Maine Legis. passes Marriage Equality, other Marriage News

[Duckie]

Maine's house just voted 89-57 to pass Gay Marriage, with emotional testimony from several gay representatives. The senate previously passed it 20-15, 21-14, or 22-14 depending upon which news story you look at, so now it's just awaiting the governor. Notice how close that is to veto override- if veto override is 60%, that's just a vote or two in the senate away, and already done in the house.

BOSTON (Reuters) - The lower house of the Maine state legislature passed a bill on Tuesday that takes the northeasternmost U.S. state a step closer to being the fifth in the nation to allow same-sex marriage.

Maine's Democratic-controlled House of Representatives voted 89 to 57 to enact the proposal.

The bill now returns to the state Senate, which has previously approved it. If it passes there it will be brought to the governor for his signature.

Governor John Baldacci once opposed gay marriage but in April said he is keeping an open mind on the issue.

"Marriage is not just a bundle of rights, but is dignity and respect; it is full and equal citizenship; it represents a future of hope for gay and lesbian youth," said Lee Swislow, executive director of Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders, which has been lobbying for approval of same-sex marriage across the New England region. "We are hopeful that Governor Baldacci is hearing this, too."

Opponents of the bill in the rural state of 1.3 million people did not immediately respond to calls seeking comment.

Massachusetts, Connecticut and Vermont in the Northeast and Iowa in the Midwest have already legalized gay marriage, and New Hampshire's state senate last month approved a gay marriage bill.

Were New Hampshire and Maine to pass laws allowing gay marriage, Rhode Island, the nation's smallest state, would be the only New England state not to allow it.

Opponents of Marriage Equality have been refused almost unanimously a referendum, and so are attempting to college signatures for a Citizens Veto. They need a hundred thousand dollars and 60,000 signatures to do so, and then it goes to a vote (50%+1). Whether the veto can go through or not via citizens is in doubt, as Maine is a very awesome state.

In further news:

At least 2 Republicans have agreed to support the New York same sex marriage bill. The bill won't go to vote until it is guaranteed to pass the Senate, but grabbing a few percent of the republicans in the Assembly is a moral victory of a sorts.
Nydaily

Gay Marriage Gets Another Assembly Republican
May 4, 2009

The Log Cabin Republicans of New York, the state's GOP gay rights group, announced today a member of the the Assembly minority - Fred Thiele - has decided to cosponsor the same-sex marriage bill.

This brings to the number of GOP Assembly members willing to vote "yes" on the bill up to five. In 2007, four Republicans - Mike Spano (who has since become a Democrat), Joel Miller, Teresa Sayward and Dede Scozzafava - joined 81 Democrats to pass the same-sex marriage bill in that house for the first time in New York history.

(NOTE: Republican Assemblywoman Janet Duprey did not vote "yes" in 2007, but has since changed her position on the issue and is now in favor of marriage).

"I am committed to the civil rights of all New Yorkers," Thiele said in a statement released by Log Cabin. "I didn’t support the bill in 2007 because I thought equal rights could be guaranteed through civil unions."

"Since then more states have experimented with civil unions as separate but equal, only to find that discrimination persisted in health care and other areas. The only way to ensure equality is by giving all couples access to the same civil right - the right to marry."

Thiele hails from Long Island, where another group working on marriage, the Empire State Pride Agenda, has been polling in GOP Senate districts in hopes of landing votes in the minority conference to make up for the six Democrats who have said they won't vote "yes" when - and if - the bill ever makes it to the floor.

Log Cabin lobbyist Jeff Cook said the organization maxed out last year to the four Assembly Republicans who voted in favor of marriage and is promising to do the same in the 2010 cycle for any GOP lawmaker who does the same this year.

Both the Assembly and Senate minority leaders have said they will let their members vote their conscience on marriage and won't make the issue a party-line vote.

Cook, who is here in Albany today to continue his lobbying efforts, said he expects to grow the number of "yes" votes in the Assembly, but refused to predict what the final number would be.

The Assembly Judiciary Committee approved the gay marriage bill last week, and it was originally expected to come to the floor for a vote tomorrow.

But the funeral of the late Sen. John Marchi and the ongoing MTA mess delayed the start of today's session until 5 p.m. and pushed everything back. Advocates are now expecting the bill to be taken up by the Assembly next week.

