RETRACTION: SoCal Voice retracts its reporting that EQCA is behind the Prepare to Prevail Statement

by Nakhone Keodara

(July 31, 2009, Los Angeles, CA) I would like to put to rest the controversy in connection with my interview with Kat Khommarath of API Equality concerning the Prepare to Prevail Statement. I am sorry if my reporting may have caused confusion and hurt feelings.

The truth of the matter is, I wrote that post from memory and didn’t have the interview on tape so it is unfair to Kat and to API Equality as well as to the POC LGBT Organization that issued the Prepare to Prevail statement.

I am sorry for casting API Equality, Kat Khommarath or the POC collective as not having the ability to think for itself or make its own decisions. We all know from the Prepare to Prevail statement that they’re quite capable of doing so.

In that vein, I am retracting my unfounded accusation and insinuation that API Equality and the POC Coalition was influenced by EQCA. Specifically, I retract my “Editor’s Note” in a former post indicating that “EQCA has always thought 2010 is too soon.”

To be frank, this misstep on my part has caused me great concern because it is irresponsible reporting that may or may not harm the credibility of API Equality and/or the POC LGBT Organizations in connection with Prepare to Prevail.

I respect the work that API Equality has done on the No on 8 Campaign and will continue to do for the LGBT community in our struggle to win back marriage in California once and for all.

I ask for forgiveness from Kat, API Equality and the POC collective and the LGBT community at large. I sincerely hope that we can all move on together no matter what year the next Campaign to win back marriage happens to be.

Personally, I am for 2010 because I don’t want to wait another three years. However, given everything that has happened and in light of all the developments and considering the state of the economy, I don’t think it’s wise for us to go back to the ballot in 2010. It’s a fact that social organizations are having their fundings cut and so many people are losing their jobs and becoming homeless. I think it would be unconscionable for us to go to battle on the backs of our gay brothers and sisters who are hurting right now.

With that said, I will get on board with whatever the community decides.

Sincerely yours,

Nakhone Keodara
Editor-in-Chief
SoCal Voice

===============================================================================

UPDATE 3 (July 21, 2009): United The Fight reported that ALL seven of the political consultants of EQCA has advised against a 2010 Campaign. However, veteran activist David Mixner says NOW is the TIME. He advises for us to take the leap of faith. To read more, go here.

==============

UPDATE 2 (July 17, 2009): SoCal Voice’s Editor-in-Chief, Nakhone Keodara, spoke with Kat Khommarath of API Equality today to question her on the grassroot’s concern about the POC LGBT organizations’ haste in going to the press before discussing the Prepare to Prevail statement with the larger community.

Nakhone Keodara: Kat, this is on record. Thanks for taking my call. Listen, I’m calling because there have been some in the community that are saying that the POCs are holding them hostage in not wanting to go back to the ballot in 2010. What do you say to that?

Kat Khommarath: We’re not holding anybody hostage Nakhone. We’re in it to win it too. It’s never been about whether or not we would go but a matter of when.

Nakhone Keodara: Well, their main beef is with the POCs going to the LA Times before discussing this issue with the grassroots such as OUT West coalition. Like at the July 25th Leadership Summit. And, they do have a point there. Why didn’t you guys do that?

Kat Khommarath: Yes, we could have done things differently. And, we did go to these other organizations to ask for their input.

Nakhone Keodara: Who? Honor Pac, Jordan Rustin Coalition and ACLU?

Kat Khommarath: Yes.

Nakhone Keodara: So, are you saying that the POCs will not come on board if the majority of the grassroots decide to launch a 2010 Campaign?

Kat Khommarath: No. That’s not what we’re saying. Of course we’ll come on board and help with the 2010 Campaign if that is what the majority decides. It’s never been a matter of if but a matter of when for us. We just wanted to make sure that we’re at our best before we proceed with the Campaign to win back marriage in California.

Nakhone Keodara: Thanks, Kat!

