To Form a More Perfect Union: Marriage Equality News

Poll: Arizonans support ban on same-sex marriage

Link: Capitol Media Services via East Valley Tribune

Excerpt:

More Arizonans support a constitutional ban on same-sex marriages than are against it, according to a new statewide poll. But Rep. Kyrsten Sinema, D-Phoenix, who is leading the opposition to Proposition 102, said Tuesday that the results suit her just fine.

"We're winning," said Sinema, basing her conclusion on the fact that the survey by KAET-TV (Channel 8), the Valley's PBS affiliate, shows that 49 percent of those asked support the measure. "In order to win, you need 50 percent plus one."

At this point, though, only 42 percent said they intend to vote against the measure to amend the state constitution to define marriage in Arizona as solely between one man and one woman. The rest are undecided.

A split among the undecided could push the measure over the top. So could a situation where those who are undecided simply do not vote for the measure.

A similar measure on the ballot two years ago was narrowly defeated, but this campaign differs in two significant ways.

First, that 2006 measure would have not only banned same-sex marriages, but also made it illegal for governments to recognize civil unions or provide benefits to the domestic partners of their employees.

Second, supporters of that measure were outspent by foes. At this point, backers of Proposition 102 have raised more than $3.5 million, as opposed to less than $100,000 reported by opponents.

[…]

[jw]

Poll: Young Evangelical Christians and the 2008 Election

Link: Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research

Excerpt:

Executive Summary

A recent survey conducted for Religion & Ethics NewsWeekly by Greenberg Quinlan Rosner finds that young white evangelical Christians are less supportive of John McCain for president than their older counterparts. Although McCain maintains a solid winning margin among white evangelical Christians on the ballot, white evangelicals ages 18-29 are less supportive of his candidacy and express less favorable impressions of McCain than older white evangelical Christians.

Key Findings

[…]

 

• Young evangelical Christians display generational differences on some key social issues. A majority of younger white evangelicals support some form of legal recognition for civil unions or marriage for same-sex couples. Older evangelicals remain strongly opposed. At the same time, young evangelicals are as solidly pro-life on abortion as older evangelicals.

[…]

Read full report.

Thanks to Andrew Sullivan.

[jw]

Deliberative Democracy Poll: Nearly 70 percent of Pennsylvania poll participants support the legal recognition of same-sex relationships

Link: Southwestern Pennsylvania Program for Deliberative Democracy

Excerpt:

Nearly 70 percent of Pennsylvania voters who participated in a statewide Deliberative Poll® support the legal recognition of same-sex relationships, either through marriage or civil unions. The poll was conducted Sept. 27 at Carnegie Mellon University and three other higher education institutions across the state.

But the situation is more complex than this headline implies. Among those who support legal recognition of same-sex relationships, participants split with approximately 35 percent supporting same-sex marriage and 35 percent supporting a version of civil union. Interestingly, participant data also showed 50% support for the PA Marriage Protection Amendment. Initial analysis suggests that those who supported versions of civil union did not carry that support to an opposition to the Marriage Protection Amendment.

As the data is being analyzed, it is also possible that the distribution of support or opposition reflects deliberative poll results from the four different sites. For example, voters in Southwestern, Middle and Eastern Pennsylvania seem to show more opposition to the PA Marriage Protection Amendment than those in the Northwestern part of the state.

[…]

The full survey consisted of 14 questions, and initial results will be available during the first weeks of October.

[jw]

Poll: Same-sex marriage ban not wooing voters

Link: San Francisco Chronicle

Excerpt:

Proposition 8, a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage, is in dire straits, with 55 percent of likely voters opposed and 41 percent in favor of the ban. Making it even tougher for the measure's supporters, only 4 percent of those surveyed were undecided.

"That 55 percent looks pretty strong," Baldassare said. "Now the supporters not only have to convince the undecided voters, but they also have to convince people who already have decided to vote no."

[hj]

CA: Analysis--Can You Trust the Polling on Proposition 8?

Link: Advocate.com
by Patrick J. Egan

Excerpt:

Do voters lie to pollsters when asked their opinion on banning same-sex marriage? That seems to be the question in California, where a survey last week found voters rejecting a proposed statewide ban on gay marriage by a decisive 17-point margin. Conservatives have countered with a study claiming that voters -- driven by “political correctness” -- substantially underreport their support for banning gay marriage to pollsters.

