Turnout key for gay rights Question 1 elicits strong Maine debate

loading...

For all the polling, fundraising, debating and advertising that have defined the Question 1 campaign thus far, come Nov. 8 the fate of the state’s new gay rights law will rest solely with people like Alberna Bunker and James Martin.

The two Maine voters – barring any natural disaster – are certain they will go to the polls in their respective towns and equally certain how they will vote. Bunker, of Belfast, favors repealing the law; Martin, of Orono, wants to keep it.

With recent polls indicating few voters left undecided on the issue heading into the final days, a campaign’s ability to mobilize its core supporters – such as Bunker and Martin – could spell the difference between victory and defeat next Tuesday.

“Absolutely, turnout will be key,” said University of Maine political scientist Amy Fried, who predicted a close vote despite polls showing opponents of the repeal effort with a comfortable lead.

“You have to start with the assumption that [those favoring the repeal] are more motivated, so you have to adjust polls accordingly,” said Fried, further predicting that a higher overall turnout would favor those who want to keep the law while a lower turnout would benefit its opponents.

Question 1 on the Nov. 8 ballot will read: “Do you want to reject the new law that would protect people from discrimination in employment, housing, education, public accommodations and credit based on their sexual orientation?”

A yes vote will repeal the new law, which has been put on hold pending the referendum results. A no vote will allow the law to take effect.

Paul Madore of the Maine Grassroots Coalition, one group leading the repeal effort, said Friday his organization would spend the weekend contacting supporters and making sure they plan to vote.

“I’ll take either [low turnout or high turnout], but if it’s a low turnout, it will be our turnout,” said Madore, whose group helped gather the 50,000-plus signatures needed to place the repeal effort on the ballot.

Madore doesn’t need to call Bunker.

During a Friday telephone interview, the 65-year-old woman from Belfast outlined her concerns about the law. And her concerns mirror Madore’s almost verbatim.

“It’s part of an agenda,” said Bunker, who has played a limited role in the campaign by putting up a lawn sign along Route 1 and passing out literature she received at her church. “We’re just seeing what’s on the surface. What they really want is gay marriage.”

A rough road

Bunker’s line of thinking frustrates the law’s supporters, who after hearing it so often almost automatically recite the law’s language that specifically states it cannot be used to change the state’s definition of marriage as between one man and one woman.

For Martin, a 40-year-old business owner from Orono, the vote is about one issue: discrimination.

“I believe discrimination is wrong whether it happens to 10 people or 10,000 people, and we want to send the message that Maine wants to be a discrimination-free state,” said Martin, discounting opponents’ claims that the bias against gays and lesbians is rare and does not warrant a new law.

The current fight over gay rights in Maine has been nearly 30 years in the making, and it’s a personal fight for Jesse Connolly of Maine Won’t Discriminate, the group spearheading the effort to keep the law.

“I hope to personally close the door on this,” said Connolly, who urged supporters to vote even though polls show the law’s supporters with a comfortable advantage.

It was Connolly’s father, Maine Rep. Larry Connolly, D-Portland, who in 1977 helped introduce the first bill to outlaw discrimination based on sexual orientation.

The bill, LD 1419, came out of committee with a 6-6 vote but failed to pass in either the House or Senate. It first was approved by the Senate in 1983, but the House overwhelmingly voted down the measure. In 1985 it was approved by the Senate but again rejected by the House.

In 1989 the Senate rejected the measure while the House passed it. In 1991 the Senate passed it and the House rejected it. In 1993, the bill finally was approved by both chambers – but vetoed by Gov. John McKernan.

The issue first hit voting booths in 1995, when Mainers overwhelmingly opposed a measure that would have repealed local gay rights ordinances. In 1998 and 2000, however, voters narrowly rejected gay rights initiatives.

Just 29 percent of registered voters made it to the polls for the 1998 special election, which took place in February and featured only the gay rights question. In 2000, a presidential election year, about 65 percent of Mainers voted.

Secretary of State Matthew Dunlap on Friday predicted turnout on Nov. 8 could approach 50 percent, equating the interest level to that in 1995, when 44 percent of Mainers voted in the “off, off year” election that featured no major candidate.

“People are energized by this election cycle,” said Dunlap, who put his low-turnout estimate at 35 percent.

The last time?

The fact that the fate of the anti-discrimination law is dependent on a popular vote rankles some backers of the law, who during the last legislative session argued that civil rights protections for a minority group should not be subject to the will of the majority.

The Legislature appeared to agree, passing the bill without requiring a referendum. However, opponents collected enough signatures to force a public vote.

Long battles over gay rights have not been limited to Maine. This year in Illinois, lawmakers passed a gay rights law more than 30 years after the introduction of the first such bill there.

In New Mexico, lawmakers in 2003 – after 12 years – passed a bill almost identical to Maine’s, but the attorney general there ruled that it could not be repealed by way of a popular vote. The law, the attorney general there explained, was designed to protect a segment of the population and thus fell under the state’s police powers as granted by the state constitution.

But the New Mexico constitution isn’t Maine’s, and gay rights opponents here still fume over the Legislature’s decision to forgo another referendum.

“This law is not needed, it’s not wanted, and it’s not good policy for the state of Maine,” the Rev. Sandy Williams, chairman of the Coalition for Marriage, said at a debate this week, referencing past rejections of the law.

Leading into the campaign’s final weekend, supporters were hoping to settle the issue once and for all.

“With this victory … the people of Maine will see the law is needed and a positive part of our state,” Connolly said.

But Fried, speaking from her Orono office, predicted the issue was not one easily laid to rest – particularly if the law’s opponents were successful in their repeal effort.

“Every year that goes by, it’s going to be harder and harder for [the law’s opponents] to prevail,” said Fried, noting the younger makeup of the law’s supporters.

Although Madore on Friday predicted victory, calling his base “galvanized,” the fiery activist from Lewiston said defeat wouldn’t dampen his group’s efforts.

“Win or lose, we’re going to continue,” he said.