Count us in: A Latin American call to include LGBT individuals in the census

In the United States, the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force has led efforts to push the government to adopt changes to the national census in ways that better reflect the nation's lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender communities through its "Queer the Census" project.

A U.S. House of Representatives panel took up the issue back in March but it still seems like an uphill battle ("House panel hears about adding LGBT to census survey", The Bay Area Reporter, March 15, 2012).  The idea is that with better data about who we are as a community, government will be able to provide better services.

It's a battle being fought in other parts of the American continent as well.  This might not be a comprehensive listing but it's a sample of similar efforts taking place throughout Latin America.

• Argentina: Passage of a federal marriage equality law in Argentina in 2010 forced the National Census to incorporate questions about same-sex partnership households. Perhaps among the most progressive of census agencies in the world, Argentina also allows transgender individuals to register with their current gender and name even if it's not reflected in their birth certificates or government ID's. 
• Bolivia: In 2011, the Bolivian Ministry of Justice announced that the 2012 census would include specific questions about sexual identity and whether a census taker was lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender.
• Brazil: In 2010, the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics announced it would survey and record data about same-sex partners.
• Colombia: Although it has yet to adopt progressive LGBT policies when it comes to the national census, in 2011 the Colombian government announced it would survey prisoners as to whether they identified themselves as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or intersex. Some LGBT advocates raised alarms about the potential for violence should a person's sexual identity be exposed in a general prison setting but the National Penitentiary and Jail Institute insisted the measure would help them to safeguard the safety of every LGBTI person in the system.
• Cuba: Influential gay blogger Francisco Ródriguez, who blogs as Paquito el de Cuba, has mounted a personal campaign to have the National Office of Statistics and Information include questions in the 2012 census that would give visibility to the LGBT community in the Caribbean island. Ródriguez says that internal documents and conversations show that the Cuban government is very much interested in instituting these changes but, as of February, he lamented that the Cuban government was being less than forthcoming as to whether they would adopt these changes.
• Venezuela: In 2010, the Venezuelan National Statistics Institute eliminated an "error" message that appeared whenever a census participant tried to register having a same-sex partner at the request of LGBT-rights organization Unión Afirmativa.  It's one of the few positive developments when it comes to LGBT rights under the Hugo Chávez mandate but, officially, same-sex couples in Venezuela can register their partnership in the national census surveys.

Which brings us to Chile.

The Homosexual Liberation Movement (MOVILH) has worked closely with the current center-right Chilean government of Sebastian Piñera to improve the way the Chilean census reflects the reality of the LGBT community. Although not as progressive as the census changes in Bolivia and Argentina, in 2011 the Chilean government announced that it would survey the number of same-sex partnerships in the country.

Today, the MOVILH launched a national campaign urging same-sex couples to register as such in the 2012 census under the theme of "Acknowledge the other half of your orange" ("Tu media naranja" or "Your half orange" is a common term of endearment used in Latin America to refer to one's partner).

The campaign includes a stand alone interactive site and an amazing Census 2012 video which I have taken the liberty of translating. 

Here it is in full:

Reaction:

• Opinion: Do gay people count? (The American Prospect, April 27, 2012)

Mexico: As gays prepare to marry in Mexico City, Jalisco queers act-up for their rights

On December 21st Mexico City's legislative Assembly made history when it passed a law allowing same-sex couples to marry and adopt children. The law, which goes into effect on March 4th, became the first such measure to be adopted in all of Latin America.

Surprisingly, in the days that followed the vote, there was actually little visible reaction from any of the regular anti-gay forces in the country. Instead, as the new year began, a Twitter-led media frenzy erupted over homophobic comments made by a Mexican television morning show host named Esteban Arce.

Now, a week before the law goes into effect, the opposition has certainly raised its ugly head and come out in full force.

On January 27th, Mexico's Attorney General filed an appeal before the country's Supreme Court challenging the constitutionality of the law. Last week six governors from the conservative PAN party also raised constitutional appeals claiming that the law might spread to other regions in the country. And - somewhat surprisingly - Mexico's president Felipe Calderón - also from the PAN party - stepped in and honed his conservative re-election bonafides by siding with anti-gay forces and stating his opposition to the law.

Patrick Corcoran, a freelance writer based in Mexico who blogs at Gancho, has a great breakdown of the partisan politics at play in an essay he wrote for Mexidata, and I quote:

Despite a lengthy to-do list that represents Mexican President Felipe Calderón's last gasp for an enduring legislative legacy, the president and his party have diverted their recent efforts toward a push to ban same-sex marriage.

The change of focus stems from a December law passed by the left-leaning Mexico City government legalizing same-sex marriage and providing gay couples with an avenue to adoption. Gay rights in general and same-sex marriage in particular had not been particularly divisive issues in Mexico, but the new law, which was the first of its kind in Latin America (the northern state of Coahuila did, however, legalize same-sex unions in 2007, though without the adoption provision) provoked a storm of controversy.

Even before the new law was official, the Mexico City PAN (National Action Party) was promising a legal challenge. Church officials, predictably, were apoplectic (although interestingly the Vatican conspicuously kept its distance). Opponents of same-sex marriage found a sympathetic ear in Los Pinos; Calderón is said to be personally close to Mariana Gómez, the PAN's most visible opponent of same-sex marriage, and in late January, his attorney general Arturo Chávez Chávez filed a challenge of the law before the Supreme Court. Five more states, all run by PAN governors, joined the fray last week, challenging the law on the grounds that it unfairly obliges them to recognize the capital's marriages.

Since Mexico City is light years to the left of much of the rest of the country, the backlash could undermine gay rights more than the Mexico City law advanced them. The Supreme Court could strike down the Mexico City law, rendering same-sex marriage illegal across the nation. Even if the Court refrains from doing so (which seems likely, given the court’s recent leftward tilt, its endorsement of Mexico City’s abortion legalization, and the flimsiness of the legal arguments), a series of statewide bans of same-sex marriage seem quite likely. This pattern, a progressive law in Mexico City sparking a harsh conservative reaction virtually everywhere else, was established over the past couple of years in the realm of abortion.

But even if the PAN’s strategy does bear fruit, this is a bad policy and ultimately a bad political move for the PAN... [read the rest of the essay here]

The good news this week: The Mexican Supreme Court has dismissed all six appeals from the governors of Sonora, Tlaxcala, Guanajuato, Morelos, Jalisco and Baja California.

