NOM spent $709,000 in Minnesota on 2010 marriage ads
Thursday, August 18, 2011 at 7:46 am
- 21 Comments
Findings by the Minnesota Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board show that the National Organization for Marriage spent $709,000 on radio and television ads during the gubernatorial campaign in 2010. Those ads targeted DFLer Mark Dayton and Independence Party candidate Tom Horner for their support for marriage equality and lent support for the campaign of Republican Tom Emmer who supported a constitutional amendment barring same-sex marriage.
The ads, paid for by the New Jersey-based NOM were created by the California-based Schubert Flint Public Affairs.
The ads were the subject of a campaign finance complaint that was dismissed Wednesday by the public disclosure board. The decision by the board provides some insight into the ad campaigns and how much was spent.
The first ad, “Your Right to Vote,” his television airwaves from May 18 to May 26 and cost $212,716:
A radio ad called “Who Should Decide?” ran from Aug. 12 to Aug. 20 at a cost of $96,050:
“The Most Important Civil Right,” aired on Minnesota television stations from Sept. 20 to Oct. 24 at a cost of $333,155:
Just before the election, from Oct. 13 to Oct. 24, the radio ad “The Most Important Civil Right” ran for a cost of $62,549:
The group also spent $4,700 in literature at the Minnesota State Fair.
According to the board’s findings, NOM paid Schubert Flint Public Affairs to create the ad campaigns. Schubert Flint was also behind the campaign in California to pass Prop 8, which halted marriage equality in 2008. Same-sex couples were granted the right to marry in that state in early 2008.
Frank Schubert and Jeff Flint discussed their strategy in a February 2009 interview with Campaigns and Elections magazine and in that interview the two laid out the strategy they used to win on Prop 8, including strategies the Minnesota Family Council has recently utilized to pass a similar amendment in Minnesota.
“We built a campaign volunteer structure around both time-honored campaign grassroots tactics of organizing in churches, with a ground-up structure of church captains, precinct captains, zip code supervisors and area directors; and the latest Internet and web-based grassroots tools,” the duo wrote.
As the Minnesota Independent reported last week, the Minnesota Family Council is organizing pastors, in particular, “church captains.”
Schubert and Flint also said they came up with messages that would “result in voters casting a Yes vote for traditional marriage.” That strategy is to assign “consequences” to the legalization of same-sex marriage.
We strongly believed that a campaign in favor of traditional marriage would not be enough to prevail. We needed to convince voters that gay marriage was not simply ‘live and let live’—that there would be consequences if gay marriage were to be permanently legalized. But how to raise consequences when gay marriage was so recently legalized and not yet taken hold? We made one of the key strategic decisions in the campaign, to apply the principles of running a “No” campaign—raising doubts and pointing to potential problems—in seeking a “Yes” vote. As far as we know, this strategic approach has never before been used by a Yes campaign. We reconfirmed in our early focus groups our own views that Californians had a tolerant opinion of gays. But there were limits to the degree of tolerance that Californians would afford the gay community. They would entertain allowing gay marriage, but not if doing so had significant implications for the rest of society.
We probed long and hard in countless focus groups and surveys to explore reactions to a variety of consequences our issue experts identified. The California Supreme Court ruling put gay couples in a protected legal class on the basis of sexual orientation, and then found that gay couples had a fundamental constitutional right to marriage. This decision significantly changed the legal landscape. No longer would it be enough for Californians to tolerate gay relationships, they would have to accept gay marriage as being equivalent to traditional marriage. Tolerance is one thing; forced acceptance of something you personally oppose is a very different matter.
Whenever a conflict occurred between the rights of a gay couple and other rights, the rights of the gay couple would prevail because of their “protected class” legal status. We settled on three broad areas where this conflict of rights was most likely to occur: in the area of religious freedom, in the area of individual freedom of expression, and in how this new “fundamental right” would be inculcated in young children through the public schools. And we made sure that we had very concrete examples we could share with voters of things that had actually occurred.
The firm noted that widespread dissemination of campaign literature helped persuade voters who might be uncomfortable voting against their neighbors rights.
“This intense commitment to distributing materials throughout the state was the result of another key strategic decision. Supporting traditional marriage is not considered to be ‘politically correct.’” Schubert and Flint said. “We wanted voters who supported our position to know that they were not alone and so we made sure they saw our signs in their neighborhoods and our campaign materials at their church. And if they were part of an ethnic minority, all these were in their native language.”
The campaign then pivoted to television ads that made the threat that homosexuality would be taught in the schools if Prop 8 did not pass. Here’s two examples of the ads used by Schubert Flint in California:
Follow Andy Birkey on Twitter21 Comments
Pingback posted August 18, 2011 @ 8:33 am
[...] Full Story from The MN Independent [...]