Kat Khommarath: You can use anything you want!
=====================

UPDATE: Marc Solomon, Marriage Director of Equality California has written a blog post on California Ripple Effect in response to POC LBGT Organization’s Prepare to Prevail statement:

In late May, we told the community that, preliminarily, based on all we knew at the time, we believed we should return to the ballot in 2010. We also promised that we would not go back to the ballot on our own, but only together with coalition partners. And we said that, before we concluded what the right timing was, we would perform extensive “due diligence,” speaking with and listening to our coalition partners, volunteers in the field, donors, political consultants, pollsters, and many others. As we said in late May, a roadmap to victory includes:

* A realistic and executable fundraising plan. We must be able to raise between $25 and $50 million, with a good portion of that coming early on in the campaign when much of the persuasion work needs to be done.

* A governance structure that works. We need a campaign structure that engenders the confidence of the community and balances the need for inclusive representation with the need to act decisively and quickly.

* A winnable campaign plan. Polling shows that we have approximately the same level of support for marriage equality as we did when Proposition 8 passed. We need to know that if we can raise the funds and have a solid governance structure, we have a well-thought out program of how we are going to prevail.

* A commitment to doing the hard work. In order to move enough people to win, we must be out speaking to voters who are not yet with us, relentlessly. Tomorrow we will report on the results of our field efforts to date.

Our threshold has always been that we want to go back to the ballot at the earliest time that we have a strong chance of prevailing.

Mr. Solomon indicates that EQCA is going to experts before deciding the right time to go back to the ballot.

To assist the community in reaching a decision, Equality California has asked several well-respected political consultants who represent different perspectives to provide us with answers to the following two questions:

Based on your professional experience with ballot initiatives and the research and data that is presently available, when do you recommend returning to the ballot to try to overturn Proposition 8: 2010, 2012, or other? On what do you base your conclusion?

What do you believe are the most important steps that the LGBT community and its allies must take to prepare to return to the ballot?

Each of the people below has generously volunteered to provide responses within the week, and we will post them when we receive them. We will also submit them to ME USA for inclusion in the Get Engaged Tour results.

* Mark Armour, Armour Media, who served as Al Gore’s press secretary, leads an LA-based progressive media and political consulting firm. Armour has successfully led ballot initiative campaigns to require the generation of more clean energy and to tax tobacco companies to support early childhood development in California.

* Sue Burnside, Burnside & Associates, is a Los Angeles-based grassroots/field consultant. Her firm, the first national field-consulting firm in the country, specializes in sophisticated grassroots field operations, turnout programs, ground-based vote-by-mail programs and coalition building. Burnside co-chairs the National Gay and Lesbian Victory Fund’s Campaign Board. The Victory Fund is dedicated to electing openly LGBT officials to office.

* Rick Claussen, Partner, Goddard Claussen is among the most respected and successful Republican consultants in California. His firm has won 93% of its statewide ballot issue campaigns in California and many other states.

* Jill Darling served as Associate Director of the award-winning Los Angeles Times Poll and the Times/Bloomberg Poll from 1988 until the Times Poll was disbanded in 2008. She has national, state and local election exit polling expertise, after two decades of designing samples, questionnaires, and analysis models for primaries, general elections and absentee voter polls. Formerly president of the Pacific Association of Public Opinion Researchers, she is currently working on a history of gay-related legislation in California.

* Dave Fleischer. For many years, Dave was Director of Organizing and Training for the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force. In that role, Fleischer played a lead part in devising strategy on literally dozens of LGBT-related ballot initiatives. Fleischer is now advising the L.A. Gay and Lesbian Center’s Vote for Equality canvass project, the most extensive door-to-door effort on marriage equality in California.

* Gale Kaufman, President, Kaufman Campaign Consultants, a Sacramento-based Democratic political consultant, was awarded, in March 2006, the coveted “National Campaign Manager of the Year” by the American Association of Political Consultants for leading the coalition that defeated all four of Governor Schwarzenegger’s Special Election Initiatives in November 2005. She represents many unions including California’s largest union, the California Teachers’ Association, and is known as one of the most formidable ballot campaign specialists in California.

* Richie Ross is one of the most revered Democratic political consultants in Sacramento. A former aide to Cesar Chavez and organizer for the United Farm Workers, Ross ran the successful Proposition 98 campaign that guarantees schools a certain percentage of tax revenues. He was top adviser and consultant to former Assembly Speaker Willie Brown, a long-time leader on immigration-related initiatives, a top adviser to many Latino candidates and has one of California’s most successful records of winning elections over the last 30 years.