It's anyone's guess when the Senate will move on marriage. Majority Leader Malcolm Smith has said he won't let Gov. David Paterson's program bill come to the floor until it has at least 32 votes, but the legislation hasn't even been scheduled to be taken up in committee yet.

New Hampshire seems stalled on the bill, and New Jersey has its Governor still promising to sign a gay marriage bill if it arrives but NJ is apparantly lazy and not working on it.

Still, an ultimately exciting week. By next week we should have the conclusion of at least 1 of these 3 states.

[Pint0 Xtreme]

It's great to hear a number of Republican legislators in NY change their positions. For once, it seems as if the Log Cabin Republicans have an actual significant audience. Governor John Baldacci has very little reason to veto the bill now that the legislature has close to a 2/3rd majority vote on it. By signing it or letting it pass without his signature, he would receive very little political consequences as a democrat from the state of Maine. And by vetoing it, he faces the possible retribution of a veto-override, which would put a dent in his image.

[Duckie]

It's great to hear a number of Republican legislators in NY change their positions. For once, it seems as if the Log Cabin Republicans have an actual significant audience. Governor John Baldacci has very little reason to veto the bill now that the legislature has close to a 2/3rd majority vote on it. By signing it or letting it pass without his signature, he would receive very little political consequences as a democrat from the state of Maine. And by vetoing it, he faces the possible retribution of a veto-override, which would put a dent in his image.

His constant seeking out of the media personally or by representatives to tell them "I dunno, I was against gay rights before but now I'm undecided, I'll mull it over. Honestly guys, I haven't decided and won't until it hits my desk."-

It makes it sound like he really wants to cast himself as a reluctant signer or as someone who washes his hands of it and won't veto but won't sign (pass without signing) unlike Lynch who appears to be really weighing whether or not he can afford to veto the bill. Baldacci doesn't want to get in the middle of a legislature vs citizen fight so I can see him passing-without-signature.

The more worrisome thing is the citizens veto (essentially a referendum)- Maine is a northeastern state but an overwhelmingly rural one- latest numbers are 50% against, 47% for, 3% undecided, with a whopping 5% margin of error (so basically 'possibly even'). It could very well be a fundraising battle, and if the legislature loses I don't think it'll have the balls to bring it up again for a few more years.

Nate Silver thinks Maine would reject a gay marriage ban right now, but whether that translates to rejecting the rejection of a gay marriage bill is anyone's guess.

[Crossroads Inc.]

Suck it down Fundies
at this rate all of new England is going to have Gay Marriage in the next year r so.

[Duckie]

Suck it down Fundies
at this rate all of new England is going to have Gay Marriage in the next year r so.

Yeah great man jinx this shit right now. That's exactly what we need

I'm concerned about crowing before our eggs hatch. Bringing gay marriage from 2 to 4 to 5, 6, or 7 would be great, but I'm pretty nervous about all the different ways this could go wrong: Maine with a threat of two different vetoes only one of which can concievably be overriden, New Hampshire with an unoverrideable veto, NY with its weird procedure and the bill dying before getting on the floor, New Jersey never doing anything despite its desire to legalize, etc.

[Pint0 Xtreme]

Keep in mind that the goal is marriage equality in New England by 2012 and it's now currently 2009. If either Maine or New Hampshire makes it out at the end of this year, it'd be pretty good as far as pacing goes. I don't quite understand what Gov. Lynch has to lose from letting it pass, however. The polls have already indicated that the majority of New Hampshire supports marriage equality and he would receive little backlash from the Democrat party.

[CmdrWilkens]

On a related note

D.C. Gay Marriage Measure Set for Mayor's Signature
Council Votes 12 to 1 to Honor Other States' Same-Sex Nuptials

An overwhelming majority on the D.C. Council voted today to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states, sending the District deeper into the national debate and galvanizing supporters on both sides of the issue.

The measure, approved by a vote of 12 to 1, now goes to Mayor Arian M. Fenty (D), a supporter of gay marriage.

If Fenty signs it, the District will put the same-sex marriage issue directly before the Congress. Under Home Rule, the District's laws are subject to a 30-day congressional review period...

There is more to the article but I figured the highlights would be enough.