Additionally, President Felipe Calderón, when asked yesterday to share his thoughts on the law once again, refused to reaffirm his opposition, simply referring to the one appeal against the measure that is still standing before the court: That of the Attorney General's Office.

"I will abstain from giving an opinion which might be interpreted as as if the President might be trying to introduce a belief, an opinion, a value that is different than the law", Calderón said.

He added that it was a delicate debate and argued that he respected every single person. "I absolutely do not have any bad taste nor reproach towards those who have a partnership with another of the same gender," he said, "I respect - I absolutely insist - such preferences".

David Razú Aznar, the President of the Human Rights Commission of Mexico City's Legislative Assembly, Tweeted this morning that this could be a signal that Calderón knows he is on the losing end of the debate. Aznar was among a team of lawyers and government officials who handed a report to the Supreme Court yesterday in which the City vouched for the constitutionality of the marriage equality law (you can download the complete report, written in Spanish, here).

Jalisco queers act-up: As good as it looks for marriage equality supporters in Mexico right now, what has been the most inspiring to see is how the LGBT community has reacted to efforts to sink the law. Mexico doesn't really have a national LGBT-rights organization that can act as a centralized force against these homophobic efforts. Instead, there is a large patchwork network of small local LGBT rights advocates and organizations that mostly work independently from each other. And, despite the fact that the law in question will only cover couples within the Mexico City district, it seems that LGBT folk throughout the country are rising up against efforts to derail it, particularly in Guadalajara, the state capital of Jalisco.

I already wrote about a march that took place in Guadalajara on Valentine's Day which drew more than 350 people and ended in a town square with kiss-ins and symbolic marriage ceremonies (Milenio has a full description here).

A week later, riding approximately 12 vehicles, 40 advocates made their way through the Guadalajara streets once again and stopped in front of the State's Human Rights Commission. According to El Occidental, advocates declared their opposition to their governor's Supreme Court appeal, as well as the interference of the other PAN-affiliated governors into the affairs of Mexico City. They also announced a campaign they called "Thousand for Our Rights" and said that they would be collecting 1,000 signatures from Guadalajara residents asking the Human Rights Commission to protect the rights of the city's LGBT community.

Milenio reported that leaders of three local LGBT rights organizations symbolically shut down the Commission's office by placing rainbow-colored chains and red-tape on its front doors and declaring a "quarantine" [see top photo]. Members of the Lesbian and Gay Committee (COLEGA AC), the Sexual Diversity Commission (Codise) and the Sexual Diversity University Network said that they were shutting down the office to protest the inaction of the president of the Commission, Jesús Álvarez Cibrián, who refused to take any action against the Supreme Court appeal filed by Jalisco's governor.

A representative of the Human Rights Commission refused to talk to demonstrators but said that the agency stood by its claims that the governor's actions were beyond their scope of work.

Rodrigo Rincón, president of Codise, said that protest organizers were considering taking additional actions, including outing political and religious leaders who stood in opposition to the advancement of LGBT rights, following similar actions by LGBT advocates in the United States.

From El Occidental:

In Jalisco we want to do the same: First we will look for them and see how they can support the cause, if there is no free will by gay public figures, or if they don't take a position that is of beneficial on these issues - because we have seen these officials speaking badly about the initiatives that have been presented - if this continues to happen, in the middle of the year we will release some pictures, videos, which include interviews with partners and ex-partners of the officials, so that they can provide names and be witnesses to all of this.

Finally, in an interview posted today on NotiSistema, Rosa Maria Trejo Villalobos, Coordinator of Codise stated that there were 14 couples from Jalisco who were planning to travel to Mexico City to get married on March 14th. She said that they would join approximately 300 other same-sex couples who had petitioned for the right to get married once the law goes into effect on March 4th.

Amazing all that's been happening in Jalisco, no?

As for the homophobic opposition to Mexico City's marriage equality law, it doesn't only come from within the nation. The United States religious right is also freaking out. Earlier today, the World Congress of Families, led by several right-wing religious groups in the United States, announced a "World Congress of Families Leadership Petition To Save Marriage In Mexico City".

US-based signers include Gary Bauer, Tom DeLay, Tony Perkins, Maggie Gallagher and Yuri Mantilla. Oh joy! Funny how they would blow a fuse if another nation meddled into United States policies but are all too glad to tell Mexico what to do.

No worries in the short-term as their actions will probably have null effect on the current Supreme Court's deliberation of the constitutionality of the law. The clear intent is to push Mexico to adopt a constitutional ban on same-sex marriages because, if they haven't achieved a constitutional ban in the United States, why not try Mexico? Ugh.

• Related: If you want to follow the latest on Mexico City's marriage equality law and you are on Twitter, you can follow the #MatrimonioDF hashtag or my @NoticiasLGBT Twitter account. A warning: Both feeds provide information that is overwhelmingly in Spanish.
  

Argentina: Court authorizes the 2nd same-sex marriage in all of Latin America

A Buenos Aires court has given a gay Argentinean couple the green light to get married in what would be the second such marriage to occur in all of Latin America. From an AFP news brief posted this evening:

A judge on Tuesday authorized two men to marry in Buenos Aires in what would be the country's second same-sex marriage.

In December, two Argentine men, Alex Freyre and Jose Maria Bello, became the first homosexuals to legally marry in heavily Roman Catholic Latin America, after the governor of southernmost Tierra del Fuego province allowed them to wed in the provincial capital, Ushuaia.

Judge Elena Liberatori gave her approval to the second couple, two men whose names were not immediately released, to set a date to wed at the Civil Registry.

She said they were exercising their rights even if current laws "are not in line with the times."

Diario Digital, which offers the full 15-page ruling for download here (it's in Spanish), names the couple as Damián Bernath and Jorge Esteban Salazar. They also say that while the judge paved the way for the couple to get married, she stopped short of declaring current marriage laws as being unconstitutional (nevertheless, the country's Supreme Court is expected to take up the marriage equality issue at some point in the future).

When a court ruled in Freyre and Bello's favor back on November 11th, the men made plans to marry on December 1st in observance of World AIDS Day (both said they were HIV positive). They knew that theirs would be a historic marriage ceremony and they wanted to draw attention to to the plight of those living with HIV/AIDS.

That plan ran into trouble when another two city courts stepped in and asked for a stay on the proceedings at the very last minute and when the office of Buenos Aires Mayor Maurico Macri asked the Supreme Court to clarify if the city should follow the extraordinary court ruling.

