This past Thursday, the Delaware State Senate voted 13-6 (plus 2 absent) in favor of S.B. 30, Delaware's first civil unions bill, sending it over to the House. Our organization, Delaware Right to Marry, has not been involved with that effort, since we were campaigning earlier this year for a full marriage equality bill. To the present, we have remained strictly neutral on the bill. The main group backing S.B. 30, Equality Delaware, has made the case repeatedly that they are pursuing civil unions in their own right and on their own merits, while the opposition (mostly the Focus on the Family-affiliated 'Delaware Family Policy Council') has tried to claim the bill is a stalking horse for gay marriage in the near future. Therefore, because we are neither working for nor against S.B. 30, we did not want to let the equality opponents link us incorrectly to the effort as a means of harming the bill's chances. Our efforts remain entirely separate.
That said, regardless of our position on civil unions as an institution, it was clear from the Senate debate on Thursday ahead of the vote that all votes against civil unions were also votes against full equality down the road. As of Thursday night, we are officially treating all No votes on civil unions as hostile votes to our own objective.
Of the six Senators who voted against the civil unions bill, four were Republicans and two were Democrats. We are nonpartisan, but because Daily Kos is oriented toward electing "more and better Democrats," in this diary I will be focusing on the two Dems, though we are taking a hard look at the Republicans as well.
Nationally and in Delaware, there's an emerging consensus within the Democratic Party and especially within the party base that Democrats will be the party that stands for equal rights for gay and lesbian Americans, especially the right to marry. Across the country, Democrats are finally standing up to anti-gay bigots in the party ranks, as we've seen recently in places like San Antonio, Texas (KABB video). It's time to send that message loud and clear in Delaware, too, especially as Democrats here back us heavily in public opinion polling. In our statewide poll at the end of January (conducted by Public Policy Polling), we found 61% of all Delaware Democrats support marriage equality, and 68% of Chris Coons 2010 voters do. 71% of Delaware Dems support civil unions, and 76% of Coons voters do. The state party's 2009 platform endorses "Relationship recognition regardless of sexual orientation" in Section IX. Therefore, it is more than fair to target Democratic legislators in Delaware for anti-equality votes.
One of the Democrats who voted against S.B. 30, Sen. Bruce Ennis, is not up for re-election until 2014. The other, Sen. Robert Venables, is up for re-election in 2012. The latter "distinguished" himself quite ignominiously on Thursday, and so we are zeroing in on him in particular.
Sen. Venables has been in the office since the 1988 election. He represents a very conservative district in southwestern Delaware around Laurel DE (for those not from Delaware, the geographical distinction sounds odd for a small state, but it's important politically here). He is very much a part of the old guard, but he is still regarded as a "party elder" with significant influence among fellow Senators in both parties and across the Democratic establishment. He has made "family" issues a major part of his legislative agenda.
A couple years back, Sen. Venables was the main advocate for a state constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage. At the time and even fairly recently, according to multiple sources, he claimed that he was not anti-gay and would be fine with civil unions as a fair alternative as long as the gays couldn't get married. Obviously, he flip-flopped on Thursday. But not only did he vote against the civil unions bill, he actively tried to add a poison pill amendment, brought anti-gay witnesses to the floor to testify against the bill, and tried to propose the bill be put to a statewide referendum (not something we ever do in the state of Delaware except for constitutional amendments) in 2011, which would likely be fairly low turnout. From The News Journal:
The Senate rejected two amendments proposed by Sen. Robert Venables, D-Laurel.
Venables wanted a public referendum on the issue before any such law could take place, along with another amendment that would broaden the bill to include opposite-sex couples and family members who live together.
Civil rights should never be put to a vote. The appalling, newsmaking PPP poll of Mississippi Republicans that came out last week should remind us how things would be if minority civil rights had been put to a vote:
Almost half of Mississippi's Republicans think interracial marriage (PDF) should be illegal, according to a recent poll by Public Policy Polling. (Some have accused PPP of having a liberal bias, but the pollster has proven rather accurate, and the question in this poll was straighforward.) Call me naive, but I find this level of support for anti-miscegenation laws in 2011 shocking.
