 |
|
|
Unintended Consequences? |
|
By Viginia M. Apuzzo
The first trend has to do with the ever-growing influence of the California electorate on the rest of the nation. Based upon its rapidly growing population, California has seen its electoral votes increase from 40 in the 1960s to 54 in the 1990s. And after this year's census, the state will pick up at least one more vote in the Electoral College. It is getting more and more difficult for a presidential candidate to win election without winning this state. In fact, this has only happened twice in half a century: 1976, when Gerald Ford won California but lost to Jimmy Carter and 1960, when Richard Nixon won California but lost to John F. Kennedy. The second trend has to do with the emergence of a powerful voting block: gay, lesbian and bisexual voters. According to exit poll data, 4.9 percent of the California voters who cast ballots in the 1998 elections self-identified as gay, lesbian or bisexual. While this number is undoubtedly a floor, not a ceiling (many voters are not willing to reveal their sexual orientation to a total stranger) it is nonetheless higher than the national average.
What is surprising--and what is important to remember on March 7 and on the first Tuesday in November--is that the GLB electorate is independent and not locked in to pulling the Democratic lever. Nationwide, in 1990, when social issues did not play a major role in the mid-term Congressional elections, fully 39 percent of GLB voters cast ballots for Republican Congressional candidates. But in 1992, after Pat Buchanan invoked his "culture war" against gays and lesbians at the Republican National Convention in Houston, the number of GLB voters who cast ballots for Republican Congressional candidates dropped dramatically to 23 percent. The degree to which GLB voters shy away from the Republican Party seems to depend upon how far Republican Party leaders go to marginalize gays and lesbians. When gays and lesbians themselves become the issue, the vote goes Democrat. When social issues are taken off the table, some GLB voters drift back to the GOP. Which brings us back to the March 7 election and Proposition 22. Also known as the Knight Initiative, Proposition 22 is viewed by gay, lesbian and bisexual voters as a mean-spirited attack. Should Proposition 22 pass, GLB voters aren't going to retreat to their closets. What they may well do is remember Pete Knight, who launched the initiative, and the political party that he represents.
A backlash in California could lead to historic gains for Democrats and could influence the presidential race (and remember: the next president could determine the future composition of the Supreme Court). Moreover, a backlash in California--given the many Congressional seats up for grabs--could determine the outcome of which political party controls the U.S. House of Representatives. If this happens, then the Knight initiative could well leave a surprising and lasting imprint on the American electorate--albeit not one that its sponsor intended. Virginia Apuzzo served as the Assistant to the President for Administration and Management from 1997 to 1999. She was the highest-ranking gay or lesbian official in the White House. Today, Apuzzo fills the Virginia Apuzzo Chair for Leadership in Public Policy at the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force Policy Institute. |
On March 7, 2000, two powerful trends in Golden State politics will
collide when California voters go to the polls to vote in the presidential
primaries and to decide the fate of Proposition 22, the Limit on
Marriages initiative.
Rep. Tom Campbell is one of California's Republicans who has spoken out against Prop 22 
© 1997-2000 BEI