That petition was dismissed by the Supreme Court and Freyre and Bello eventually were able to get married in a surprise wedding that took place on December 28th in Tierra Del Fuego, the southernmost region in the American continent.

This second time, Mayor Macri has announced that he will not appeal the ruling.

Argentina: Highest Court ready to back same-sex marriages, says justice, but there's one caveat...

As you might remember, on December 28th, Alex Freyre and José Maria Di Bello became the first gay couple to ever receive a marriage license in all of Latin America. Their victory came after years of struggling with the Argentinian courts and with much help from marriage equality advocates, including the Argentinian LGBT Federation.

Previously, the country's Supreme Court had indicated that they would take up the question of whether denying marriage rights to same-sex couples was unconstitutional and, in the wake of the surprising wedding announcement, they reaffirmed their intent to take up the issue later this year.

In the meantime, last year there was an aborted effort to bring a marriage equality bill to the country's Parliament and strong indications that there would be another push this year (there have been efforts to do so since 2007).

Now, in an extraordinary front page article that ran yesterday in Argentina's Pagina/12, the paper takes a look at both the Parliamentary and the judicial paths to marriage equality in Argentina and it begins with quite a bombshell ("The Two Roads to Gay Marriage") .

"The judicial decision is quite simple, that's not the problem" says an unnamed source, "it's a clear case of supervening unconstitutionality, the same thing happened with joint divorce".

The problem, according to the unnamed source is this:

"What is difficult, what is doubtful (he weighs), is whether we should dedicate ourselves to rule on any of the files we have, or if we [should] wait for Congress to debate the law."

Those words coming from any anonymous source would be almost meaningless but when the source is identified as one of the seven Supreme Court Justices in Argentina they are simply stunning. Basically, the unnamed justice is saying that the Argentinian Supreme Court is all but ready to rule in favor of marriage equality but also seem willing to wait for issue to go through the Parliamentary process.

Mario Wainfeld, the reporter for Pagina/12, says he was surprised that a sitting Supreme Court Justice would agree to discuss an issue that was on the docket and still unresolved. He was even more surprised, he says, by what he described as the vehement insistence by the judge that the outcome of the Supreme Court's decision would be "easy" and fall in the favor of same-sex couples.

It's not clear whether there are enough votes to pass a marriage equality bill through Parliament, particularly in the Senate, and the reporter says that the judge agrees with that statement. Without a tape recorder to capture the conversation, the reporter paraphrases the judge's comments:

Judge: If that is the case, it would be better to wait for the topic to be aired through society and through the Parliament. Of course, if the bill doesn't advance or it's delayed, the Tribunal would have to decide.
Reporter: In that case, would it be that easily resolved? (reporter insists).
Judge: The file would have to be passed around, there are some strong individuals here, each one will want to establish their position, it's a historic decision. But it is almost certain that there will be majority support.

-----------

Bizarre. The last time I remember a judge from the highest court discussing a case on which the court had yet to rule was when Peruvian Constitutional Court Justice Carlos Fernando Mesias Rámirez went on Peruvian television to argue that a ban on gays in the military might violate the Peruvian constitution. The court went on to decide just as much six months later.

But how would you feel, as a member of the highest court, if another member spoke to media about a case on the docket and predicted that a majority of the court would vote in one way or another? I hope he or she knows exactly what he or she is doing, because I can see how those comments might back-fire easily. At the same time, though, the interview was probably arranged in advance with accompanying prerequisites (the judge could be identified as a judge but not by name, no tape recorders, etc.). What if it was meant to send a message to the legislative branch as they mull taking up the issue once again?

----------

The Pagina/12 article then takes a look at previous efforts to bring a marriage equality bill to the Argentinean Parliament (see my previous post: "Argentinean president-elect Cristina Fernández de Kirchner coy on LGBT issues, activists split on same-sex partnership strategies").

The current President, Cristina Fernandez de Kichner and her government come out as duplicitous and opportunistic on the issue (that's her with the violin and her husband and former president Nestor Kichner, who now backs marriage equality). I have never been a fan of President Kirchner on LGBT rights and the article confirms some of my hunches and reservations.

From the article:

Also simple and brief is the bill that came within a hair of being taken up by Parliament last year. It's being sponsored by, among others, deputy Vilma Ibarra (New Encounter party). It calls for the reform of a single article in the current Civil Code. Where it is established that an essential prerequisite for marriage is the "freely expressed full consent by man and woman", it would substitute "man and woman" for "persons of the same or different gender". The rhetoric economy of the modification is not due to chance or negligence. It seeks to underline the equality of every person, in their civil rights.

The Front for Victory party (FpV) joined the initiative at the end of last year until it was resolved from the Pink House that it should be delayed [Buenos Aires' Pink House is the equivalent of DC's White House]. It came on the eve of president Cristina Fernández de Kirchner's trip to the Holy See. Her Chief of Staff, Anibal Fernández, according to rumors by opposing MP's and fellow party members, suggested that it was inopportune to move ahead just before the imminent meeting between Férnandez de Kirchner and her Chilean counterpart, Michelle Bachelet, with Pope Benedict XVI to commemorate the mediation by John Paul II that averted war between the two countries. Having engaged in the ceremony and averted any alleged embarrassment to the Pope, the ruling bloc has the intention to join the move. Their support is necessary, although not sufficient. It's already known that it doesn't have its own quorum but it's the largest minority; their numbers and their discipline ensures an important number of loyalists. They won't all be from the same party, because it deals with one of those so-called "question of conscience" norms in which legislators are allowed to deviate from party discipline.

The ruling party strategy is to build a progressive platform agenda to revamp its image and start to weave alliances, even if they are contingent, with center-left parties. And, by the way, try to regain the support of progressive citizens.

As a matter of fact, Nestor Kirchner, a former Argentinean president and husband of the current president, officially announced his backing for the marriage equality bill earlier this year (echoes of Bill Clinton backing marriage equality last year while Hillary has yet to do so)..

Ultimately, the article says, the topic is heading to Congress and it's certain that, if rejected by the Congress, the Supreme Court will have its say. If that happens and the high court rules in favor, the civil code will remain on the books. Same-sex couples who have brought their demands to the highest court in the nation would be allowed to marry but other couples would have to take their case to the courts and wait to be granted marriage rights on a case by case basis.

Picture that: A ruling presidential political party, which is in trouble with its progressive branch, unabashedly - if opportunistically - embracing marriage equality as a progressive calling card.