[Cecelia5578]

This is all nice and dandy, but in the end its all rather low hanging fruit. Ultimately I think most of the important LGBT rights decisions of the next few years are going to happen at the federal level-DADT, DOMA and (t)ENDA. Especially with repealing DOMA and the inevitable (???) SCOTUS case.

[Pint0 Xtreme]

And Gov Baldacci signs the bill!

Maine legalizes same-sex marriage

(CNN) -- Same-sex marriage became legal in Maine on Wednesday as Gov. John Baldacci signed a bill less than an hour after the state legislature approved it.

"I have come to believe that this is a question of fairness and of equal protection under the law and that a civil union is not equal to civil marriage," said Baldacci, a Democrat.

But he raised the possibility that the residents of the state would overturn the law, saying, "Just as the Maine Constitution demands that all people are treated equally under the law, it also guarantees that the ultimate political power in the State belongs to the people."

Three other states -- Massachusetts, Connecticut and Iowa -- allow same-sex marriages. Vermont has passed a law making gay and lesbian marriages legal that takes effect in September. New Hampshire lawmakers are close to passing a similar bill.

On Tuesday, the Washington City Council voted to recognize same-sex marriages from states that allow those unions. Mayor Adrian Fenty has indicated that he will sign the measure. It will become law if Congress fails to overturn the measure during a 30-day review period.

A slim majority of Americans are against legal recognition for same-sex marriage, CNN polling found last month.

Fifty-four percent of adults questioned in an April 23-26 nationwide CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll said that marriages between gay or lesbian couples should not be recognized as valid, while 44 percent said they should be considered legal.

The survey's sampling error was plus or minus 3 percentage points.

[Duckie]

CNN naturally neglects to note that if you include civil unions, Civil Unions win by far, and if you include a three way marriage equality, civil unions, and nothing go in that order.

Also, it's great Baldacci took the right side and signed it. Maybe it'll encourage Lynch to do so. Cross our fingers for the citizens veto when that arrives- it looks from what I've seen to be even, so it'll be an EqualityMaine vs National Organisation for Marriage television ad slugfest.

Here's hoping they don't fuck it up like California did, but even if they do at least it's only a veto and not a ban- it'll be signed eventually, by 2012 unless EqualityMaine fucks up massively.

[Pint0 Xtreme]

If a people's veto is initiated, when would the vote take place?

[VT-16]

Looked this over, but didn't find anything. You do realize Sweden also legalized it this month, right? Just pointing it out, given it's an entire country this time.

[Duckie]

If a people's veto is initiated, when would the vote take place?

November of 2010 if they can get 55,000 signatures and 100,000 dollars*, which might be bad as it's not a presidential election year so only people who care will turn out. From a little research I did though a significant hurdle will be getting those signatures. Last time Maine Fundies tried to repeal a gay rights law, they fell significantly short of the 55,000 signatures they needed: only 5,000 by the time they gave up on that last year.

*Peoples Veto is free, besides time and volunteer costs and minor paperwork costs, but the head of the opposition to gay marriage in Maine has estimated it will take 100k in donations to oppose it, so I'm taking his number in his email for aid at face value.

Portland Herald in June 2008

June 20, 2008
AUGUSTA —The Christian Civic League of Maine has abandoned its campaign to repeal the state's gay-rights law, saying in an e-mail to supporters that it lacks money and volunteers to pursue a referendum in November 2009.

Wednesday's decision, which was made public Thursday, came about two months after the league announced that it hoped to collect 55,087 voters' signatures to place its proposal on the ballot, and less than one month after the state issued petitions to the league.

In addition to repealing the anti-discrimination law, the referendum would have prohibited unmarried couples from adopting children.

It also would have barred the state from recognizing civil unions; prohibited municipal officials from licensing same-sex marriages; and eliminated funding for the state's civil-rights teams.

Supporters say the teams fight bullying in Maine schools. The league argues that the teams persuade teenagers to accept homosexuality.

Thursday's e-mail to supporters from Michael Hein, the league's administrator, said the league dropped the drive because it has "neither enough funds nor enough volunteer support to continue the effort."

Yes for Marriage and Equality, a political action committee created in April to raise money for the referendum, reported $821 in contributions and about $520 in expenditures through late May.

Although the league circulated its petitions at polling places during the primary election on June 10, Michael Heath, the group's executive director, estimates that it has collected about a third of the 15,000 signatures it hoped to have by now.