That Sen. Venables
has opposed state referenda proposals in the past makes it even more malicious. So, that's a big minus in our ledger.
The other amendment was designed to make the program extremely expensive during a tough fiscal period and to make the bill unpalatable to conservatives by undercutting the institution of marriage (by opening unions to straight couples) and unpopular with progressives (by equating committed gay couples to siblings or co-habitating friends). Another big minus.
Now to the testimony. According to on-scene News Journal reporter Beth Miller, here's a sampling of what he said (organized chronologically):
"Venables says he knows brothers who live together, widows who choose to share expenses, a widow who'd remarry except she'd lose benefits."[1]
"Venables says this is not the same as a civil rights issue. Rules on marriage: can't marry relative, or two people. All have same rights."[2]
"Venables says all have the right to marry, but you have to marry someone of the opposite sex."[3]
Let's hear from his first "expert" witness on the floor, as live-tweeted by Miller:
"Nicole Theis of Delaware Family Policy Council is addressing the Senate in opposition to the bill. #deunions" [1]
"Marriage is a profound social good - bringing male & female together. Same-sex marriage says men & women are optional, Theis says. #deunions" [2]
"Civil rights argument implies those who oppose same-sex marriage are bigots, Theis says." [3]
"Theis: 'There is a better way than to take us down the road of time-delayed same-sex marriage.'" [4]
Sen. Venables then called an attorney from the Arizona-based Christian conservative group "Alliance Defense Fund" to testify that the bill would result in endless litigation. (Which to me sounds like an argument for full equality, not against unions.) The ADF was the hateful group originally behind the "Day of Truth" campaign that 'counters' GLSEN's national "Day of Silence" campaign to raise awareness of homophobia.
So. What can we do about this clear opponent of equality?
1. Recruit and help a pro-equality primary challenger. While it's true the district is very conservative (in both parties), a low turnout primary election in September 2012 could produce an upset with hard work and effort.
2. General Election Removal The problem with a nominal Democrat (he's bad on other issues too) in the Delaware Senate is that he holds influence in committee and on leadership selection as both a member of the majority party and as a long-time veteran. We can do better. Hopefully, that means replacing him with a better Democrat, but if that fails there's a backup. Removing a nominal Democrat in a conservative district even in the general election would not be a huge loss, and he would be replaced most likely by a reliably conservative Republican in the minority. The replacement would have less power and influence within the Senate, and we wouldn't have to worry about backstabbing from within the Democratic column. If Sen. Venables makes it to the general election, we can be there, too. We won't support an anti-equality candidate, of course, but we can advocate against re-election of one.
Anybody notice he "introduced an amendment to let siblings enter civil unions" and that the amendment "would have undermined traditional marriage by allowing straight couples to opt for civil unions"...as the ad campaign might read? There's a big opportunity for a wedge here. We can run mailers and possibly highly-targeted cable television ads relatively inexpensively within his district with your financial support.
September and November 2012 probably seem fairly distant right now. However, the House is voting on the civil unions bill as early as next Thursday. If we can demonstrate before then that we are already preparing to take down prominent legislators who turn their backs on equality, we can probably keep some waverers from flipping. Remember what happened in Maryland not long ago? We can't have a repeat. This is a good way to show anti-gay politicians are not welcome in the Democratic Party, whether in Delaware or nationally.
Please donate today to help us launch the campaign to defeat Senator Venables next year and remove a major obstacle for full marriage equality.
Note: The figure below is an initial goal to demonstrate viability for this particular campaign, but dollars do go a long way in Delaware politics, so every contribution helps. And as a reminder, we're still all-volunteer, so none of this is going to pay us.
Thanks again for all your support.
Bill Humphrey
Statewide Director
Delaware Right to Marry PAC