by BTL staff
The Coalition for a Fair Michigan has filed the campaign disclosure reports from the 2004 battle over Proposal 2, which amended the state’s constitution to ban same-sex marriage. The files were supposed to have been submitted following the November 2004 campaign, but records from the Secretary of State’s office show the reports were filed Jan. 25.
The report shows the group raised nearly $800,000 in an ultimately unsuccessful battle urge state voters to reject an amendment that would define marriage as between one man and one woman. That measure passed in 2004.
Secretary of State documents also show that Coalition treasurer Richard Wallace of Royal Oak was sent multiple warnings by election officials, and finally was threatened with criminal prosecution by the Office of Attorney General Mike Cox. The number for Wallace listed on campaign disclosure documents has been disconnected.
The filing is being hailed by Gary Glenn, head of the American Family Association of Michigan and a co-author of the amendment.
“After breaking the law for five years, Mr. Wallace has finally relented and allowed Michigan voters a right they’re supposed to be guaranteed by law on a timely basis: the ability to see for themselves which of their local politicians, public school teachers, university professors, businesses and individuals financially contributed to the campaign that opposed constitutionally protecting marriage between one man and one woman,” Glenn said. Who has donated to either side of the same-sex marriage debate has become a heated issue. In California, supporters of the controversial Proposal 8, which banned same-sex marriage after that state’s supreme court approved it, have gone to court seeking to keep the names of donors private. They claim doing so is to protect the safety of those donors.
“As a rule, I’ve supported and even championed the spirit of public disclosure and the people’s right to know, though a court may find that the widespread hate and intimidation tactics by homosexual activists against individuals who supported California’s Marriage Protection Amendment warrants an exception,” Glenn said of the issue as it applied to the Prop. 8 proceedings. “In any case, the same rules should apply to both sides of any issue. If disclosure is required, it should apply to both sides. If an exception is made to protect public safety, that should apply to both sides.”
Glenn was, however, quick to point out that this was not the case here in Michigan. The Coalition, he said, “thumbed their nose at the letter and the spirit of the law.”