Comment posted August 18, 2011 @ 8:39 am
Put down your Bibles and stop pushing your archaic beliefs on everyone. Or live by ‘the good book’ word for word.
Comment posted August 18, 2011 @ 8:54 am
Wouldn’t it be nice if NOM spent that money instead on helping support education in our least wealthy counties, or on the homeless, or on preventing suicide or drug abuse.
It is time to stop scapegoating gay people.
Comment posted August 18, 2011 @ 8:56 am
My God this is scary stuff. Basically the masses can be convinced to run, tumble or jump off a bridge on command if the right marketing tools are used. I guess logic or reason or any of the critical thought processes have no place in American any longer.
Comment posted August 18, 2011 @ 9:00 am
I don’t recall gay citizens getting to vote on straight marriages. So why exactly do straight people get to vote on something that doesn’t impact their lives at all? How is this any different than people voting on the civil rights for African-Americans or Jewish citizens?
The fact that NOM does absolutely NOTHING to combat the 50% divorce rate, or help marriages that are in trouble, speaks volumes. This has nothing to do with marriage, and everything to do with anti-gay animus cloaked under the guise of religious beliefs.
Comment posted August 18, 2011 @ 9:15 am
The Real Fact is….Gays/lesbians ARE ALREADY Marrying…….10′s of 1000′s of cpls have ALREADY Married……Im one of them (married last yr in VT, tho I live in NJ which offers Civil Unions..I/we refused to settle for 2nd class citizenship…so, we took our $2500 vakay budget and spent in in VT cause THEY deserved it, screw NJ) ….trying to prevent Gay people from marrying isn’t gonna stop them/us from marrying….sure it will make it harder for those who CAN’T afford to travel to another state to get married….NOm just shows that it has NOTHING to do with SAVING Marriage – they just Hate Gay people, and don’t want gays to have any Rights…its puts UNDUE burden on LGBT Tax paying citizens….and Throws these anti-gay states on the WRONG side of History, its an embarrassment to OUR Nation…you know…tthis place thats “Supposed” to have LIBERTY & JUSTICE for ALL??? Its Discrimination….Plain and simple!!! America, the Land of Hypocracy.
Comment posted August 18, 2011 @ 9:18 am
Here’s an Idea..how about we ask – these Rabid Antyi-gay Holes…..If they’d like one of thier daughters/son’s marrying an Ex-gay? LOL (they don’t exist)
Comment posted August 18, 2011 @ 9:23 am
…also…why doesn’t someone ask Fatass Maggie Gallagher ( her maiden name) why she DOESN’T USE her Married name? ..I mean, isn’t it TRADITION to use your husband’s last name? ..and WHY she never seems to wear her wedding band? See FATASS Gallagher and Brian Brown don’t want thier CASH-COW of BIGOTRY to DRY up…then they’d have to get REAL JOBS…..and well, they’re not qualified for anything else..except maybe Food-tasters. ..They’ve cemented & secured Thier place in History..just Like George Wallace, and anyone else who appears in Public Foums and who has thier Pictures taken…..those pistures can NEVER be erased bigots.
Comment posted August 18, 2011 @ 9:45 am
How many hungry children could have been fed with that money? Why not start a business with it and employ some of the people who don’t have jobs?
NOM is a hate group and if you support them, you’re a hater.
Comment posted August 18, 2011 @ 10:13 am
I though churches were places where people developed their spiritual lives. Now I see they’re just political organizations. They have nothing to do with spirituality. I think the “special rights” of churches should be yanked. Ministers should have their tax breaks yanked. Church property should pay property taxes, etc.
That said, the anti-gay marriage business is all about motivating voters to go to the polls to vote for republican candidates. It really has nothing to do with marriage or even gay people. Gay marriage is just a hook to motivate fear-based people to vote for republicans. It’s a cruel scheme that hurts real people – all for the purposes of winning elections for republicans. Gay people voting for republicans are like chickens voting for Colonel Sanders.
Pingback posted August 18, 2011 @ 10:18 am
[...] From Andy Birkey of Minnesota Independent. [...]
Comment posted August 18, 2011 @ 10:38 am
I’m a former Minnesotan who now lives in CA & married my husband in Toronto in 2003.I can tell you first hand how ugly Prop 8 was and continues to be.Entire communities divided,neighbors & family members who no longer speak and all around resentment- even by the pro Prop8 side that “won”. They realize their victory is short lived & they never bargained on the fallout that would result.It’s very easy to find out who gave money to Yes on 8 & avoid that person or their business.Most fair minded people prefer to patronize like businesses.
Until NOM & their cronies started running their misleading ads,marriage equality was ahead & Prop 8 was trailing badly.After these ads & weak responses from our side Prop8 won,52% to 48%.You can beat this in MN but you must be proactive & when NOM trots out their lies you must eviscerate them.Their craveness knows no bounds & they will go to any lengths to win.Forewarned is forearmed! Go MN marriage equality !
