

The Human Rights Campaign marked a first in its history this month when it opened a campaign office in Concord, N.H. -- a central hub for presidential candidates on the campaign trail.
Though the move attracted little attention nationally, the ceremony drew about 100 people, including HRC members, staffers from the Obama, Edwards, and Clinton campaigns among others, and key state politicians such as Ray Buckley, the New Hampshire Democratic Party chair. State senate president Sylvia Larsen presented an official proclamation welcoming HRC into the mix.
The organization has also hired a full-time organizer and political operative, Heather Gibson, to help coordinate the efforts of LGBT groups and HRC members on the ground in New Hampshire.
National field director Marty Rouse said the move is part of a protracted campaign by HRC to have a presence in key states where the group can have an impact both locally and nationwide.
“We can’t be in all 50 states,” said Rouse, “so our goal has been to look across the country and see where we can be helpful in moving forward a GLBT agenda that, while important to the community members in that one state, also might have national implications.” He estimated that HRC would pour upward of $50,000 into New Hampshire during the primaries alone.
The HRC committed almost $150,000 in the 2006 elections in both New Hampshire and Iowa in order to elect what Rouse calls “fair-minded majorities” in both state legislatures. At the time, officials in both states were considering putting an antigay constitutional marriage amendment on the ballot for voters in 2008.
But HRC’s strategy along with other forces contributed to Democrats gaining majorities in both legislative bodies in New Hampshire and Iowa. Consequently, instead of debating marriage amendments this year, elected officials in both states introduced and passed pro-LGBT legislation: a civil unions bill in New Hampshire and a civil rights bill that protects gays against discrimination in Iowa.
“Think how different it is when Hillary Clinton speaks in front of the Manchester Democrats and says, ‘I congratulate you all and your governor for having civil unions in New Hampshire,’” said Rouse. “Think about that versus having marriage amendments -- would [the Democrats] be courting our community openly if we were fighting marriage amendments in Iowa and New Hampshire?”
HRC has also been actively working in Iowa with One Iowa, the state's LGBT civil rights organization. In June they launched a campaign there to highlight the military contributions of LGBT soldiers called the Legacy of Service Tour, which received press coverage by most of the state's local TV affiliates, the Des Moines Register, and the Associated Press.
HRC also corralled 50 volunteers on September 16 to the 30th annual Harkin Steak Fry -- Iowa’s compulsory event for Democratic presidential candidates.
“Every single presidential campaign saw us and we have pictures of them holding up our T-shirts,” said Rouse. “What we’re trying to do is increase the LGBT visibility in these campaigns so the candidates know that they need to address our issues.”
Rouse encourages LGBT voters to attend as many house parties as possible in Iowa and New Hampshire and ask questions, regardless of whom one anticipates voting for come the primary. “We’re trying to lift all boats here,” he said.
HRC is conducting training sessions for caucusgoers in both Iowa and Nevada because the public nature of attending caucuses can be intimidating to first-timers.
Whereas at a primary such as in New Hampshire, voters go into a booth and vote behind a curtain for a presidential candidate, Rouse explained, “at a Caucus, you’re public -- you have to publicly declare in a public place which candidate you support in front of all your peers -- that’s not something people like to do.” Then if the candidate one chooses is left with too few votes, one has to pick another candidate on the fly even as they are actively courted by other campaigns. “It’s a very intense process,” said Rouse. (Kerry Eleveld, The Advocate)
These comments are reproduced as written by visitors to this Web site. They have not been edited for content, grammar, or spelling. The viewpoints appearing here are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion or views of advocate.com, The Advocate, or its affiliates.
Be the first to comment on this story.
If you would like to submit a comment for posting, please fill out the form above.
All comments submitted via this form are subject to posting or publication. (To send a private letter to an Advocate editor or writer, please use the e-mail button at the top of the page, or use snail mail.) If you would like your comment considered for publication in The Advocate magazine, please include your full name, your city of residence, and a phone number where you can be reached during business hours so that we can confirm your identity. Your e-mail address and telephone number are strictly confidential and will not be shared or used for any purpose other than to contact you about your comment.
Comments that do not concern specific articles in The Advocate or on Advocate.com will not be posted or published. See the Contact page for sending comments for reasons other than responding to Advocate editorial and news stories.
Please note that comments sent by fax or snail mail are unlikely to be posted, although they will be considered for publication along with all letters received via e-mail or via this Web page. Comments that chiefly concern Advocate.com content will be considered for posting only on the Web site. The Advocate reserves the right to edit submitted comments for grammar, spelling, obscenities, or libel; we will, however, do our best to preserve the original comment's style and intent. Comments considered for publication in The Advocate magazine may also be edited for length.