10/03/00
10:45 a.m.
A Crucial Election Day
Taking back Vermont.
he
presidential race aside, which contest this November should conservatives
care about most? Clinton-Lazio? Maybe. But as conservatives give millions
to free up cookie-baking time for Hillary, an election of equal or greater
importance may be lost for want of money. The "Take Back Vermont" movement,
on the verge of repealing gay civil unions, is being badly outspent by
its rivals.
September's primary was a triumph for the take-back-Vermonters. Five Republican legislators who had supported civil unions — half of those targeted — were defeated. And the Republican gubernatorial nomination was won handily by Ruth Dwyer. Dwyer is committed to the repeal of civil unions — a move that Howard Dean, her opponent and the current Democratic governor, would surely veto. With the governorship and both houses of the legislature within reach for Republicans, the civil-unions law stands an excellent chance of being repealed. A decade of leftist dominance in the only state in the Union that sends a Socialist representative to Congress may be about to end. But right now the Democrats and pro-civil union forces are winning the money race hands down.
For the first time in his five gubernatorial campaigns, Governor Dean has asked for financial help from the national Democratic party. And he's gotten it. With a not-so-veiled reference to the civil unions battle, DNC spokeswoman Jenny Backus announced a donation of $270,000 to the Dean campaign. That's more than five times the $50,000 Dwyer has received from the Republican National Committee. Dwyer has asked for another $200,00 to $250,000 from the Republican Governors Association. No word yet on the decision. As of now, Dean's total funds are more than double those of Dwyer.
Meanwhile, supporters of civil unions have already spent $47,000. That compares to about $36,000 from civil-union opponents. And the backers of civil unions have nearly $60,000 more in reserve. In recent weeks nearly $20,000 have poured into the coffers of civil unions activists from out-of-state sources. Meanwhile, Take It to the People (TIP), by far the oldest and most effective organized force against civil unions, is reporting a mere $1,505 in contributions and $4,000 in loans, nearly $4,000 of which has already been spent.
Gay activists understand the importance of this election. That's why the money is flowing in. If the Democrats are thrown out for supporting civil unions, the drive for gay marriage will be seriously damaged. But if the Republicans cannot prevail here — even with the Take Back Vermont movement, and majority disapproval of civil unions — expect proposals for civil unions and full-fledged gay marriage to be introduced in legislatures across the country within the year. And expect them to pass.
Why haven't conservatives contributed? Maybe because the liberal press has had little to say about what's happening in Vermont. While the New York Times has been busy using its front page to puff up the flimsy campaign to punish the Boy Scouts, the story of a genuine grass-roots movement like the take-back-Vermonters has been buried inside. So Take It to the People has virtually no resources, while Vermonters for Civil Unions is flush with cash. In a state like Vermont, it takes only thousands of dollars, not millions, to reach every voter in the state. For the merest fraction of what conservatives are giving to stop Hillary, the battle against civil unions might be won. No wonder the national press has had little to say.
Of course the specter of out-of-state help will raise cries of protest in a proudly independent state like Vermont. At least that's the tactic the pro-civil union forces used last year to keep their opponents off-balance. But a quick look at the record shows that the civil unions forces have been national from the get-go. The first gay rights cases in Vermont — including Baker vs. Vermont, the case that led to civil unions — were prepared, in part, by GLAD (Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders), an activist law firm from Boston; the New York-based Lambda Legal Defense and Education fund, the organization that has managed the gay-marriage movement nationally, also gave public support to the Baker effort; and above all, after rejecting proposals to restrict civil unions to Vermonters, the legislature made them available to residents of any state in the Union.
Since July, when civil unions took effect, couples who've gotten "C.U.ed" have hailed from out of state by a ratio of 2.6 to 1. In the same period, couples married in Vermont have been from in-state by a margin of 2 to 1. The plan, quite simply, is to have out of state couples in civil unions raise court challenges across the country, thus forcing recognition of civil unions on the nation as a whole. Just this sort of judicial end-run around the legislature brought civil unions to Vermont in the first place. And now, even Al Gore has signed on to the strategy. In a recent appearance on MTV, Gore used his support for civil unions to suggest a change in immigration laws that would likely force repeal of the national Defense of Marriage Act, quite possibly opening the way for full-fledged gay marriage nationally.
The argument against out-of-state contributions is nothing but a smoke-screen covering a national strategy to promote gay marriage. The truth is, the leader of Vermonters for Civil Unions has repeatedly asked gay activists from around the country for contributions, and the money is pouring in. If conservatives care about the gay marriage issue, they need to wake up to the importance of this election and send a little sustenance to groups like Take It to the People. New Yorkers are inclined to think that they reside at the center of the universe. Conservatives ought to know better.