On Valentine's Day, gays in Latin America demand marriage equality and an end to homophobic violence

As commercialized as Valentine's Day has become over the years, it also has become a prime opportunity for the LGBT community to make our lack of partnership rights visible whether it's in the United States or any other country that 'observes' the unofficial ode to lovers.

Take France, for example. One of our favorite French blogs posted an amazing video of a massive kiss-in that took place in Paris ("Yagg: Kiss-in against homophobia"). The awesome scene has been a sensation and been picked up by a lot of the big blogs out there including The Huffington Post, Towleroad, Joe.My.God, Queerty, Mike Tidmus, etc.

Definitely less massive but just as important were several demonstrations that took place yesterday throughout Latin America.

Peru: Meet Jonathan and Oscar (right), college students and members of the LGBTI Student Bloc of Lima. In what Blog de Lima calls the 2nd annual "Kisses against homophobia" street action, they joined other several gay and lesbian couples and tried to take over the main public space inside a popular Lima shopping mall.

The couples held hands and kissed as they made their way through the mall but ran into heavy security as they tried to congregate inside the mall's main gathering spot. Several couples embraced each other and kissed for the cameras once they left the building (thanks to leading Peruvian LGBT rights advocate Jorge Alberto Chávez Reyes for providing images and video).



Meanwhile, across town, members of the Peruvian TTLGB Network congregated at the "Love Park" in Lima's Miraflores district for a symbolic marriage ceremony between same-sex couples. The Network, which had participated in previous kiss-in actions, said that they wanted to highlight the lack of same-sex partnership rights in the country.

"Just as the laws have to change in Mexico and Argentina, making civil rights be available for everyone, that's what our community demands", said well-known lesbian attorney Susel Paredes, who participated in the ceremony and symbolically married her partner, as quoted by the EFE news service.

There are conflicting reports of how many couples participated in the symbolic marriage. EFE says there were five but Peruvian media says that there were four as well as a heterosexual couple who was there in support for same-sex partnership recognition but did not participate in the ceremony.



Argentina: I haven't seen any coverage yet, but on the eve of Valentine's Day, the leading network of organizations advocating for marriage equality in Argentina called for members of the LGBT community and allies to participate in the 2nd annual "Picnics for the Same Love". The Argentinian LGBT Federation, in collaboration with ElMismoAmor.org [off-line at this moment] were the leading organizers (source: AG Magazine).

Two Argentinean men became the first same-sex couple to marry in all of Latin America back in December after a court declared that it was discriminatory to deny them the right to marry but other gay couples wishing to marry are awaiting an expected Supreme Court ruling on the constitutionality of allowing gay couples to do so.

I do know that, as part of the Valentine's Day events, Argentinean advocates launched their YouTube video version of Lily Allen's "Fuck You":



Chile: Chile is further back on the path of recognizing marriage equality but that didn't keep members from the United Movement of Sexual Minorities (MUMS) to take to the capital's Army Plaza and demand the right to marry.

"Chile is a country in which not everyone is equal," said MUMS director Fernando Muñoz, "it's a country where the laws keep you out and put you on the margin specifically in the sense that there is no recognition of same-sex partners or of common-law partners in the law that recognizes partnerships, nor of those who might want to conform one."

Muñoz also said that if the current law specifically establishes that marriage is only allowed for procreation and implied that it was hypocritical to keep gays from marriage but allow straight couples who cannot procreate to marry even if the law said they don't qualify (source: Radio Cooperativa).

Mexico: As in Argentina, marriage equality is a red-hot topic in Mexico ever since the Mexico City legislature passed a bill allowing same-sex couples to marry in Mexico's capital city (the law goes into effect in March). The measure, which also explicitly would allow same-sex couples to adopt, has run into vehement opposition from right wing politicians and religious leaders - and will also be heading to the country's Supreme Court for review later in the year.

Yesterday's La Jornada reported that different LGBT rights organizations from Jalisco, Colima and Guanajuato marched down the streets of Guadalajara to demand equal partnership rights. The group, mostly made up of lesbian and gay members from different regional university student groups, carried signs and expressed a desire for having similar rights granted to gays and lesbians in Mexico City. The group gathered outside the University of Guadalajara and made their way to the city's main plaza where they staged a kiss-in as the shadow of the city's Metropolitan Cathedral fell on them.

Milenio describes the scene outside the Cathedral and gives a better sense of how massive the march was. They estimate the crowd at 350 and say that, in addition to the kiss-in, eleven gay and lesbian couples also participated in a symbolic wedding ceremony. They also report homophobic insults and obscenities being hurled at marchers even as organizers expressed relief that there were no outbursts of violence.

"We received many threats form many people who said they were not going to allow us to march, including many who said they would be waiting here at the Cathedral to prevent us carrying on with the event, but at the end, none of that came to be," said Karina Velasco Michel.

These weren't the only LGBT-rights demonstrations that took place yesterday in Mexico, nor in other cities throughout Latin America, but I wanted to give you a flavor of what went on.

Mexican supreme court will determine constitutionality of Mexico City's marriage equality law: NY Times

On December 29th Alex Freyre and José Maria Di Bello shocked the world by becoming the first gay couple to be allowed to marry in all of Latin America. Their marriage victory in Argentina came after a protracted court battle which ended when a Buenos Aires judge ruled that it was discriminatory to deny them the right to marry. A Buenos Aires court placed a stay on that ruling but the couple circumvented that last obstacle by traveling to Tierra del Fuego, where that municipality's Governor's Office allowed the marriage to proceed, making Latin American history at the end of 2009.

By some accounts, more than a hundred same sex couples in Argentina have filed marriage claims following Freyre and Di Bello's historic wedding but, as of now, there are still no laws allowing same-sex couples to marry anywhere in Argentina and no marriage bureaus willing to grant marriage rights to other couples.

is no law allowing those marriages to take place or a marriage bureau willing to start processing additional marriages. The matter is to be decided later this year when the Supreme Court is expected to take up the matter and determine whether the Argentinian constitution is indeed discriminatory in not allowing same-sex couples to wed.

Buenos Aires already enjoyed the reputation of being the first city in Latin America to have granted limited civil union benefits to same-sex couples in the year 2003. In 2007, Uruguay became the first Latin American country to adopt a country-wide same-sex civil unions measure. In 2009, the Colombian constitutional court stopped short of calling for marriage equality but ruled that same-sex partners had the right to the same rights as heterosexual couples. Mexico City and other Mexican localities have also passed limited same-sex civil union statutes since 2006. Some municipalities in Brazil and Ecuador have also passed similar measures. But it wasn't until December that Mexico City became the first municipality in all of Latin America to approve a law allowing same-sex partners to marry. The law goes into effect on Thursday, March 4th, and hundreds of couples are expected to take advantage of the opportunity to marry.

