News Archives



Other Breaking News

Music Button Out and About Reprint

This is Democracy?
Millennium March 'tweaks' platform ballot. MMOW press release of Dec. 8th does not reflect actual GLBT community vote.
December 1999, by Kathleen Voigner, Contributing Editor

DECEMBER, 1999 --   A national 'official' ballot was put out by the Millennium March on Washington. In it was stated:

You can help make history! For the first time, every member of the gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgendered communities - and our familles, friends and allies - has the opportunity to vote for the platform of the March on Washington. Ballots must be completed in full to be counted, including name and addresses. All information will remain confidential.

The platform results from December are listed below.

Actual Voting Results According to MMOW Documents Platform Balloting Results

% of Vote
 Ballot Issues

    73%
Hate Crimes Legislation
    72% Non-Discrimination in Employment
    64% Right to Marry
    62% Overturning Anti-LGBT Laws
    56% Child Custody & Adoption Rights
    34% AIDS Issues
    33% Youth Issues
    24% Right to Serve Our Country
    21% Privacy/Choice Issues
    13% Lesbian Health Issues
    12% LGBT Aging Issues
    10% Immigration Rights
      4% LGBT Global Issues

Here's more text from the document that circulated at the Washington MMOW meeting last week:

"3.2% of respondents wrote in additional issues not which were not listed on the ballot. Many of these were not specifically related to the March's national equality theme while some others were already included in the larger ballot issues. Included among these were public education issues, racism, anti-abortion rights or abortion as gay bashing, overturning state LGBT laws, LGBT religious issues, increased emphasis on transgender rights, right to public sex, gender protection, classism, LGBT partner insurance, networking with other social justice organizations and groups, poverty, and inter-community acceptance of diversity."

By changing the Platform Ballot to a "working vision," MMOW organizers were able to ignore the actual statistical results (which were reportedly available to the entire MMOW board of directors but not released to the public) and incorporate issues and priorities that weren't reflected by the actual ballot results.

"By changing the Platform Ballot to a "working vision," MMOW organizers were able to ignore the actual statistical results . . ."

After the MMOW meetings in Washington, DC, the organizers announced they had adopted eight priority issues. According to their press release, the issues are as follows:

 Hate crimes legislative protections.
 Ending GLBT discrimination in the workplace.
 Racial justice.
 GLBT family values, including marriage and partner rights, equality of adoption laws, and child custody protections.
 GLBT health care issues.
 Legal protections for GLBT youth.
 Overturning anti-gay initiatives and laws on both the federal and state levels.
 Privacy rights.

Now all of this is very interesting and raises some important questions. Why have March organizers ignored the actual vote of the community? Why have they changed the presentation of platform issues from the way they were presented in the ballot? Why have they added issues (no matter how worthwhile) which the community didn't list as priorities, while dropping issues the community clearly listed as priorities?

Take a look at the actual results above, and you'll see that the 'Right to serve our country' took 8th place in national balloting. But organizers completely dropped it from their press release date Dec. 8, 1999.

Or look at the issue that came in at 9th place in the national polling. It's listed as "Privacy/choice issues." But for reasons they have not explained, MMOW organizers dropped "choice" from their list of priorities and amended it to just 'privacy rights'. Why?

"Racial Justice is listed nowhere on the MMOW ballot . . . and, since only 3.2% of the people voting wrote in other issues . . . it is statistically impossible for Racial Justice to be an actual result of the national balloting . . . (yet) the organizers stated that this was a result of "community forums and from write in ballots".

AIDS, which received 34% of the actual vote, was replaced by the broader, more generic "GLBT health issues." Why did organizers drop the word '"AIDS" when the community had voted for it?

In the national balloting, the 'Right to marry,' came in at 3rd place and received 64% of the total vote. Yet organizers changed this result, too, by coupling it with 'equality of adoption laws, and child custody protections' which was a separate ballot issue, which came in at 5th place and received 56% of the actual vote.

Also very troubling is the decision by MMOW organizers to include 'Racial Justice' as one of the March's priority issues. Not because it is not an important; it certainly is. It is troubling for another reason: The organizers stated that this was a result of "community forums and from write in ballots". No votes or ballots were taken at the community forums. Nor did the write in ballots reflect the issue. Take a look and you'll discover that 'Racial Justice' is listed nowhere on the MMOW ballot. And, since only 3.2% of the people voting wrote in other issues (see the list below), it is statistically impossible for "Racial Justice" to be an actual result of the national balloting process.

"If 40,000 members of the GLBT community took the time to vote, why weren't the results of that vote made public?"

From all appearances, MMOW organizers ignored the actual votes of the community by arbitrarily adding 'Racial Justice' to the platform, just as they arbitrarily dropped 'Choice' and 'AIDS.' Why have they done this? Why have they ignored the community's vote?

The organizers may try to explain that this is now just a 'working' vision. But, whose vision is it? If 40,000 members of the GLBT community took the time to vote, why weren't the results of that vote made public? And, why was the March's 'platform,' which for unexplained reasons is now called a 'working vision,' altered to not include the words 'AIDS' and 'Choice'? And, why was the 'right to serve' avoided? And why was 'racial justice' arbitrarily added while sexism, classism or transgender rights (which weren't on the ballot either) were ignored? Does that reflect community consensus?

And why did the press release say that the 'working vision' 'incorporates feedback received from the ballot'. The organizers now claim that they 'welcome continued community input' and yet the community was lead to believe that their vote on the Platform ballot would democratically form the Platform?

Whose March is this? Certainly not the community who cared enough to vote!  

Reprinted with permission from Out and About, December 1999