Stay tuned. More will be revealed!

===================

SoCal Voice is officially endorsing API Equality, Honor Pac and Jordan Rustin Coalition’s Prepare to Prevail: Why We Must Wait In Order to Win statement.

We believe that the People of Color organizations have it right when it comes to preparation before going back to the ballot to repeal Prop 8. As it stands, the gay rights movement, and, specifically the major gay rights organizations such as Courage Campaign, EQCA and Love Honor Cherish and the inevitable Campaign leadership are made up of a whole bunch of white boys that still think they can go it alone.

One only needs to look at executive director of Love Honor Cherish John Henning’s statement to see the arrogant mindset some of these elitist white gays still possess:

There is a majority of the community . . . that favors going forward in 2010,” said John Henning, executive director of the pro-same-sex-marriage group Love Honor Cherish. “The fact that some favor waiting should mean only one thing: They can wait, if they need to wait, but we are going to go ahead.

Love Honor Cherish’s claim to fame has been the raising of $500,000 in funds for the No on Prop 8 Campaign. Big deal! For comparison purposes only, our Editor-in-Chief, Nakhone Keodara, raised the same amount of funds from the SEIU while canvassing at the Speaker of the Assembly Karen Bass’s reception at Barnsdall Park during said Campaign. Love Honor Cherish doesn’t have the resources or the clout to be pulling that kind of weight to be claiming to go it alone.

As was shown in the last failed Campaign, you can’t and won’t win this fight without the Asians, Hispanics and the Blacks and that’s what going it alone without API Equality (Asians), Honor Pac (Hispanics) and Jordan Rustin Coalition (Blacks) would mean.

So far, all we’ve seen from leading gay rights organizations such as Courage Campaign, EQCA and Love Honor Cherish are the backstabbing politics, pissing contest in claiming territory on who’s the grassroots leadership and who’s going to be the Campaign manager. Not much of an “in-reach” to POC communities and their leaderships have been made in any meaningful ways. This is not a race to the finish line so a few of your white boys can play hero to the movement. It’s about our ENTIRE LGBT community and that includes POCs.

Folks, this affects ALL of us and we can’t afford to let a few white boys on an ego trip sink the ship for all of us. Going back to the ballot in 2010 is not the right time!

See the POC gay rights organizations’ letter below for more detail:

Prepare to Prevail: Why We Must Wait In Order to Win

A public statement on how to win back marriage equality in California
July 13, 2009
Issued by: API Equality-LA, HONOR PAC, Jordan Rustin Coalition

www.apiequalityla.org| www.honorpac.org | www.jordanrustincoalition.org

Unlike Proposition 8 in 2008, any upcoming electoral campaign for marriage equality would be one of choice, not one of necessity in fending off an attack from religious-right foes. Timing is ours to determine. Going back to the ballot to remove the voter-imposed ban on same-sex marriage from the state constitution in 2010 would be rushed and risky. We should proceed with a costly, demanding, and high-stakes electoral campaign of this sort only when we are confident we can win. We should choose to Prepare to Prevail.

We have much work to do before we proceed to the ballot. Many of us, which includes lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) organizations and progressive allies, have been doing critical educational and organizing work for years, intensified it during the Prop. 8 campaign in 2008, and have continued to communicate with key constituencies after the election. We vow to intensify our efforts until we win back marriage equality in California. We invite all groups and individual leaders to sign on to this statement and join us in building a solid battle plan for equality. We must step up our work, collectively and in concert, as soon as possible.
Prepare to Prevail requires making progress on the following before proceeding to the ballot:

1) Winning requires full LGBT community support and a broad coalition of allies. Only a few segments of the LGBT community have announced their intention to pursue a “vote-yes” campaign next year. Energy and passion are a necessary prerequisite for any effective campaign but are not a sufficient substitute for a broad coalition with a clear strategy backed by ample resources. For California to win back marriage equality, broad segments of the LGBT and progressive community including critically important people- of-color groups, LGBT families, and other allies need to pull together. We should proceed when we have a unified strategy and a massive coalition of progressive non-LGBT allies ready to act in unison. Anything short of a broad coalition of allies would place our campaign in a strategic disadvantage from the onset.