Comment posted August 18, 2011 @ 11:26 am
While it is easy to have our ire raised when we learn about the deep and broad reaches of groups like NOM, we must discipline ourselves to stay mobilized and proactive–*not* to get hooked by our own anger to the extent that we fume in our living room and do nothing outwardly to achieve a different outcome.
This article provides specifics about the research and stories that went into a campaign that got the result they sought: to pass Prop 8. But research like this can *also* teach supporters of marriage equality not only what to expect but how to build a cohesive movement that will provide us (1) buffers against such slippery marketing; and (2) a different outcome in Minnesota, where the proposed amendment will be defeated.
We ought not to squander these next 15 months because we are angry, but use our anger, creativity, and solidarity to show that Love will prevail and marriage between loving, committed couples provides stability and an increased capacity for joy.
Comment posted August 18, 2011 @ 12:41 pm
Dear Minnesotans,
If you’re curious to find out who supplied the $700,000 in out-of-state money to NOM to influence your election, good luck finding out. NOM will NEVER release their donor list (short as it is).
Comment posted August 18, 2011 @ 2:30 pm
I’m excited to see the counter ads supporting gay-marriage in MN and explaining how the hate, discrimination groups are suppressing a peaceful community that makes large and wonderful contributions to society…. along with being tax payers.
Can you imagine, interviewing someone who just wanted to help make life and death choices for a life partner in the hospital but was rejected and couldn’t? or showing gay couples ask “How has my love for another human being hurt your marriage or your family?”
Great reporting MN Independent !!! A HUGE THANK YOU FOR ALL THAT YOU DO !!!
Now on the flip side, I’ve realized this last week that I also have my own discriminating ideas and behaviors against certain groups of people. Something I’m working on.
Comment posted August 18, 2011 @ 3:38 pm
It’s certainly enterprising of NOM to feed off the prejudices of society creating great paying jobs out of being anti-gay marriage. Feeding the poor, helping the homeless isn’t a well paid job, but they have tapped into prejudice which seems to be very well paid positions. Maggie a former unwed mom leading the battle cries about the importance of traditional marriage to raise children seems a bit of stretch even for those people who live with prejudice.
Calling on churches for donations to fund salaires and prevent hard working, tax paying citizens the right to have a life togethe with the same loving benefits as their neighbors is just amazing marketing. How is it that in the doorways of churches in every major city the homeless struggle to find shelter from the elements, but there is no funding for assisting them, yet there is money for focus groups and inflated salaries.
While I’m not able to speak for God, I wonder how these people will answer to their God when they get to heaven and are asked, why didn’t you help those I put in your reach instead of fighting those state wide from enjoying the legal contract and benefit of a marriage? I may get caught up in loop holes I just don’t see how God will.
700K is a lot of money and could done a lot of good. While divorce is a multi-billion dollar industry, and unwed teen mothers cost the country billions in tax dollars, it seems that instead of raising their children not to be unwed teen moms, and focusing on their own marriages instead of mine they might better serve their own purpose. Oh wait, then how would they get paid?
Comment posted August 18, 2011 @ 4:17 pm
“The ads, paid for by the New Jersey-based NOM were created by the California-based Schubert Flint Public Affairs.”
Schubert Flint ran the antigay Prop 8 campaign PR….any other questions as to out of staters running the anti gay MN amendment?
Trackback posted August 18, 2011 @ 4:26 pm
NOM spent $709,000 on 2010 marriage ads in Minnesota | Minnesota Independent: News. Politics. Media….
Findings by the Minnesota Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board show that the National Organization for Marriage spent $709,000 on radio and television ads targeting DFLer Mark Dayton on Independence Party candidate Tom Horner during the guberna…
Comment posted August 18, 2011 @ 6:25 pm
I’m rusty on my Bible…can someone remind me which gospel describes Jesus’ plan to manipulate the people into hating others who were almost but not quite exactly like them? Because all I can seem to find is something about “Love thy neighbor”. Perhaps that’s just a very subtle way of saying “Discriminate against thy neighbor and deny them fundamental civil rights”?
Comment posted August 19, 2011 @ 11:06 am
@IowaCentric:
I think it’s right next to the part of the bible that talks about letting poor people fend for themselves, denying basic assistance to the most vulnerable populations, destroying the earth for profit, and making sure that Judgment comes before Forgiveness.
And I think it definitely says that Jesus would have been a Republican. Or maybe a Tea Bagger.
Comment posted August 19, 2011 @ 7:10 pm
From my local food bank, ” for every $1 donated we can distribute $11.91 worth of food to people in need. Just think of how many people could have been fed with that $709,000.
What a waste.
And they call themselves Christians? I guess their Bibles were missing all those verses about love and helping the poor.
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
