Taking to the Streets to Demand Action

I am often critical of HRC and some of the other self-anointed "leaders" of the GLBT movement for equality since they seem more worried about "access" and schmoozing with politicians than getting real equality under the law enacted (I have actually begun receiving e-mails from staffers at HRC telling me what HRC is "doing" for the cause). Is it a fear that HRC will be put out of business and its leadership will have to get real jobs if the GLBT movement ever achieves its goals? I do wonder at times. As do other like Michelangelo Signorile in a new column in The Advocate. The reality is that Congress will never grant GLBT Americans full legal equality under the civil laws out of the goodness of its heart, nor will President Obama move to deliver on his campaign promises without constant pressure to do so. And fancy dinners and soirees do not count as pressure. They are good for fund raising - which I am all for as demonstrated by my involvement in the EV Legends committee for four years running - but they are not the kind of activities that make politicians understand that they have to act, not just talk and give pretty speeches. Here are some highlights from Michelangelo's column as he calls for another national march:

*

Taking to the streets — and to the World Wide Web — is the only way get this White House to move on gay issues, columnist Michelangelo Signorile says. So it could be time to plan another march on Washington.

*
[W]e’ve learned a few things in this first year of Barack Obama’s presidency. First off, this administration responds to pressure, and unlike the previous Democratic administration, these White House officials cannot contain our discontent by going to groups like the Human Rights Campaign or politicians like Barney Frank (more on that and the reasons why farther down). They want to keep LGBTs at arm’s length, but we continue to make that difficult, and we force them to move — ever so reticently — each time we have applied pressure.

*

The successes of the march began when the president decided to address our issues days before the march, agreeing to speak at HRC’s annual dinner. Just as he decided to commemorate Stonewall back in June, inviting gays to the White House after much public criticism of the administration’s dragging its feet, the president was responding to the marchers’ criticisms. The speech didn’t outline any new details on how the president would . . .

*

The White House scrambled in other ways too, among them naming an openly gay ambassador to New Zealand. Nothing big, but evidence of a scramble and our pressure working. Even Barney Frank’s actions, coming on my radio program and declaring the march “useless” a few days before it happened, were an indication of our success.

*

Senate majority leader Harry Reid, meanwhile, feeling the pressure, sent his own letters to the administration, demanding action on “don’t ask, don’t tell,” endorsed the march in a letter to organizers, and met with the organizers to talk about issues. Within days of the march, Reid confirmed that he, a Mormon, told the march organizers that it was harmful and wrong that his church backed California’s Proposition 8. That same week we got the news from the highest-ranking openly gay official, John Berry in the Office of Personnel Management, that the White House is talking to Joe Lieberman about leading the repeal of DADT .

*

The reason the administration can’t contain our discontent is less about this White House than it is about dramatic change in society, certainly since the last Democratic president was in office. With blogs, YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, satellite radio, 24-7 cable news and all the other new media, it’s impossible for establishment gay groups or prominent gay politicians to contain us.

*

And let’s get something out of the way: No one, including me, is questioning their commitment to LGBT rights, just disagreeing with their strategy. . . . Same with HRC, often pursing a strategy of access at all costs, including compromising on its beliefs and even going back on its word for the sake of politics. . . . It’s a strategy, but one that many of us very much disagreed with at this time. It’s a strategy that many people who have worked and still work on Capitol Hill and in Democratic politics disagree with as well, as much as HRC and its supporters try to present the criticism of them as coming from out-of-the-Beltway know-nothings.

*

Only HRC seemed to think the speech [by Obama at the HRC dinner] was so “unprecedented” that it didn’t need any criticism, though the speech offered nothing new in terms of a timetable on any of the many promises the president made both before and after the election. Institutions as mainstream as Time magazine and the Washington Post editorial board agreed with many of the marchers who were quoted in the papers the next day discussing the speech, whose opinions could be summarized by the Time headline: “All Talk, No Action.”

*

The radio broadcasts went on. The cable debates didn’t stop. All you had to do was tune in or sign on to any media to find out what gays really thought — and it wasn’t what HRC thought.

*

In addition to criticizing HRC, Michelangelo has constructive ideas of how HRC can play a positive roll. Whether the HRC leadership gets the message will have to be seen. I am not against HRC, I just think that there needs to be a palace coup. Here are some ways in which HRC could be an asset:

*

It [HRC] can start by really representing the mainstream LGBT thinking on Obama and his promises instead of heaping praise on the president and falling back on its access-at-all-costs strategy, which has never worked. And HRC should acknowledge to the White House that the grass roots is very organized, isn’t happy, and will be marching again. HRC can be a facilitator of that truth rather than apologizing for the administration. Rather than looking increasingly irrelevant, our big D.C. lobbying group could actually make itself look much stronger.

*

The march in fact has only made us all stronger as a movement. We were able to organize in a few months, using new media, and got 200,000 people to D.C. without spending much on traditional advertising. David Mixner is to be lauded for his passion and putting the idea out there. Cleve Jones, for his vision and his steadfastness at doing it quickly and keeping the costs down to a mere $150,000. Robin McGehee, Kip Williams, and all the other young activists, for tirelessly organizing the event and using the Net roots so skillfully.

*

We need to continue making a lot of noise — online, but also getting into the streets and protesting everywhere. And we need to march again on Washington — or at least let them know we’re prepared to do so if we don’t see some real action, real soon.