2) We need to build strong majority support before placing the issue before voters. Popular support for marriage equality for same-sex couples has not changed since the last election. Today, California voters’ opinions on a constitutional amendment to overturn the voter-imposed elimination of marriage equality remain evenly split, according to all recent polls. In order to seek major investments of time and money from key stakeholders and allies in an affirmative ballot-measure campaign seeking a “yes” vote from voters, seasoned campaign experts advise against proceeding to the ballot without evidence of a strong majority in favor of the measure. Failure to begin with a sizable majority puts sponsors in a more likely position to lose. More than two-thirds of all ballot initiatives fail to pass on Election Day. Moreover, polls can overstate actual public support for LGBT rights because respondents may be reluctant to reveal their bias to pollsters. In 2008, some polls indicated majority support for marriage equality and against Proposition 8, which was not the result on Election Day. This was also true for Proposition 22, when opponents of the measure thought there was more support for marriage equality than the final vote demonstrated. In Washington State in 1997, some gay-rights activists pushed forward with a pro-active ballot measure aimed at outlawing antigay discrimination in the state. Despite having public opinion narrowly on their side, they lost 60 to 40 at the polls on the measure. It took nine more years for LGBT rights supporters to secure passage of a nondiscrimination law by the Washington state legislature. Proceeding with campaigns seeking a “yes” vote without support from a strong majority of voters holds foreseeable danger.

3) Campaign donors will be constrained given the current unprecedented economic downturn. Over $81 million was raised and spent by both sides in the Proposition 8 campaign, more than in any previous anti-gay ballot initiative. Many of the LGBT nonprofit organizations doing critical work for our communities have suffered layoffs and cutbacks in services. The current economic downturn has also reduced the capacity of campaigns both educational and electoral to amass multi-million-dollar war chests from small, large, and institutional donors. The scope of anxiety and human need in California means that individual donors are making hard choices about charitable dollars. Major donors, including foundations that provided funding for critical educational campaigns, have endured hits to their portfolios, and many are exercising caution. Any successful “vote-yes” campaign will require generous support from pro-LGBT institutional donors. These donors give=2 0based on evidence of likely success, which for 2010 is filled with grave doubts. It is unlikely that we will be able to raise the necessary funds to undertake an effective electoral campaign until after 2010.

4) Educational, voter-ID (not electoral) campaigns with specific goals should begin immediately. To reach a threshold of support for marriage equality suitable to begin an electoral campaign, supporters need a voter-ID campaign aimed at moving an identifiable subset of California voters. Vote-no campaigns typically seek to plant doubts and promote confusion among voters about measures. Several arguments used to pass Proposition 8 have not been widely rebutted and thus retain their appeal as attack strategies with particular currency as part of a vote-no campaign. A campaign of changing hearts and minds of selected groups of voters requires time, diligent research, and targeting of specific communities. The worst time to attempt to educate voters is in the midst of a heated campaign, which makes it difficult to rebut lies and fear-mongering. The voter-ID campaign should precede the electoral campaign aimed at mobilizing support to remove from the state constitution the discriminatory language already approved by voters.

5) We need time to build a coordinated data infrastructure that can support a winning campaign. We need time to establish robust get-out-the-vote (GOTV) data systems and a statewide online voter contact database to make and measure contacts with California voters in a coordinated fashion with participation from the many pro-marriage stakeholder groups across the state. Unlike narrow special interests, our cause is a broad-based movement that will require coordinated data collection among multiple groups working in concert. Many individual groups have started this work, but winning will require buy-in and participation in a singular statewide and coordinated data system. Agreements and accountabilities need to be worked out and trust needs to be rebuilt. Time and true collaboration are vital to developing organizational partnerships and the data systems needed to tap and deploy our grassroots network and measure our progress toward specific voter-contacts goals.

