* My weekly syndicated newspaper column…
There’s more than enough blame to go around regarding the failure of the gay marriage bill during the final days of the General Assembly’s spring session, which ended May 31st.
Gov. Pat Quinn knew that African-American House members were reluctant to support the bill, mainly because of pressure from their churches. So, why did he pick a nasty fight with the Black Caucus over Medicaid? Quinn was offering projects to Republican legislators to entice them to flip, but Quinn couldn’t find a few million Medicaid dollars to help poor people get wheelchairs and preventative dental care? That late session fight over Medicaid spending was counterproductive. Instead of using the disagreement to his advantage, Quinn dug in his heels and so did the Black Caucus, which also initially refused to support a gay rights measure several years ago after being cut out of a gaming expansion bill.
Senate President John Cullerton said he didn’t regret passing the gay marriage bill out of his chamber in mid-February, before the House votes were lined up. Back then, the House roll call was reportedly in the 40s (60 votes needed to pass). Usually, proponents try to wire these things so they pass both chambers quickly. Cullerton said he feared opponents would begin gearing up and believed the bill needed to be passed as quickly as possible. But passing that bill without first making sure the House was ready to deal with it energized opponents and gave them time to organize.
Proponents say the House roll call moved into the 50s by March. But instead of working it hard at that point, House Speaker Michael Madigan appeared to put off a vote. Madigan did the same with several other bills this spring, including the fracking proposal. The idea was to wait on stuff that looked like it could pass easily and get the truly hard stuff done first, like the budget, pension reform and concealed carry. Those bills absolutely had to be passed, so giving out goodies to his various factions early in the game would, the theory went, reduce the willingness of proponent legislators to work on the tough stuff. But, the opposition geared up and by the time Madigan revisited the issue in late May, the roll call was already sliding backwards. By May 29th, when a majority of the Black Caucus decided it wanted to wait until November to vote on the bill, the roll call reportedly fell to just 52 “Yes” votes. It couldn’t be salvaged. Madigan’s strategy failed.
The proponents themselves need to reexamine their entire, failed strategy. They pushed for an early Senate vote, then didn’t adequately respond to the growing opposition from black churches. The response playbook was written almost a quarter century ago. During the 1990 gubernatorial race, Republican Jim Edgar targeted black church leaders, believing he could hold down the black Democratic vote that way. It worked. Big companies like ComEd and Illinois Bell saw how effective Edgar was and began using black churches to make their legislative cases. Their Statehouse influence took off like a rocket.
ComEd and Illinois Bell also began hiring black lobbyists at about the same time. There weren’t many back then, so hiring those folks gave them a huge advantage with African-American legislators. The gay marriage proponents had just one black lobbyist on their payroll, and he’s affiliated with the Senate. They didn’t bother to hire any House-affiliated black lobbyists until the afternoon of May 30th, when it was way too late. An inexcusable blunder.
Some proponents have slammed the bill’s House sponsor for not calling a floor vote. But that’s simply ludicrous. Big bills like this tend to fail badly if they don’t zoom up to 60 on the tally board. The final total would’ve almost surely been in the low 40s, meaning it would’ve died in its tracks. It also could’ve exposed a few “hidden” votes. Either that, or those secret proponents would’ve had to vote against the bill, making it that much harder to turn them around the next time.
As mentioned above, the House Black Caucus wants to wait until November for a vote, but November is near the end of House candidate filing season. A November vote means many already nervous legislators might guarantee themselves primary opposition. So, if it doesn’t pass this summer in a special session, it’ll probably have to wait until after the 2014 primary.
* Meanwhile, Think Progress has a piece that puts the issue into a bit of perspective…
Like Illinois, legislative efforts to pass marriage equality stumbled in Maryland, New Hampshire, New Jersey, and New York — either failing to obtain a majority or by through postponed consideration. Future attempts to enact legislation later succeeded in three of those states, while the New Jersey legislature’s passage of a bill was met with a Gov. Chris Christie’s (R) veto. As Illinois supporters work to win passage of the bill later this year, ThinkProgress reached out to key players in each of those states and asked them about their experiences.
Three common themes emerged in their responses. Several said Illinois supporters need to make sure they have an accurate target list and focus on the lawmakers who need persuading. Constituents, they suggested, must respectfully tell their personal stories to their legislators and make their representatives understand why this issue matters to their families. Finally, the openly LGBT caucus within the legislature must appeal personally and emotionally to their colleagues, especially those who may not be as attuned to the topic.
Maryland
Perhaps the most analogous case was Maryland’s unsuccessful 2011 attempt to pass a civil marriage bill through the state House of Delegates. Though advocates believed they had the needed votes to pass the bill, they were forced to postpone the vote after some pledged supporters wavered. Unlike Illinois, supporters went through with the debate — hoping their compelling personal stories might sway the handful of votes needed for a majority — before sending the bill back to committee after it became apparent the votes would not be there. Advocates, including Gov. Martin O’Malley (D), the state’s seven openly LGBT Delegates, and LGBT groups, organized a new campaign and successfully pushed the bill through less than a year later. When opponents forced the question onto the November ballot, a majority voted for marriage equality.
