If you thought the campaign opposing gay marriage on the fall ballot was floundering, think again. Sure, it’s trying to look poor on paper. State financial records show that Preserve Marriage Washington has only about $200,000 on hand, hardly enough dough for a statewide ad blitz before November. But don’t be fooled.
Records obtained by The Stranger for local television stations and cable providers show that Preserve Marriage Washington has recently reserved nearly $1.5 million in commercials for the final weeks before the general election. For example, records from KING-TV in Seattle show a reservation of $164,000 in TV spots—targeting the morning and evening news programs—beginning on October 15. And those ads, running in media markets throughout the state, won’t be nice. The spots were secured with the help of Mission: Public Affairs, a Sacramento-based consulting firm run by Frank Schubert, the architect of divisive ad campaigns that helped overturn same-sex-marriage laws in California and Maine in the last few years (such as an ad depicting a young girl being taught about gay marriage at school).
This plan to spend big money and the partnership with Schubert should shatter any illusion that this is a small, local operation—run out of Lynnwood by a man named Joseph Backholm—and all but proclaims that major national funders are waiting in the wings to bankroll the attempt to block same-sex marriage in this state. Further, it suggests that the campaign may have already received pledges that haven’t been reported to the state.
Since it launched its campaign in February, Preserve Marriage Washington has tried to downplay its potential for massive donations, despite a campaign booster saying that “there was a commitment of $1 million made to this campaign” and the National Organization for Marriage indicating that they expect millions in spending on both sides.
Like all contributions, pledges must be reported to the Washington State Public Disclosure Commission (PDC). But Preserve Marriage Washington never reported a $1 million pledge. Why not? State officials interviewed Backholm and took him at his word that there were no actual pledges. But now, with $1.5 million in ads apparently in the pipeline (not to mention the cost of producing them), it looks more like those pledges were, in fact, real. It also looks like the state let Backholm off too easy for failing to report them.
This wouldn’t be the campaign’s only curious financial reporting. According to election records, more than four dozen of the campaign’s individual contributors who have given more than $100 failed to identify their occupation and employers, both required under state disclosure laws.
Neither Preserve Marriage Washington nor Mission: Public Affairs replied to a request for comment. Will state election officials press them to report their mysterious pledges—and their donors’ employers—so the public knows who is really behind this campaign? The PDC did not respond by press time, but its track record so far has been to let this campaign off the hook. 