But a careful analysis of polling data on marriage amendments and election results from previous races indicates that if any such reluctance exists with regard to same-sex marriage initiatives, it is small -- about two points on average since 1998. In 2006 it was effectively zero. In other words, if the election were held today, polling trends suggest that California voters would reject the marriage ban -- known as Proposition 8 -- by a healthy margin.

The Field Poll in question was conducted September 5-14 and found likely voters opposed to the ban by 55% to 38%, with 7% undecided. The poll is the second in as many months indicating that a majority of the state’s voters intends to vote no on Prop. 8. (If passed, the measure would reverse a May ruling by the California supreme court that gave same-sex couples the right to marry.)

The response by Prop. 8’s sponsors? Not so fast, they say. The group ProtectMarriage.com released a study last week that compared preelection polling with actual Election Day results in 26 states that have voted on same-sex marriage initiatives since 1998. They contend that many survey respondents who supported the bans misreported their preferences to pollsters as undecided or even opposed, and conclude that support for these measures has been underestimated by an average of seven percentage points.

But my analysis of the ProtectMarriage.com data suggests that the study’s methodology overstates the gap between polls and election results with calculations that implicitly allocate undecided survey respondents to the “oppose” category. Reanalyzing the data shows that the number of voters who are reluctant to share their true feelings about same-sex marriage is small -- and is certainly not on the rise. Since 1998, the gap between polled support for marriage bans among decided voters and Election Day results has averaged only 2.2 percentage points. In 2006, the gap declined to less than a point in the seven states holding initiatives for which data are available.

[…]

My analysis indicates that it is unlikely that recent polling on Prop. 8 in California substantially understates support for the initiative. Given how much the marriage ban is currently trailing in the polls, the probability is very low that a Bradley effect would lead to a Prop. 8 victory if the election were held today. Stay tuned, however: Both sides have raised millions to finance what will undoubtedly be a knock-down, drag-out fight via TV ads. A lot can change in seven weeks -- including polls. But when new surveys are released, take voters at their word: They are telling the truth.

Egan is an assistant professor of politics at New York University.

[jw]

PA: Same-sex marriage -- an informed conversation

Link: Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Excerpt:

On Saturday, citizens across the state will gather at four universities to address a question that has occupied legislatures and courts across America for much of the last decade: Who should be allowed to marry?

But they will do more than have a chat. They will take part in a Deliberative Poll -- a new democratic decision-making process capable of articulating the informed voice of the people.

The initiative -- unprecedented in this commonwealth -- has been organized by the Southwestern Pennsylvania Program for Deliberative Democracy and the Pennsylvania Center for Women, Politics and Public Policy at Chatham University. The participants, drawn from a random sample of Pennsylvania voters, will be working in small groups with trained moderators. They will discuss the pros and cons of the proposed Pennsylvania Marriage Protection Amendments (see sidebar) and compare them with the recent decisions by courts and legislatures in Massachusetts and Vermont.

[…]

For the event on Saturday, potential participants were randomly selected from the voter rolls in the communities surrounding four universities -- Carnegie Mellon, the Community College of Philadelphia, Shippensburg University and Slippery Rock University. Several weeks before the event, those who agreed to participate received a booklet of concise, balanced background information, which was developed by scholars from several universities. This booklet contains a review of the social, religious, and legal histories related to marriage and homosexuality, as well as a review of how these histories have informed the debates over same-sex marriage in Pennsylvania, Vermont, and Massachusetts. (You can get a copy of this booklet at caae.phil.cmu.edu/caae/dp)

On the day of the event, participants will spend close to three hours deliberating in moderated small groups. After lunch, the small groups gather to pose their questions to a resource panel of experts. The panel act as teachers; they serve to inform and answer factual questions rather than to advocate for any particular position. At the end of the day, participants complete a confidential survey.

After the event, the results of the surveys are shared with regional media. It is important that these results echo throughout the larger community. It is also important that the results of this event actually influence policy debates. The district offices of state legislators surrounding the four schools have been notified ahead of time of these deliberations.

[…]

The background materials and surveys that will be used at Saturday's event were tested last November at a Deliberative Poll that engaged 75 students, staff, faculty and alumni at Carnegie Mellon. As has been the case at many of our events, on that day, in the small groups, participants worked together to become informed about the issue.

Through their own stories, participants give life to the perspectives included in the background materials. At last November's event, for example, one group experienced the respectful disagreement between two devout Christians during a thoughtful discussion of Scripture.

