LGBT Equality

 In 2004, voters constitutionally banned gay marriage in 13 states by an average of 70%. Two years later, voters approved seven measures while one was defeated in Arizona. The average passing rate in 2006 fell by more than 15 percentage points to 54.5%. This year, only three marriage discrimination initiatives went before voters and all three passed. Efforts in Arkansas, Maine and Oregon failed to make the ballot in 2008.

In California, a marriage discrimination initiative passed narrowly 52%-48% and will likely overturn a recent California Supreme Court decision that ruled that gay marriage was protected by the state constitution. Florida voters passed a marriage discrimination measure that needed 60% of the vote with 62%. The amendment will outlaw recognition of all same-sex partnerships. And in Arizona, a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage that was referred to the ballot by the Arizona legislature passed 56%-44%. An adoption discrimination measure in Arkansas also passed 57%-43%. While this initiative sought to outlaw adoption for gay and lesbian couples it applies to all unmarried couples.

California

The California initiative entitled Limit on Marriage (Proposition 8), gained a lot of attention before and after the election because it is the first measure to rescind an existing constitutional right to marry. In May, the Republican dominated California Supreme Court overturned the ban on gay marriage that voters approved in 2000. The court ruled that Proposition 22 was unconstitutional because marriage was a fundamental right under the state Constitution and the 2000 initiative denied a protected group, gay and lesbian couples, that fundamental right.

Proposition 8 re-writes the state constitution in such a way as to eliminate the fundamental right to same-sex marriage.

As of November 17, 2008,  supporters and opponents of the ban had each spent roughly $38 million. Funding for supporters of the ban came largely from religious organizations, most notably the Mormon Church.  

Following the election, some have claimed that an increase in voter turn-out among African Americans, fueled by Barack Obama's historic success, made the difference in the ban's passage. However, according to analysis by Nate Silver at fivethrityeight.com, "the notion that Prop 8 passed because of the Obama turnout surge is silly."

Silver sites exit poll data that suggests that first-time voters -- the vast majority of whom were driven to turn out by Obama (he won 83 percent of their votes) -- voted against Prop 8 by a 62-38 margin.

Silver concludes that Proposition 8's passage was more a generational matter than a racial one;  these new voters were, "helpful on balance" to opponents of the bans; and that if California's electorate had been the same as it was in 2004, Prop 8 would have passed by a wider margin.

Florida

The Florida initiative (Amendment 2) needed at least 60 percent of the vote for the amendment to be added to the state Constitution. With 62% voting for its passage, the amendment re-writes the constitution with a ban on gay marriage and domestic partnerships. The amendment outlaws all recognition and benefits for unmarried couples, straight and gay. It will also block civil unions, domestic partnership and repeal existing protections and family benefits.

The amendment could have an especially harsh impact on Florida's large senior population, many of whom form domestic partnerships rather than remarrying after they are widowed in order not to risk losing essential benefits. Same-sex couples, whom already are denied the right to marry by law, will now be denied the right to any kind of meaningful legal protection.

Based on campaign finance reports filed with the state immediately prior to election day, supporters of the ban drastically outspent opponents - $3.2 million to just $350,000.

Arizona

In Arizona, voters passed a constitutional amendment (Proposition 102) which had been referred to the ballot by the Republican controlled legislature. In 2006, Arizona became the first state in the nation to reject a ban on same sex marriage. This year's amendment will now change the state's constitution to define marriage as a union between one man and one woman, although Arizona statutory law already prohibits marriage by same-sex couples.

The amendment passed with 56% of the vote with supporters outspending opponents $5.2 million to $380,000 (based on finance reports filed in mid-October.) Religious groups, including the Mormon Church financed the marriage discrimination initiative's passage.

Arkansas

 

In Arkansas, an initiative to take away adoption rights from "all unmarried couples" failed to collect enough qualified signatures in its first attempt to make the ballot, but after additional time and effort, they were able to qualify their initiative for the November ballot. Initiative Act 1 passed 57%-43%. The adoption discrimination initiative will prohibit all unmarried couples, both opposite-sex and same-sex individuals who are cohabiting with a sexual partner outside of a marriage, from adopting a minor. While the measure was broadly drawn, and includes opposite sex couples, the main goal of the initiative was to prevent gay and lesbian couples from adopting children.

According to a study by the Urban Institute, currently half a million children live in foster care in the United States and more than 100,000 foster children await adoption. Three states currently restrict adoptions for gay, lesbian and bi-sexual (GLB) individuals and couples.

 

Recent government surveys demonstrate that many lesbians and gay men are already raising children, and many more GLB people would like to have children at some point. The Urban Institute estimates that two million GLB people have considered adoption. Their findings suggest that GLB people are an underutilized pool of potential adoptive parents, since prior research shows that less than one-fifth of adoption agencies attempt to recruit adoptive parents from the GLB community. The report concludes with an assessment of how proposed bans on allowing GLB individuals and couples to foster might affect foster care systems and fostered children. The study estimates the possible financial cost to states if they were to limit or deny GLB people the ability to foster, which could displace 9,000 to 14,000 children if pursued nationally.

The Gay Marriage Turnout Myth Confirmed

Following the 2004 election, numerous opinion makers claimed that the anti-gay marriage measures - especially the initiative on the ballot in the swing state of Ohio-were the keys to George W. Bush's win.

 

However, much of the evidence on the electoral effects of anti-gay marriage amendments did not support the claim that they boosted turnout and "delivered' the election for Bush.

Relying on aggregate national turnout data and statewide presidential votes, several studies have found that the 11 states with gay marriage bans in 2004 did not have higher voter turnout or support for Bush than states without the bans; after controlling for other factors including a state's rate of turnout in 2000, whether a state had a 2004 U.S. Senate race, or whether it was a "swing" presidential state in 2004.  By extension, research showed that same-sex marriage bans did not contribute to the reelection of Bush b y boosting turn-out. 

In 2008, as in previous Presidential election cycles, the Presidential campaign drove turnout for ballot initiatives, not the other way around. The claims that the marriage discrimination initiatives would boost turnout in this presidential election were based on the 20004 myth and the 2008 election proved this point. What does drive turn-out in presidential elections is a campaign's ability to get new voters to the polls. There is evidence that Obama's campaign did that this cycle but the data also suggests that the new voters that did turn out voted against the bans.

One key to success for opponents of these bans moving forward into off-year congressional elections is to make sure that these new voters are identified, engaged and show up at the polls in 2010. Over the last decade, the data shows that time is not on the side of supporters of the marriage bans as their support base is largely older and younger voters by larger margins are voting against these bans in state after state, revealing a generational challenge that will be difficult to overcome.

 

The Wedge Withers

Despite the fact that there was a lot of media speculation about the potential impact of the gay marriage issue on the Presidential election and other candidate races, there is no evidence to show that the initiatives acted as a political "wedge" that had a negative impact on candidates who opposed the bans.

While marriage discriminations initiatives passed in California and Florida, Obama won California by a larger margin than John Kerry did in 2004; and in Florida, Obama defeated McCain after the democratic candidate lost the state in 2004 and 2000. Even in Arizona, while the initiative passed, Obama still gained 45% of the vote in John McCain's home state.