lasso that final group of several, stubborn votes still reportedly needed, to get it done before 2014 General Election…
- DaveM - Wednesday, Oct 16, 13 @ 10:53 am:
I wonder if there are any plaintiffs who would like to argue that Illinois’ CU law now makes for a 14th-Amendment violation under Windsor, and that all CUs must be renamed marriage for federal purposes. Otherwise, IL is creating second-class citizens, unable to claim federal recognition/benefits (1040 as married, etc.) under the law.