These two breathed life into the religious perspectives contained in the background material by revealing what consequences these disagreements have in the real life of real people. Participants also often introduce new perspectives that did not make it into the background materials.

For example, in one small group during last November's poll, participants learned of the marriage traditions of other countries; they also engaged the issue of marriage from the perspective of a single person who was concerned that married people, no matter what their sexual orientation, will always enjoy benefits unavailable to single people.

Although provided with a moderator, participants often assume responsibility for managing their discussions, including taking the responsibility for ensuring that everyone gets the opportunity to contribute.

[…]

The initial results of this Deliberative Poll will be available by 6:30 p.m. on Saturday, Sept. 27, at the Southwestern Pennsylvania Program for Deliberative Democracy's Web site: caae.phil.cmu.edu/caae/dp The 36-page briefing booklet is in PDF format at http://caae.phil.cmu.edu/caae/dp/polls/fall08/IMIA_v10.pdf

[jw]

Undecided voters key to Florida marriage ban

Link: St. Petersburg Times

Excerpt:

A proposal to ban gay marriage in the Florida Constitution is within striking distance of success, according to a new poll.

The St. Petersburg Times/Bay News 9 survey shows 58 percent of voters approve the proposal to define marriage as between a man and woman.

The poll, which was also underwritten by the Miami Herald, has a margin of error of 3.5 percent, meaning Amendment 2 has a shot at getting the 60 percent required to amend the state Constitution.

The poll showed 37 percent oppose the measure and 5 percent are undecided.

The new poll shows a slight increase over one conducted Sept. 2-4 by Quinnipiac University Polling Institute that showed 55 percent approval and a 2.6 percent margin of error.

The new poll comes as proponents launched an aggressive campaign to spread the word through church congregations.

"From the foundations of this earth, that's what God made it to be, between a man and a woman," said Joyce Payne, 68, a Temple Terrace Republican who participated in the poll. "I'm sorry it's even coming to a vote. These homosexual rights are just being forced on us."

But the proposed ban — similar to a current state law — is not certain to pass given the 60 percent threshold, which voters approved in 2006, at the Legislature's urging, to keep frivolous measures out of the state Constitution.

"When I was younger, I would have been for the ban," said Victor Collazo, 35, an independent voter in Orlando. "I'm Catholic, and I know what the Bible says, but sometimes you just have to change. People have rights."

[…]

[jw]

Proposition 8: Words Matter

Link: Beyond Homophobia
by Gregory Herek

Excerpt:

[…]

The New Field Poll

Now an experiment embedded in a new Field Poll has shown that the wording does have an impact, mainly on voters who aren’t already knowledgeable about Proposition 8.

The latest poll was conducted with a statewide sample of 830 likely voters drawn from the voter registration rolls. Roughly half of the respondents — selected at random — were read the official ballot description of Proposition 8:

Proposition 8 is the initiative to Eliminate the Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry constitutional amendment. It changes the California Constitution to eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry and provides that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California. Fiscal impact: Potential revenue loss, mainly to sales taxes, totaling several tens of millions of dollars to state and local government over the next few years. If the election were being held today, would you vote YES or NO on Proposition 8?

The other half were read the original description:

“Proposition 8 is the Limit on Marriage constitutional amendment. It amends the California constitution to provide that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California. Fiscal impact: Potential revenue loss mainly to sales taxes, totaling several tens of millions of dollars to state and local government over the next few years. If the election were being held today, would you vote YES or NO on Proposition 8?”

In the sample as a whole, the different ways of framing the amendment showed only a minor impact — 55% opposed Proposition 8 when it was framed as eliminating marriage rights, compared to 52% who opposed it when it was framed as merely placing a limit on marriage. Regardless of the wording, 38% of likely voters said they would support Proposition 8.

This overall pattern, however, masks the wording’s big impact on a particular group — the 30% of likely voters who reported they hadn’t previously heard about Proposition 8. Only a plurality of these respondents opposed the measure when it was described as a limit on marriage — 42% versus 37% who supported it. But when the ballot measure was framed as eliminating marriage rights for same-sex couples, a whopping 58% opposed it while only 30% supported it.

The different versions also affected the level of uncertainty among those who otherwise weren’t aware of Prop. 8. In this group, 21% of those who were read the “limit on marriage” description said they were undecided, compared to only 12% of those who were read the actual ballot version.

