Tweet
Since July 2008, when hotel owner Doug Manchester’s $125,000 seed-money donation to Proposition 8 was revealed, a broad coalition of labor and the LGBT community has boycotted his Hyatt hotel in San Diego. On Sunday, Bill Clinton is scheduled to deliver a speech there. He’s being asked to honor the boycott. Will he?
Bill Clinton must make a choice. He must decide whether a speech for big bucks is more important than honoring a labor and activist boycott. On Feb. 15, the former President is scheduled to make a speech at the Manchester Hyatt.
As a refresher, Mr. Manchester gave some of the initial seed money to get Proposition 8 on the ballot, $125,000 to be exact. Since then, a coalition of labor, LGBT, and grassroots organizations has promoted a boycott against the hotel. And it has been quite successful, with groups such as the American Assoc. of Law Schools moving their events.
In their letter to Bill Clinton asking him to move his Sunday speech, labor and LGBT leaders explain the importance of the Manchester Hyatt boycott:
The boycott of the Manchester Hyatt is an ongoing labor dispute sanctioned by the California Labor Association, AFL-CIO and the San Diego Labor Council. It is also an issue of importance to the gay community and is supported by Equality California, San Diego Pride and others, Neither labor nor the gay community can tolerate a hotel whose profits are used to take away equal rights from gay couples and create poor working conditions for women and immigrants.
It would be a mistake for former President Clinton not to honor this boycott, one he will surely be aware of when he shows up in San Diego on Sunday:
Rest assured that if Clinton plans on busting the boycott, he’ll have to pretend he doesn’t notice the rally outside. Activists from around the region are planning on protesting the speech. Clinton should move the speech or just not give it. Together, we will bend the arc of history for justice. But we must be united.
There’s nothing new about the boycott, either:
Cleve Jones, a longtime gay-rights activist who founded the NAMES Project/AIDS Memorial Quilt, said he welcomed Clinton’s help fighting Proposition 8 but was skeptical of the president’s position.
“The boycott has been in effect and very well publicized since July,” said Jones, who also signed the letter. “He’s had ample foreknowledge of the situation.”
Supporters of same-sex marriage plan to gather outside the hotel Sunday at 11 a.m. and remain there throughout Clinton’s scheduled 12:30 p.m. speech.
Finally, Rick Jacobs of the Courage Campaign (sign the letter at this link!) notes the irony of Bill Clinton not honoring a Proposition 8 boycott:
Rick Jacobs of the Courage Campaign, a Los Angeles organization that promotes progressive political issues, said it’s ironic Clinton would be involved in the debate over same-sex marriage, because Proposition 8 is being defended in court in part by Kenneth Starr, who 10 years ago built the case for impeachment against Clinton.
“Bill Clinton has done a lot of good,” said Jacobs, who also signed the open letter. But “there’s a really big irony in this.”
34 Comments
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL Action
Join the Digg right here!
Slick Willie and DOMA, for most he has already given his answer.
I’d be willing to bet that he won’t. Isn’t there already some precedent for Bill declining to cross a picket line?
OT EPU
I heard Sherrod Brown would be there in the Senate to vote around 10:30
CSPAN 2
Good grief…. why should we even have to ask Bill about this?
Wake up, Bubba.
I think he will cross, even though he doesn’t need the money anymore. Hate to say it about the Big Dawg, whom I supported in his tribulations, but he’s a bit like Huey Long.
If he’s getting paid, he’s crossing it.
Is he afraid of doctors?
Duggity!
I’ll bet no.
Mr. Brown “Aye”
Breaking!!!
Sherrod Brown just became the 60th Aye vote on the Stimulus Bill!
60-38!!
Mr. Brown. Aye.
Good for Mr Brown.
Now let’s hope Mr Clinton shows his stuff.
Hooray for the bill. Obama gave up a lot to get it passed by Prezidint’s day. He could have got more if he waited till St Patrick. But all the same, it’s through the hoop. Now to the hard work.
Perhaps a little public pressure could get Bill to donate his speaking fee to a good progressive anti-H8 cause. I’m guessing that it’s a little bit north of the $125K that Manchester gave.
Does a bear . . . ? [He’ll cross.]
new post up about the stim bill passing
egregious has the scoop on Sherrod’s arrival…
Creative way to split the baby.
What is the importance of the boycott that causes you to critcize an ally to whom you might be expected to honor?
I’ll take 3-1 that Clinton won’t honor the boycott. He’ll never run for office again, and he needs to pull in the bucks to put food on his family and make the pie higher.
What’s the importance of an ally who violates your long-established boycott?
I’m not sure I agree, but that’s damned funny.
I’m greatly against Prop 8, but don’t understand the importance of the boycott.
The big money, the organization, and the votes came from elsewhere.
No, you do not know the history.
Doug Manchester’s $125,000 was donated very early on in order to get Prop 8 on the ballot, long before the Archbishop of SF invited the Mormon Church to involve themselves in the fight.
I appreciate your unfailing contrary approach, but it’s important you have the facts on your side. In this argument, you do not.
Besides, on other posts, you comment often that protests against the Mormons will be ineffective, since their views are so well-fixed. Now you say people shouldn’t protest against Doug Manchester, and Bill Clinton for appearing at his hotel, when that approach has cut into Manchester’s profits.
It seems to me you’d rather no protests at all. Am I right?
Not exactly. I’m wary of boycotts, unless they’re used with exactitude.
Protests are something I support, and always have.
I was certainly decrying the protests and boycotts aimed at the individual Mormons that occurred.
I would love to see protests, large and peaceful, aimed at the LDS itself. Salt Lake City if possible, or the biggest Mormon establishment in California. Letters, phone calls, and as much publicity as you can get. But bring it to bear on the Church itself, don’t go around screwing over individuals.
You won’t change the LDS, but if you press them hard, in a reasonable manner, you’ll force them into discussing their stance in a way that they won’t be able to control.
Sorry for the ridiculous grammar in that.
Isn’t the Hyatt hotel chain itself a Mormon enterprise?
Bubba will cross. The DLC has trained the faithful well. Corporate, right-wing good-liberal, worker, poor middle class bad.
The Marriott chain is owned by the Marriotts, who are Mormons.
On the morning after, I appreciate your rather tactful characterization of my remarks, most of family are more blunt.