As you would expect, the measure, which also allows same-sex couples to have the same adoption rights as heterosexual partners, has drawn the ire of right-wing political parties and conservative religious groups. Mexico's attorney general has filed a suit to block the law before the Mexican supreme court. The court recently announced that it will accept the suit and determine whether the law is constitutional. But the suit won't reach the court until possibly the end of the year and, by then, hundreds of couples might have already married.

Today's New York Times takes a look at the law and its repercussions. I believe it gives too much credence to the conservative parties that are trying to derail the law but it is a worthy read ["Gay marriage puts Mexico City at center of debate"]. It is also the only English-language coverage that I have seen covering the right-wing challenges that await the landmark law in months to come.

So, come March 4th, please join me in celebrating the same-sex marriages that will take place in Mexico City and rejoice in their historic nature. But also know that the law faces incredible challenges in the future and that the marriage equality fight in Mexico, as in the United States, is far from won.

New York Senate sinks marriage equality bill

Today, after months of public and private pressure on the New York State Senate to bring a marriage equality bill to the floor for a vote, it finally happened. The Assembly had already passed their version of the bill and Governor David Paterson had vowed to sign the bill if it reached his desk. But passage in the Senate was never a done deal and today the bill was voted down by a margin of 38 to 24.

The loss wasn't necessarily a surprise, although it was certainly disappointing, particularly coming on the heels of the heartbreaking loss in Maine. But the margin, with 8 Democrats voting against the bill and NO Republicans voting in favor was certainly a big shock. Personally, I believed that a few Republican votes might make up for the Democratic deficit that had been evident for months. That did not happen.

Tonight at Times Square, an impromptu call for a protest rally drew approximately 200 to 300 people despite the threat of rain. My photos here. Selected ones below...

Rainbow flag designer Gilbert Baker came up with this banner. Black script on yellow. "N.Y. Crime Scene".

Angered by the results, the crowd was energetic and seemed ready for action. But there was also an air of uncertainty as what the next step should be. Most of the anger seemed directed at the 8 Democrats who voted against the bill with the crowd chanting "Vote them out! Vote them out!"

Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer came out to the rally and spoke to reporters in condemnation of today's vote.

Blogger Joe Jervis (Joe.My.God) was there to cover the rally and to express his displeasure, singling out Queens Senator Hiram Monserrate.

Not proud to be a New Yorker tonight...

Update: Video of the rally from In The Life Media:

Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez on marriage equality and anti-gay persecution

As rare as it is to have Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez on the record on LGBT rights, I wanted to share this little nugget from an interview given on the spot during his visit to Europe last month. In it, an Italian gossip show host lobbies a series of questions on controversial issues and elicits as clear an answer from Chavez on his views on marriage equality and anti-gay discrimination. From my translation:

REPORTER: Can you tell me your position on gay marriage? [EDIT] ...in a world in which gay marriage is possible.
HUGO CHAVEZ: I believe that... look, each country has its customs, no? At least, in Venezuela, it is not well-regarded, no? But there are societies, there are societies, there are ideas which continue to mature [EDIT] ...what I am indeed against is any persecution against anyone based on sexual orientations...
REPORTER: What do you think... [CLIP]
HUGO CHAVEZ: ...we are all equal, the particularities of the individual, of a human being, have to be respected.
REPORTER: ..brings us, justly, to gay marriage... [CLIP]
HUGO CHAVEZ: In Venezuela, it is not well-regarded...
REPORTER: What do you think...
HUGO CHAVEZ: Now, if... Me? The same as Venezuelans, as the majority of Venezuelans, those of us who don't see it as being good.
REPORTER: No...
HUGO CHAVEZ: No, but it's a state of opinion, it's a state of opinion. Which doesn't mean we are in opposition, that I am in opposition of what you might think.

Translation caveat number one: Italian is not my first language, so I might have erred in translating some of the reporter's questions. Translation caveat number two: As you would expect for an Italian paparazzi show, the video has several edits which means that Chavez' response has been severely truncated. Translation caveat number three: "No es bien visto" can be translated as "it's not well-regarded" but doesn't have the full impact of "it's not considered to be a good thing" which is probably what Chavez means.

All in all, Chavez admits a couple of things: 1) He thinks that marriage equality is a symbol of a 'mature' society and yet he sides with the Venezuelan population that believes marriage equality is wrong, and; 2) He says that he is against persecution against anyone based on sexual orientation.

Last week, the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission sent out an urgent alert on the arbitrary detention of LGBT leaders in Caracas. So far, no word from the Venezuelan government or Chavez. I guess it's one thing to say that he is against discrimination against the LGBT community when interviewed in a foreign country but quite another when it comes to governing his own country.

Update (or, some additional thoughts as of 11/21/09): Over at Towleroad as well as below, some readers have taken some issue with what I wrote on this post. I wanted to address a couple of those issues.

On taking Chavez to task for violence and detentions against the LGBT community in Caracas instead of the local authorities and the city's mayor: Caracas Mayor Antonio Ledezma might be among those who oppose Chavez and the IGLHRC 'action alert' might be directed at local Caracas officials, but ultimately Chavez is the country's president and it would make a world of difference if he stepped in and publicly declared the detentions a violation of people's human rights. What's particularly galling to me is that there he is in Venice boasting that he is against persecution based on sexual orientation and yet, when he goes back home, he continues his long-term silence on LGBT issues.

On taking Chavez to task for his position on marriage equality when even US President Barack Obama does not support marriage rights for same-sex couples: I doubt that marriage equality advocates in Venezuela give a second thought to Obama or his position on the issue when advocating for the right of same-sex couples to marry in their country. The video was actually sent to me by an LGBT rights organization called Venezuela Diversa and, in a statement that accompanied the video, they deplored Chavez's stand on the issue. Interestingly, they argue that, on LGBT issues, Venezuela is being left behind other countries in Latin America (no mention of Obama) and argued that left-wing movements throughout the world had embraced the issue and now support it (an arguable point).

Argentina is about to see the first marriage between a same-sex couple in all of Latin America in a couple of weeks and courts and legislatures have paved the way for a series of advances in countries like Uruguay, Colombia, Brazil, Mexico, Chile and others. They are advances that have been obtained through the hard work of local organizations and activists with little economic or strategic input from organizations in the United States.