Openly lesbian Maryland Del. Heather Mizeur (D) noted that about 10 supporters were willing to be a part of a 71-vote majority but would have voted against the bill if it appeared likely to lose. “It would not have been okay to lose by 12 votes and try to come back the next year to win those back. We wanted to hold onto their willingness to be yes on a winning vote, instead of locking them into a no vote because they saw it was going down,” she recalled. [Emphasis added.]
Notice the emphasized text. Gov. Quinn’s oft-stated demand that a vote should be held regardless was just plain silly.
* Related…
* Lisa Madigan predicts gay marriage “one day” will be legal in Illinois: “As you know it passed out of the Senate, but they never had enough votes to call it for a vote in the House. I’ve spent a lot of time lobbying a lot of members of the Legislature on that bill in addition to writing an op-ed and speaking out in favor of gay marriage as well as intervening in the two court challenges that are happening both at the federal level and here at the state level,” she said following commencement ceremonies at Knox College Saturday.
* Traditional marriage rally brings out hundreds in Chicago
* Chicago activist voices frustration with pastors’ efforts against gay marriage
- wordslinger - Monday, Jun 10, 13 @ 10:59 am:
–…but Quinn couldn’t find a few million Medicaid dollars to help poor people get wheelchairs and preventative dental care? –
Is that for real? It doesn’t make any sense.
Voters in black communities put Quinn over the top in both the primary and general elections last time. He’ll need them, again, to have any chance this time.
Why would he get tough with them over things he should be supporting anyway and play footsie with Republicans?
Can anyone get through to this guy to tell him when he’s wrong?
- ZC - Monday, Jun 10, 13 @ 11:02 am:
Very interesting Rich, thanks for the backstory.
- Just Me - Monday, Jun 10, 13 @ 11:09 am:
What nobody is mentioning is that within a matter of days SCOTUS will rule on both DOMA and California’s Prop 8, which may change the entire landscape of equal marriage.
- PQ's Primary Opponent - Monday, Jun 10, 13 @ 11:10 am:
I believe the supporters seriously underestimated the influence of the black ministers in certain Chicago districts. They were unprepared for a battle in the House, and never truly caught up with the opposition until it was too late. Plus, when Quinn came out and publically stated that he did a roll call and the votes were there, only to have 4 of his YES votes say they were NO. That legislative misplay by Quinn, set back the bill for the rest of May. Maybe he can call a meeting with everyone and tell them to do the right thing?? But again, PQ can’t lead, and leadership from the chief executive is what produces results.
- Small Town Liberal - Monday, Jun 10, 13 @ 11:25 am:
- Proponents say the House roll call moved into the 50s by March. -
This seems to go unnoticed by everyone blaming Quinn, Cullerton, and Harris. I find it very hard to believe that the Speaker couldn’t have put this over the top at that point, his failure to put forth any real effort is a slap in the face to everyone else that worked hard on this issue.
- Quinn T. Sential - Monday, Jun 10, 13 @ 11:37 am:
{began using black churches to make their legislative cases}
Lot’s of tithing going on there.
- Waldi - Monday, Jun 10, 13 @ 11:49 am:
God (or at least his/her earthly representatives) must be a capitalist. Seems the most successful prayers come with dollars attached.
- Responsa - Monday, Jun 10, 13 @ 11:56 am:
Rich–that was a good overview. There’s one additional other piece with respect to the black caucus support that I really think still is not well understood– and it has nothing to do with “religion”. It is something which was mentioned on CapFax several times. That is the decision of marriage equality proponents to equate the struggle for gay marriage with the hundreds year long struggle for civil rights for blacks. My contacts in the black community stressed that they did not appreciate what they considered to be a diminishment of their struggle. To your point, had there been adequate lobbyists working directly toward persuading the black caucus and black churches, this key message about the failing narrative in that community may have gotten back the other direction as well.
- Election Lawyer Abe - Monday, Jun 10, 13 @ 11:59 am:
What proponents need to do is beat opponents at their own game: Threaten a primary challenge if the legislator votes no. The challenger does not even need to be overtly for the issue…
- dave - Monday, Jun 10, 13 @ 12:43 pm:
I really don’t get the idea that it was Quinn/Hamos that wouldn’t budge on Mediciaid. It wasn’t them. It was house dem leadership.
- Chavez-respecting Obamist - Monday, Jun 10, 13 @ 12:43 pm:
I don’t understand why allowing everyone the same access to marriage somehow diminishes what people of color went through to gain their legal rights. Can someone explain this to me? This is not snark, I am really trying to understand this.
- ChrisB - Monday, Jun 10, 13 @ 12:56 pm:
It’s almost as though they never read Sun Tsu.
Something something about knowing both yourself AND your opponent to guarantee victory. And also not entering the battle until your victory is already assured.
- Precinct Captain - Monday, Jun 10, 13 @ 1:04 pm:
THIS!