6) Time and greater effort is needed to build trust and relationships in communities that represent the full diversity of California voters, including limited-English-speaking voters and voters of diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds. The 2008 campaign against Prop 8 did not adequately reach non-English-speaking vot ers and failed to engage or empower allied groups poised to communicate with millions of such voters. The Yes-on-8 campaign, in taking its victory laps, bragged about the many tongues into which it translated its materials and the diverse congregations whom it mobilized. This lapse must be overcome in a future campaign to win back marriage equality. We must learn from our mistakes made during the last campaign and not repeat them. Doing so will require deepened relationships with partner organizations and leaders who can reach diverse racial, ethnic, and non-English-speaking communities. It will require working to increase the ability of LGBT parents and caregivers with children across these communities to effectively communicate the impact of marriage equality on their children. We must establish the communications capacity needed to achieve cultural competency as well as fluency in persuading immigrant, people-of-color, an d non-English-speaking communities to support marriage equality. Most of all, it requires time to build trust and relationships in targeted communities in order to succeed.

7) Labor, religious allies and communities of color are indispensable to winning. More time is needed to convert general support into full organizational backing to secure increased grassroots engagement, resources, and votes. Coordinate d outreach with labor and religious institutions remains crucial to building a strong majority for marriage equality in California. Forging lasting collaboration with and among these organizations must be a top priority for both the education and electoral campaigns. In addition to traditional civil-rights and community groups, as well as entertainment and sports celebrities, the same labor and religious organizations already highlighted will be critical in mobilizing people of color voters to support marriage equality. Rather than simply asking for support from allies, a winning campaign must be prepared to welcome these entities to the planning table and demonstrate reciprocity with them in the course of the long campaign to regain marriage equality. Winning a majority of “yes” votes on a future ballot measure will not be easy. But it will be impossible if we work in isolation or avoid competent and fluent communication with California’s diverse voters.

More time means more “yes” votes for marriage equality. The demographics of opinion on marriage equality indicate that natural changes in the state electorate, with new and younger voters replacing older voters, contributes over time to increased support for marriage equality. In weighing the options of presenting a ballot measure on statewide ballots either next year, in 2010, or in a future year, the latterp ortends a much greater capacity by marriage equality supporters to leverage and benefit from the natural shift in voter opinion.

THE UNDERSIGNED COMMIT to PREPARE to PREVAIL. Evidence and data should guide political strategy. Running and winning a statewide ballot-measure for a “yes” vote on marriage equality depends not on haste, but on preparation. Expanding public support and developing the infrastructure to mobilize our communities should be our top priorities. We commit to continuing the hard work of identifying the partnerships, commitments, and resources to launch necessary public education campaigns and setting the foundation for a solid and winning campaign. We call on all interested organizations to join in a collective body to coordinate the critical educational work that we must do. When we go back to the ballot, we intend to be active players to ensure its success just as we have always participated i n the fight for marriage equality. Please join us in winning back marriage equality in California.

WE CHOOSE to PREPARE to PREVAIL

ACLU of Northern California

ACLU of San Diego and Imperial County

ACLU of Southern California

API Equality-LA

API Equality-Northern California

Asian Pacific AIDS Intervention Team

Asian Pacific American Legal Center

Asian/Pacific Islander Queer Women/Transgender Activists (AQWA)

Ballot Initiative Strategy Center Foundation

Chinese Rainbow Association

Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles (CHIRLA)

Elections Committee of the County of Orange (ECCO-PAC)

Equality Action Project (Santa Cruz)

Gamba Adisa Quilombo

Gay-Straight Alliance Network

Harvey Milk Stonewall Democrats of Orange County

HONOR PAC

Imperial Court of Los Angeles and Hollywood

Inland Counties Stonewall Democrats

Jordan Rustin Coalition

Martin-Lyon Leadership Institute

Office & Professional Employees International Union (OPEIU), AFL-CIO

Our Family Coalition

SATRANG, South Asian LGBT Organization

Robert Chacanaca, President, Monterey Bay Central Labor Council, AFL-CIO*

Kerry Chaplin, Interfaith Organizing Director, California Faith For Equality*

Rev. Dr. Jonipher Kwong, Interfaith Organizer, California Faith For Equality *

Jerry Sloan, President Emeritus, Lambda Community Fund, Sacramento*

Nakhone Keodara, Editor-in-Chief, SoCal Voice