Obama should be taken to task for not being the "fierce advocate" he promised to be on LGBT rights but his reticence does not mean that every other heads of nation should get a free pass on LGBT issues, including marriage equality.

On these being 'fringe' issues in a region that is facing larger problems: Arguments that the Latin American region is largely homophobic and not amenable to be progressive on LGBT issues, or that these are fringe issues raised by a small minority in countries facing greater social problems, are defeatist and ignorant of the tremendous advances that have been made in the last few years when it comes to same-sex partnership rights in Latin America.

Related:

• Towleroad: Hugo Chavez on LGBT persecution and marriage equality (Nov. 19, 2009) - Read comments below post for commentary.
• The Huffington Post / IPS News: Venezuela: Gays Attacked, Harassed By Police (Nov. 4, 2009)

Previously:

• President Chavez is too macho to be gay (Sept. 16, 2007)

Coda: Maine

During my stay in Maine a couple of weeks back, as I followed the "No on 1" campaign in it's attempt to beat back an effort to strip away marriage rights from same-sex couples, I ran into two young guys producing an online documentary on the last days of the campaign.

Chase Whiteside and Erick Stoll of New Left Media (above) just sent me a message alerting me that they had just posted the resulting documentary on YouTube in two parts. In it, they capture the mood of the campaign, campaign supporters, staff and volunteer during those last hours - and a sense that "No on 1" might win. It also captures the heartbreak when election night results begin to show that a win is not at hand.

Here is part 1...


And part 2...


Blink and you might miss a shot of me at the blogger's table on election night... My photos here...

Heartbreak in Maine: No on 1 campaign concedes

While 'No on 1/Protect Marriage Equality' campaign director Jesse Connolly did not concede defeat at the end-of-the-night address to supporters of the campaign at the Portland Holiday Inn, the faces of the campaign staff behind him told a different story. There was sadness and tears and a sense of the team trying to hold each other together. They seemed to know that the 'Yes on 1' lead was insurmountable and, while it wasn't spelled out at the time, the message reverberated through the shocked crowd.

Well, now it's official. I just received the official 'No on 1' concession --

STATEMENT OF JESSE CONNOLLY, CAMPAIGN MANAGER FOR NO ON 1

Tonight, hundreds of thousands of Maine voters stood for equality, but in the end, it wasn't enough.

I am proud of the thousands of Mainers who knocked on doors, made phone calls and talked to their family, friends and neighbors about the basic premise of treating all Maine families equally.

And I'm proud of this campaign because the stories we told and the images we shared were of real Mainers -- parents who stood up for their children, and couples who simply wanted to marry the person they love.

We're in this for the long haul. For next week, and next month, and next year-- until all Maine families are treated equally. Because in the end, this has always been about love and family and that will always be something worth fighting for.

Some of us at the bloggers' table had advance warning of things turning for the worse. But for a majority of those gathered it must have come out of nowhere. For most of the night, they had been looking at incoming reports and cheering what seemed to be an early lead for the 'No on 1' side. Alas, that was not to be. Below, scenes captured soon after the 'No on 1' team had left the stage for the final time.

Related:

• Wockner: Maine voters 'veto' gay marriage law that was passed by Legislature and signed by governor (Nov. 4, 2009)

Previously on Blabbeando:

• Sorta live-blogging from the Holiday Inn in Portland - Election night in Maine (Nov. 4, 2009)
  
• The back of Nat Silver's head - Day ZERO in Maine (Nov. 3, 2009)
  
• Red is the color of equality in Maine -- 1 day to go! (Nov. 2, 2009)
  
• Pod people take over Maine -- 2 days to go (Nov. 1, 2009)
• Hallow's Eve in Maine -- 3 days to go! (Oct. 31, 2009)

Sorta live-blogging from the Holiday Inn in Portland - Election night in Maine

[November 5, 2009] With 99% of precincts reporting, the Bangor Daily News says that 'No on 1' lost with 47.19% of the vote while the 'Yes on 1' side won with 52.81% of the vote.

[1:13 am] The Associated Press: "Gay Marriage-foes claim victory in Maine"

[1:00 am] For the night: As of 12:53am, with 86% of precincts reporting, The Bangor Daily News says that the the anti-gay 'Yes on 1' has 52.74% to 47.26% from 'No on 1'. There are 4 precincts in Portland that haven't reported which should go for our side but it is unlikely that they will cover the 25K vote difference. So, unless a miracle happens, it looks as if the anti-gay forces won tonight.

[11:30 pm] Seen at the ballroom...

[11:08 pm] Tonight, Mainers were also voting on Question 5 which, if approved would make it easier for individuals with certain medical conditions to have access to marijuana. The New York Times is reporting that the marijuana referendum will pass.

[10:00 pm] Maine Governor John Baldacci was also in high spirits tonight as he addressed the crowd.

[9:38 PM] 'No on 1 / Protect Marriage Equality' campaign director Jesse Connolly just went live on Rachel Maddow. By now the room is full and everyone is in high spirits. People had to be told to quiet down a couple of times for the Maddow live-feed.

[9:16 PM] Mary Bonauto, Civil Rights Project Director at Gay and Lesbian Advocates & Defenders (GLAD) just gave a rousing speech. As one of the main legal advocates behind the strategy to secure marriage rights in Northeastern states, she said that to win tonight would be that much sweeter. As someone born in Maine, she said, it would be amazing to be able to marry her partner of 22 years in her home state.

[8:41] Second song of the night? Eddie Grant's "Electric Avenue". Those of us on the bloggers' team were asked weeks ago for input on which songs the band should sing tonight. The Awesomes are a well-known 80's music cover band here in Portland. The song I submitted? The Thompson Twins' "Lies".

[8:15 pm] Room is filling up. The band's first song of the night: The Pointer Sister's "Automatic". USTREAM already carrying the live-feed of tonight's shin-digs here.

[8:10 pm] Sitting at the bloggers' table at a ballroom at the Holiday Inn in Portland, Maine, waiting for the procedings to begin. Polls close in a couple of minutes and The Bangor Daily News has already began to post some results. The ballroom is still empty, save a tableful of bloggers, a band doing a live-check, and TV news crews. Campaign manager Jesse Connolly was in the room a few minutes ago. He'll be going live on The Rachel Maddow show on MSNBC tonight. The photo is of the window at campaign headquarters the night I met the staff. The place must be pretty empty tonight. But that's where the heart of the campaign still rests.

