Andrea Shorter Named EQCA's Coordinator of Coalitions

MadProfessah and Andrea Shorter at the
Equality Summit in Los Angeles in Janury 2009

Lost in the news on Monday of Equality California's hiring of MassEquality Executive Director Marc Solomon to win, defend and keep the right to marry was the news that Equality Summit co-chair Andrea Shorter has accepted a position at the organization to coordinate outreach to coalitions, specifically, labor, communities of color and faith communities. From the press release:

Shorter has a long track record of success in the fight for LGBT equality and other social justice issues. She is the co-founder and chair of the Bayard Rustin LGBT Coalition, the largest African-American LGBT political organization in the Bay Area.
"Andrea Shorter has a proven record of leadership and effectiveness," said San Francisco Supervisor Bevan Duffy. "She will bring a needed infusion of grassroots organizing and her commitment to working in diverse communities to our cause."

"I am pleased to join forces with Equality California to direct and expand its coalition building efforts," Shorter said. "Our work through And Marriage For All to engage people of color and faith in honest, plain talk about the importance of the freedom to marry will complement EQCA's appreciation that true coalition building must extend beyond the purpose of meeting a singular goal such as marriage equality, but must work to create and support common ground, common cause across communities. I look forward to working with EQCA to grow a statewide broad-based coalition to advance long-term civil and human rights interests for all."

In addition, Equality California has announced that is looking to hire field organizers in the Central Valley, Inland Empire and Orange County (basically all areas Prop 8 passed easily) in order to expand volunteer efforts and enhance LGBT infrastructure in those regions.

This is great news and shows that Equality California is taking seriously the commitment to do the work AHEAD of a future ballot measure to win back full equality in the state of California, regardless of what happens with the California Supreme Court decision on Proposition 8.

VIDEO: Equality Summit Plenaries available now

PART 1



PART 2



The Equality Summit blog will have links to the video of the plenaries at this weekend's plenary sessions of the Equality Summit in Los Angeles. The above video is of the much-anticipated public forum with the leaders of the NO ON PROP 8 campaign.

MadProfessah at Equality Summit

Darnell Grisby (Planning Committee co-chair) and
Anne Marks (Equality Summit organizer)

UCLA Law School's Williams Institute Visiting Scholar Catherine Smith
and MadProfessah

MadProfessah and
Equality Summit Planning Committee co-chair Andrea Shorter

MadProfessah and Equality California Executive Director Geoff Kors

L.A. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa addressed the
Equality Summit during MadProfessah's panel

MadProfessah attended the Equality Summit at the Los Angeles Convention Center on Saturday. I was on the panel entitled "Race and Religion and the LGBT Movement" representing the Jordan/Rustin Coalition. The panel was interrupted by the arrival of a very special surprise guest, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa. Here are some pictures I took with people wandering around the Equality Summit.

Some news was made at the summit: There was consensus to move forward with plans for a ballot measure to repeal Propoistion 8 on the November 2008 ballot. The group Love Honor Cherish appears to be taking the lead; they have a draft 18-page plan for recruiting 100,000 volunteers to collect the 1.5-1.7 million signatures it will take to place the measure before voters.

One pending question that was unresolved. Should the ballot measure

1. Repeal Prop 8 only
2. Repeal Prop 8; and include language making it clear it does not force the teaching of same-sex marriage in schools and re-affirming the rights of churches to marry (or not marry) whoever the hell they want
3. Do #2 AND include other language which precludes the matter from being voted on again and/or possibly includes explicit language which would incorporate non-discrimination language previously endorsed by the California Supreme Court (i.e. sex, sexual orientation and race are suspect classifications)

What do YOU think?