It’s amazing how dumb and tone deaf proponents of marriage quality are. They complained there was no hard count, but apparently didn’t try to develop one themselves. And that WCT editorial admitted that “one of the biggest problems for the long term is that this entire process was dominated by white images and voices. Yes, there were some token efforts to include minorities (last-ditch adding of African American reps as co-sponsors, inclusion of some diverse couples for the media), but the vast majority of the paid staff working on this were white. Even those hired to work in African American districts were predominantly white, some not even from Chicago, untrained on the racial segregation deeply ingrained in Chicago’s marrow. This is a hard lesson the community never seems to learn. And we paid the price.”
This shows, with Responsa’s post, that information clearly was available to proponents of equality, but they apparently just brushed it aside puffing their chests. And of course, having Governor Quinn on your side is never a plus for any issue, which is opposite just about everywhere else in America. Why didn’t they learn the lessons of other states before charging ahead on marriage? Nothing is ever easy, especially when it comes to civil rights because one is confronting a dehumanizing power structure, but that still doesn’t offer an excuse for being stupid.
- Midwest Mom - Monday, Jun 10, 13 @ 1:34 pm:
Are there any positive signs re: a special session before November?
- Esquire - Monday, Jun 10, 13 @ 2:34 pm:
How typical! Reports as to the number of legislators varied so much — when it was perceived that the bill was close to the number of needed votes all was peachy. At the first sign of opposition, some lawmakers retreated. Apparently, some did not want to take a principled vote regardless of the final tally. Many were only willing to be supportive if the bill was going to pass. Legislative timidity at its finest. Given all of the glowing media coverage, it is difficult to accept that after all of the hype the bill may have received only forty votes in the House. If that report is true, it is easy to understand why Representative Harris did not call the bill for a vote.
For all the money spent to promote SSM, it is shocking how the poorly organized traditional marriage activists are being called “powerful” now. These folks worked on pennies while the others had dollars.
- Anony Mouse - Monday, Jun 10, 13 @ 5:49 pm:
I propose we bring back black slavery and use all types of biblical justifications of slavery. I also propose we use the Book of Mormon as justification, because they are lesser beings so that we can have slaves again. I’ve been missing the good ‘ol slave days and a good ‘ol fashioned lynching. (Sarcasm)See how fragile your freedom is when put up to a vote?(/Sarcasm)
- Just The Way It Is One - Monday, Jun 10, 13 @ 6:19 pm:
Well, Lisa apparently spending all of that ” a LOT of TIME” to lobby “a LOT of MEMbers” to pass the bill in the House OBviously REALLY reaped so many benefits in the end–that the numbers weren’t there, and plenty’s been said about how MJM did virtually nothing to push it ahead in waning days. Lisa, and the Madigan Report Card on the issue, therefore= F.
- wordslinger - Monday, Jun 10, 13 @ 7:14 pm:
I have nothing but contempt for the “leaders” of the Democratic Party in Illinois — the Obamas, the Madigans, Durbin, Jesse Jackson…. for not putting this over the top.
All talk, no action.
Some of us have been carrying their water for a long time, and when the time came for them to take a historic stand for freedom, they whiffed because they were scared of losing their jobs.
Shame on them, and shame on me for giving a damn whether they have a job or not. I couldn’t be more disgusted with the Democratic Party.
The history books will remember Cullerton and the Illinois Senate. Good on you.
But even more so, they will remember Ed Sullivan. They will remember Mark Kirk. They will remember
JBT. They will remember Willie. They will remember Barry Goldwater, and Alan Simpson, and those bad ol’ conservatives who stood up when it was time to be counted.
I hope in the coming weeks they will remember Tom Cross and Jim Durkin.
Cross, Durkin, now is your time. Make history. Seize the day. Show my neighbors, and your neighbors, that the Illinois GOP is what it was founded to be, the last, best hope of planet Earth.
- WestSider - Monday, Jun 10, 13 @ 9:20 pm:
What PC Said-
- Formerly Known As... - Monday, Jun 10, 13 @ 10:14 pm:
@wordslinger - very well said, as usual.
In trying to put myself in the shoes of those Democrat leaders, it astounds me that so many issues have gotten so fouled up.
Imagine working for, let’s say 30 years {completely hypothetical:)} and achieving near-complete control of the state’s political branches.
Your daughter? Attorney General. Governor’s office, State Senate, State House, etc., etc., etc.? All Democrat. All the party you have been building up and leading for 30 years.
And then?
Virtually nothing happens. Nothing.
You have massive debts to deal with and can’t even pass meaningful legislation like this through the chamber you control [let’s say the House of Representatives
].
Why? Because proponents didn’t hire enough House-affiliated African American lobbyists?
We’re talking about life altering legislation for some citizens of our state and all your power, all your control, all your time and effort is rendered impotent by such things?
It makes you wonder. Have the past 30 years been worth it?
What good is your power? What for?
It is easy to see why so many are so upset with status quo on so many issues.