Jeremy Hooper is is also live-blogging at Good As You and so is Rex at Wockner. Louise is here also from Pam's House Blend.

The back of Nate Silver's head -- Day 0 in Maine

OhMyGodOhMyGodOhMyGodOhMyGod. The day has arrived and I have to say I feel a bit queasy. It might be my first time in Maine and I may not call the state my home but it certainly feels personal. As it should.

For those pondering whether voters will vote 'No on 1' to protect marriage equality or vote 'Yes on 1' to strip those rights away, there has been some fodder in the last 48 hours that has given hope to those on both side of the issue.

There was that alarming poll released yesterday by Public Policy Polling showing "No on 1" not only losing 51-47 percent but trending down from a previous poll taken two weeks earlier which showed a 48-48 tie. But that came with the caveat that the margin of error still covered the spread and that the actual result might go either way.

And then there was polling analyst wünderkind Nate Silver (right) walking to the plate after the PPP poll had been released their and confidently re-stating his belief that the 'Yes on 1' side is a 5-to-2 underdog *.

Then, there was Maine Secretary of State Matthew Dunlap telling reporters yesterday that he expected turnout to be extremely low - in the 35 percent range - and then, hours later - telling Politico that his predictions might have been wrong and that turnout might actually be over 50% and might even break state turnout records (conventional wisdom says that a higher turnout number means a better chance for the anti-gay referendum to fail).

When it comes down to it, though, little has changed in the last few days: We have polls that show an extremely tight race with few undecideds. The pessimist that I am, I am assuming that those who still say they are undecided will probably end up voting 'Yes on 1', and that means a single thing.

PPP poll or no poll, Nate Silver or no Nate Silver, the answer is turnout, turnout, turnout.

I am a bit hesitant to go by Dunlap's high turnout 'guestimate', particularly because it varied so widely overnight. There have been unofficial reports that turnout in Bangor, Maine - the third largest city in the state - have been high. Some Twitterers have posted information about low turnout in other parts of the state.

But I have been involved in several elections and I have seen it all before. Remember Bush-Gore? Prop. 8 in California? We all thought the win was ours (well those of us who wanted Gore to win and Prop. 8 to fail). And it turned out not the way we wanted.

The big difference with Prop. 8 is that it definitely served as a warning. I haven't seen signals that anyone is resting on their laurels and expecting a 'No on 1' win. The 'No on 1 / Protect Marriage Equality' campaign has a lot to be proud of and deserve to win. They have run a tight ship, engaged more than 8,000 field volunteers, worked day and night to make winning the vote a reality.

And yet, my stomach is still in knots. I don't want to raise my hopes up. I would rather not assume anything. I would rather celebrate if and only it's time to celebrate.

Tonight, I'll be sorta live-blogging and Tweeting from the Holiday Inn in Portland. You are welcome to catch my tweets at twitter.com/Blabbeando. The official 'No on 1' campaign Tweeter address is at twitter.com/NoOn1Maine.

For a vote this tight, it could be a very long night. Results might actually not be in tonight.

And what if it's a 'No on 1' loss? Rex Wockner put it best when he wrote this on his blog two days ago:

If we lose in Maine on Tuesday, the Legislature will just pass the law again and the governor will sign it again. We're not talking about a constitutional amendment here, as was the case with Prop 8 in California. In reality, gays are going to be able to get married in all 50 states, perhaps even very soon if the Olson/Boies Prop 8 case succeeds at the U.S. Supreme Court. And if it doesn't, next up -- very, very soon -- are New Jersey and New York, which will be added to Iowa, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Vermont and, starting in January, New Hampshire. Where all this is headed could not be clearer. But until then, there will be days like this Tuesday when bigots might force a backward step in the inevitable, unstoppable march to equal treatment under the law for GLBT Americans. The next generation will remember "Yes on 1" voters the way we remember people who believed black folks should drink from separate water fountains. I absolutely guarantee you that.

Rex will also be sorta live-blogging at the Wockner blog. He won't be Tweeting but he will be also filing live and taped reports for POTUS on XM radio and OutQ on Sirius radio. So tune in!

Less than four hours until polls close. Cross your fingers.

* Photo credit: The back of Nate Silver's head, taken by yours truly earlier this year on the way to the Pittsburgh International Airport from Netroots Nation. We both got on the same airport shuttle. Let's hope that what's inside that head is right about tonight's chances.

Red is the color of equality in Maine -- 1 day to go!

Unfortunately I wasn't able to make it to today's big "No on 1" campaign 'Get Out the Vote' rally for marriage equality here in Portland. I'm pretty sure other bloggers were able to make it, though, so let's take a look at the internetz and see what we can find.

Jeremy Hooper of Good As You finally made it to Portland and already posted two videos featuring speakers at today's rally (click on "Twas the night before..." to watch them). A bird pooped on him while taping. Yes, you read that right: Jeremy got pooped on - and didn't seem to appreciate it. In my neck of the woods, that's considered good luck. Perhaps a good omen?

John Aravosis and Joe Sudbay of AmericaBlog are also here. Joe has actually been here for a few days and has been posting great stuff over at the AmericaBlog offshoot AmericaBlogGay. He's got some photos from today's rally and a video as well (go to "Scenes from today's GOTV Rally in Portland" to watch them).

Louise from Maine who blogs for Pam's House Blend and has a personal blog at Louise's Snack Bar was also there! You guessed it! She took pictures and video (click on "'No On 1' Final Rally today in Portland..." to watch). I swiped the code for her video ans posted it above. I hope she doesn't mind! If you see people wearing red shirts or sweaters ut's because people were asked to wear red.

GayinMaine.com has some great pics as well (click on "NO in 1 Rally - Portland")

Thank you guys! Made me feel as if I had been there!

Finally - That last minute urgent call for donations from the "No on 1 / Protect Marriage Equality" campaign? The original ask was for $25K. The haul as of right this moment? 1,340 donors have given $74,550 dollars to the "No on 1" campaign. Here is campaign manager Jesse Connolly giving thanks earlier today (via Adam Bink of Open Left):



Will the added economic muscle ad up to a win tomorrow? I certainly hope so but we are all on pins and needles here.

Pod People take over Maine -- 2 days to go!

UPDATE #2 (11/2/09 at 12:30am) - ALARMING NEW POLL OUT

A new poll is out and the news is not good. Public Policy Polling, which had the 'Yes' and 'No' tied at 48-48 just two weeks ago, has the 'Yes on 1' side leading the 'No on 1' side 51-47.