[…]

Turnout Matters

Despite the good news for marriage equality supporters, the latest poll data shouldn’t lead them to be  complacent. California voters oppose Proposition 8 now, but what will count is the actual vote on November 4.  The amendment can still pass if its supporters turn out their voters in disproportionate numbers.

Thus, the success of each side’s get-out-the-vote effort could be the key to whether or not marriage equality survives in California.

*          *          *          *          *

The report on the latest Field Poll is available on their website.

[jw]

CA: Poll--Opposition grows to initiative that would ban gay marriage

Link: Press-Enterprise

Excerpt:

A ballot initiative that would end same-sex marriage in California continues to face significant opposition among likely voters, a new poll indicates.

A Field Poll survey released today found that 38 percent of likely voters support Prop. 8. In July, 42 percent of those surveyed backed the measure.

Fifty-five percent of likely voters oppose Prop. 8, an increase from 51 percent who opposed it in July. The percentage of undecided voters remains at 7 percent.

The shifting numbers in today's poll seem to reflect, in part, the effects of changes made to the measure's ballot title and summary by Attorney General Jerry Brown earlier this summer.

Prop. 8's title initially was "Limit on Marriage." Its summary described the initiative as providing that only marriages between a man and a woman would be "valid or recognized in California."

Brown's office changed the title to "Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry." Officials said the wording better described what the initiative would do, although proponents alleged that the new description was biased and unsuccessfully tried to block it in court.

The wording change has increased opposition to the measure among voters who do not follow the issue closely, poll Director Mark DiCamillo said.

" 'Eliminates the right' -- those three words, no matter what you say after that, most people support preserving rights. Those words have a negative drag for those voters," he said.

[...]

[jw]

Opinion: "Support for gay marriage grows"

Link: Long Beach Press-Telegram
by Thomas Elias

Excerpt:

"There are no acceptable prejudices in the 21st century," Hillary Clinton, the New York senator and former first lady, asserted when she finally conceded her party's nomination to Illinois Sen. Barack Obama in a mid-June speech.

Well, maybe. But it won't be certain whether the senator's rhetoric was based in any reality until the results are in on Proposition 8, the November ballot initiative aiming to overturn last spring's state Supreme Court decision and once again ban same-sex marriages in California.

For if there's one thing that Proposition 8 definitely represents, it is prejudice. No one has proven that giving full marriage rights to same-sex couples in any way diminishes or lessens the rights and privileges of more conventional married couples. No one has shown the least evidence that gay marriages harm anyone. Given the chance to list ways in which same-sex unions do harm, the campaign for Proposition 8 could not name one.

Yet, an initiative with identical wording to Proposition 8 passed as Proposition 22 in March 2000 by a 61-to-39 percent margin. Because that measure merely changed legal statutes and not the California Constitution, the state's top judges were able to overturn it. The new proposition intends to preclude anything like that this time by inserting its language into the state Constitution.

Here's what it says: "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California."

The fact that the language and goal of the current measure is identical to what passed eight years ago makes this a true test of social change in California. For sure, if Proposition 8 loses, it will be a sign of a major swing in the public's view of gay people. In a way, it's also a test of the accuracy of polls taken in California.

[...]

Despite their differences, if the final vote determines either of these surveys was anywhere near accurate, it will be certain that public perceptions of gays have changed considerably. For neither survey showed opposition to gay marriage anywhere near the 61 percent level reflected in the 2000 vote.

Giving some hint of what may come in the campaign is one already documentable change: Back in 1999, as the campaign for Proposition 22 mounted, The Church of Jesus Christ of Later-day Saints became one of its leading backers, urging its faithful to contribute to a campaign kitty that eventually topped $10 million. There were no protests within the church against that stance.

The LDS church is again behind the proposal to ban gay marriage, with its prophet Thomas Monson calling on members to "do all you can by donating of your means and time" to support the new proposition. With an estimated California membership of more than one million persons, that's important. But so is the dissent within the church.

One former professor at the church-run Brigham Young University circulated a letter saying people do not choose their sexual orientation and that it is "grossly unfair" to deny opportunity to gays.

Other individual church members are vocally opposing their prophet's call. That's a big contrast to the last time around, when there was no public dissent at all from avowed church members.

The bottom line: Every indication is that plenty has changed over eight years in the public's view of homosexuality and same-sex marriages. But with the polls disagreeing, it's difficult to know whether some biases are still acceptable or whether the documentable changes will be enough to reverse the previous outcome.

[jw]