Gainesville for LGBT rights

April 15, 2009

IN MARCH 24 municipal elections, the city of Gainesville, Fla., had its credentials as one of the most progressive cities in the Southeast put to the test.

Gainesville's city charter contains a clause extending the protections of the Florida Civil Rights Act, including non-discrimination in the workplace, to minority groups, most notably gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and transgender people.

A fringe-right group known as the Citizens for Good Public Policy obtained the necessary 6,000 signatures for a ballot initiative that would eliminate the extra protections present in the Gainesville city charter and prevent the future extension of civil rights to other minority groups, such as veterans.

Despite the looming expectation of progressive voter apathy, particularly among the students of the nearby University of Florida, the Citizens for Good Public Policy were dealt a defeat as the people of Gainesville stood up for their brothers' and sisters' rights in record numbers. Turnout was record high for a Gainesville municipal election--nearly 12,000 people, or approximately 58 percent of the total vote, put their resounding voices together against discrimination and voted "no" on Charter Amendment 1.

The circumstances behind this dramatic victory for human rights reveal an interesting trend in Gainesville city politics.

Due to the immense press coverage of California's Proposition 8, one might be inclined to forget about Florida's own equivalent ballot initiative, Amendment 2, which passed statewide last fall. Over 4.5 million Floridians, about 62 percent of the total vote, approved this amendment, which legally defined marriage as a union between a man and a woman. Though Florida, unlike California, never legalized gay marriage, the disturbing victory for Amendment 2 acted as a rallying point for the right wing, using it to gauge support for a staunchly anti-gay agenda.

The Citizens for Good Public Policy, backed by the nearly-theocratic Michigan-based Thomas More Law Center, targeted Gainesville with its discriminatory beliefs because of its large student population.

A city charter amendment of this nature would have never passed in the fall, as students, who tend to vote more progressive, would have come out to support their candidates and simultaneously vote against the ballot initiative. Introducing Charter Amendment 1 in the spring elections was an effort to sneak past Gainesville's progressive community, who would have a difficult time mobilizing a notoriously lazy voter base to fight back.

Despite this, the city of Gainesville and the students of the University of Florida nearly reversed the percentages present in the fall and struck down Charter Amendment 1.

How can this trend be explained? The No on Charter Amendment 1 Campaign, formally known as "Equality is Gainesville's Business," began as a small confederacy of gay advocates, student activists and former Obama campaign workers. Though time was not on their side, the well-organized campaign cultivated a movement across the University of Florida campus because of the way their message was tailored.

Florida's No on Amendment 2 campaign in the fall suffered from an incoherent message that left voters either feeling puzzled or apathetic. Rather than accepting that their fight was, in large part, over gay rights, the campaign sought to attract moderates by downplaying Amendment 2's significance to the gay community. In conjunction with the conservative nature of some parts of Florida, this lackluster message failed to rally enough support at the polls.

Equality is Gainesville's Business took a different approach. It billed its primary opposition to Charter Amendment 1 as an issue of discrimination against the gay community and aptly equated the existing city protections for gays as an issue of civil rights. This approach was risky, because it anticipated that University of Florida students and the people of Gainesville would see gay rights in the same light; a risk which was magnified by the results of the fall's ballot initiative.

But the strategy paid off, as a record 27 percent of eligible voters in Gainesville took up the mantle of civil rights. The turnout, usually a mere 15 percent, indicates a growing support base of students and Florida workers who see the issue of gay rights intrinsically tied to the broader question of civil rights.

If the experiences in California and Florida have taught activists anything, it ought to be that people will stand up for their neighbor if given an honest and coherent message.
Dave Schneider, from the Internet

Further Reading

From the archives