From the Public Policy Polling press release:

The measure's fate could be determined by the age composition of the electorate on Tuesday. Senior citizens support it by a 59-40 margin while voters under 30 oppose it 51-48. Last year exit polls showed more voters under 30 turning out for the Presidential election than ones over 65 but we expect seniors to turn out at a much higher rate than younger voters this year, as is often the case in off year elections. If the electorate ends up being younger than we anticipate the fight could be even closer.

Pollsters surveyed 1,333 likely voters between yesterday and today and, while the difference is within the margin of error, it does show a trending move towards the 'Yes' side in recent polling. For the complete press release and access to full poll go to Public Policy Polling.

UPDATE #1 (11/1/09 at 11:59pm) - DONATE!

The anti-gay "Yes on 1" campaign sent a message out to supporters today asking for a last minute donation drive to raise $25,000 for a brand new television ad. It would be their last minute push to poison the airwaves and turn the key 'undecided' vote to their side. More than likely, it will feature Don Mendell, a public school counselor who appeared in one of their earlier campaign ads. The amazing Jeremy Hooper, who blogs at Good As You, has a post today on Mr. Mendell, a breakdown on the facts and myths behind the last minute push by "Yes on 1", and a copy of the "Yes on 1" solicitation letter (read "Don, we now are gays in peril, and we're the ones worried about getting decked in the halls").

Our ask? DONATE TO 'NO ON 1': Blabbeando's message tonight is simple. Please help deflect a last minute poison pill from the 'Yes' folks. Please CLICK HERE and donate to the "No on 1" campaign RIGHT NOW! It will help 'No on 1' raise their ad buy power in local media and help them to counter any last minute surprise move by the anti-gay camp.

Original post from earlier tonight:

Today we headed to the "No on 1 / Protect Marriage Equality" campaign's Get Out the Vote headquarters in downtown Portland. It was the last full weekend of door-to-door canvassing before Tuesday's vote and we got there in time for the volunteer debriefing on their experiences in the field.

Teams were separated into "pods" depending on the neighborhood being covered. As they returned to the office, each of the volunteers handed in their canvassing clipboards and sat down for a well-deserved meal. Once again, I was struck by the number of younger people involved, gay and straight alike, as well as the range in ages represented in the room.

When asked if today was their first experience ever volunteering for a voting canvassing effort, approximately half of the volunteers raised their hand. A few volunteers then stood up to share their experiences on the field, as expected, and spoke of meeting people on both sides of the issue. A young woman spoke of having her preconceptions challenged when she knocked on the door of a young married couple in a wealthy suburb who she expected to be an ally, and instead finding out that they would be voting 'Yes' on 'Question 1'; while an older man in a white collar suburb with a truck parked outside enthusiastically told her that he would vote in favor of marriage equality. There were a lot of unanswered knocks and more than a couple of volunteers saying that they met some voters who were fed-up with the constant ads, knocks on the door and telephone calls and couldn't wait for Tuesday to be over - whether or not they were voting 'No on 1'.

As in the last couple of days, I took a few pictures. Accordingly, my "No on 1" campaign photo album has been updated with new pics. You can see the full album here.

Two days to go, folks! Tuesday night comes and that's it! If you can help by calling voters from your own state, please click here now. If you can make a donation, please click here now as well.

As usual, Rex (above) has his latest take as well. For his latest thoughts, click here.

Hallows' Eve in Maine -- 3 days to go!

And three days to go...

There was a little bit of sunshine this morning here in Portland but by evening the drizzle and rain had returned. Last night was a late one so I didn't get up until fairly late. Today we didn't make it into the "No on 1 / Protect Marriage Equality" campaign offices until the late afternoon.

There was blood on the doors.

OK, it wasn't really blood and it looked a bit too gell-y and gooey, but it was Hallows' Eve and staffers had decorated the office here and there.

A few people even wore something Halloweenish, if not full costumes. One volunteer, for example, was wearing a cap in the shape of a red lobster head. They do love those red lobsters here in Maine. The best costume of the night, hands down, definitely went to Jenna Lowenstein of the National Stonewall Democrats who was dressed as... drum roll please ... a blogger! (check her out above). You see, she is wearing an exact copy of the t-shirt I had on yesterday except that yesterday wasn't Halloween so it was simply a shirt and today was Halloween so it served as a costume. You see, the t-shirt has this Twitter RT and hashtag thing going on which, eh, OK, this is taking a bit long to explain. Just take it from me. It was the best disguise of the night. Plus! She had horns.

When it came down to it, though, today's Halloween motifs served as mere background to the hard work being done to get people to the polls on Tuesday. Bowls full of candy, lollipops and M&M's set up for the staff and volunteers were left mostly untouched. And people of all ages - gay, bisexual, lesbian, straight and transgender - were sitting around placing calls to make sure people turned out at the polls on Tuesday to protect marriage equality in Maine.

The campaign says that it has registered more than 8,000 volunteers. Of those, there are about 100 to 125 incredible individuals who decided to take a "vacation" and travel from other states to volunteer their time. One of them was Pam Perkins of Hendersonville, North Carolina, sitting next to Rex. From today's edition of The Bangor Daily News ("Maine marriage law has nation engaged"):

Perkins said she first heard about the “volunteer vacation” program after she and her long-time partner were legally married on the top of Mount Mansfield in Vermont in September. The couple was honeymooning in Maine and decided to get involved.

“I fell in love with Maine and wanted to come back and help all Mainers” seeking marriage equality, Perkins said.

Perkins, a professional gardener now enjoying her “off season,” returned to Maine earlier this month with the help of donated frequent flier miles and lodging provided by a “No on 1” supporter. She has spent most of the month working full time helping coordinate the volunteer efforts out of the campaign’s Portland headquarters.

Yup! It's crunch-time at office headquarters and elsewhere but there are certainly some great people on this team. And, if Pam Perkins can volunteer a whole vacation, so can you, even now - and you don't even have to travel! How? Click here and find out.

Of course, it's crunch time for the other side as well. Above are two door hangers produced by the opposing sides to be distributed this weekend. Yes, the battle is so heated that the smallest detail counts. As long as those details work for our side and translate into a victory on Tuesday, I'll be more than happy.

• Of course, Rex Wockner has his own version of what we saw at headquarters. For his take, click here.

Update:

• Pod people take over Maine -- 2 days to go (Nov. 1, 2009)