Six months ago, California voters passed Proposition 8, denying legal recognition to same gender marriages. Petitions are now being circulated to put the issue back to the voters in June 2010.
Before venturing into this thorny thicket again, the media should realize what a poor job it did in covering the fundraising for Prop 8.
The reporting blunders include gross inaccuracies and one where the media did not recognize a good story right before their eyes.
All the blunders could have been avoided had news organizations more fully understood the campaign finance reporting laws of California and/or been more diligent in examining the online campaign finance records filed with the California Secretary of State.
Blunder 1: The total amount contributed on both sides to Prop 8 was not $73 million but more than $103 million.
The campaign was widely reported to be the most expensive ballot measure of its kind, ever. But most of the media didn’t even report the correct amount spent, instead giving a figure 30% lower than the actual amount. How did this happen? The filing deadline for the last of six required financial statements was February 2, 2009, and all campaign committees met that deadline.
Every campaign committee was required to file a separate statement. The number of committees raising money for Prop 8 was four, and the number against was eight. The statements for Prop 8 totaled $41.3 million and those against totaled $61.6 million. Looking at a list of the separate amounts for each of the 12 committees, it becomes a mystery how anyone could come up with $73 million.
Blunder 2. Reporting that Mormon leaders “pulled out all the stops” to pass Prop 8.
Dozens of articles and blog comments on Prop 8 used the above phrase to describe the degree to which Mormon leadership contributed to the initiative’s passage. However campaign finance records available through the election showed that the number and amount of contributions coming from Utah and its surrounding Mormon-rich states was inconsequential -- somewhat more than $1 million, or roughly 3% of the total amount raised.
Statements filed later show that in the seven days before the election, donors from surrounding states did come up with another $3.5 million in response to an urgent plea for money made by Protectmarriage.com around October 23. That brought the percentage of out-of-state money coming from “Mormon states” to 11%.
Thus, a lion’s share of all money for Prop 8 came from Californians, contrary to wild reports that most of it came from out-of-state Mormons.
Only in California did the LDS Church designate in each congregation a fundraising person or committee or otherwise organize fundraising among its members. A letter from the highest authority within the Church, urging members to do all they can “by donating your means and time” to support Prop 8, was directed to be read to LDS congregations only in California. (California Mormons are only 12% of all LDS members in the United States.)
Finally, unlike in earlier years when the Mormon church supported efforts to preserve traditional marriage in other states, the church did not make any monetary contribution supporting Prop 8. Its in-kind contributions, required to be reported separately in California, were for $190,000, a pittance of the total raised.
By contrast, the U. S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and the Knights of Columbus together contributed over a million dollars, as did James Dobson’s Focus on the Family. To understand a blunder like this, it helps to know that all ten of California’s largest newspapers editorially opposed Prop 8.
Blunder 3: Missing the big story that Protectmarriage.com, after raising $23 million in the 3rd quarter, raised only $2.6 million during the first 18 days of October, lost the fundraising lead by $7 million, and almost lost the election.
During the critical first 18 days in October, when contributions are usually at their peak, donations to oppose Prop 8 totaled $15.6 million, six times the amount raised by Protectmarriage.com (the campaign committee receiving 95% of all contributions for Yes) and the three other campaign committees for Yes.
The No committees received 1,450 contributions each day to the Yes committees’ 333. Those opposed to Prop 8 gained the lead, and the Yes side ran out of money for TV ads to counter the opposition’s planned TV blitz. Only by urgently pleading for, and receiving, last-minute millions did Protectmarriage.com receive enough in the last ten days to afford a TV finish of its own.
Where had Protectmarriage.com been in this crucial period? Was it resting on its laurels after out-raising its opponents during August and September? Did the media ever ask these questions? Why not?
Space dictates that I stop at three. There were many more blunders.
(David L. Wilkinson, a former Utah Attorney General, is a member of the Board of Directors of the National Legal and Policy Center, a nonpartisan foundation promoting ethics in public life through investigation, research, education and legal action.)