Heath said the league's board of directors decided to drop the campaign Wednesday night, capping what he described as "a very difficult week of analysis, assessment and decision" on how to proceed.

Equality Maine, an advocacy group for gays, sent volunteers to 35 polling places in eight counties on June 10 to explain its side of the issue to voters.

Betsy Smith, that group's executive director, credited those efforts with dampening the league's signature gathering.

"What June 10 showed all of us is that there was a lot of support for our side," Smith said. She said Equality Maine's decision to make its case to voters at the polls "made a difference in minimizing the number of signatures they collected."

The two sides cast the failed effort in dramatically different terms. Heath described it Thursday as a drive to preserve "a traditional marriage culture." Smith condemned it as a "broad attack" on basic rights for gays and their children.

Maine already has a law on the books that effectively prohibits same-sex marriage by defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman.

This week, California became the second state, after Massachusetts, to begin marrying same-sex couples.

Maine does not allow civil unions for homosexuals. Such unions are legal in Connecticut, New Hampshire, New Jersey and Vermont.

The 2005 gay-rights law that the league had hoped to repeal added "sexual orientation" to the Maine Human Rights Act, which also prohibits discrimination based on age, race, religion and other factors.

The gay-rights law survived a challenge at the polls in 2005, when voters upheld it by a margin of 55 percent to 45 percent.

The anti-adoption provision in the failed petition effort stemmed from a 2007 ruling by the Maine Supreme Judicial Court allowing unmarried couples, including same-sex couples, to jointly adopt children.

One safeguard that the league's referendum did not try to undo is the state's domestic-partner registry, which became effective in 2004.

The registry gives partners "a legal status similar to that of a married person with respect to matters of probate, guardianships, conservatorships, inheritance, protection from abuse, and related matters," according to a Web site run by the state Department of Health and Human Services, which administers the registry.

The league's proposed referendum was one of several petition drives that are under way in Maine to force public votes on a range of issues.

The others include two so-called people's veto referendums designed to repeal newly passed state laws.

One people's veto would block new taxes on beverages and insurance claims to pay for the state's Dirigo Health program, which includes a health-insurance plan known as Dirigo Choice.

The other people's veto would repeal a new state law that would tighten the state's procedures for issuing driver's licenses, in part by requiring that applicants prove they are in the country legally.

Organizers of each of those two campaigns must submit 55,087 voters' signatures to the state by July 17 to force a statewide referendum vote on Nov. 4.

Assuming the deadline for Peoples Veto 2008 is the same deadline as 2010 (I don't see why it'd change, July 17 is a good date since it's close to the election but not so close as to require rush paperwork for the election officials to add petitions on the ballot), they have 1 year and 10 weeks to collect 55,000 signatures, which is a significant logistical challenge if you think about it- that's 125 signatures a day. Starting several hours ago, so they're already 78 signatures behind schedule and counting. For all of 2009. And all of spring 2010. And summer 2010.

Further, with peoples veto defeated 4 years ago, albeit on far less controversial to the average person issues, that is a significant problem.

Nate Silver estimates that every year that goes by is a 2% shift in the polls for anti-gay marriage ban voting. I don't see why this wouldn't equally apply to gay rights, where we've been seeing a paradigm shift from extremely minor support to broad based if currently not majority support for civil unions and/or gay marriage (with majority for 'some kind of recognition' already).

It's not a done deal, but it's definitely an upward fight to get it to ballot. The danger is once on the ballot it'd be a lot more likely to pass just by my estimate of how people's brains work (they don't care enough about gay marriage to take time to sign a petition, but they would if they're already voting, like how I feel about a gerrymandering petition waved in my face the other day)

[Duckie]

Looked this over, but didn't find anything. You do realize Sweden also legalized it this month, right? Just pointing it out, given it's an entire country this time.

Good catch! I missed that.

Further, since I ran out of edit time and just realised- Hein, the guy in that 2008 story? He's the same guy leading the peoples veto effort this time. And he failed last time. Which is a good sign. However, NOM probably will help with financial muscle and stuff, but on the other side EqualityMaine will probably fight tooth and nail even more than they did and they now have significant partnership with all other new england gay rights associations via GLAD and MassEquality as a hub.

[Duckie]

Oh- and one last thing that's important for Maine information (I am sorry for the triple post)- if the signatures are gotten, the law is suspended until the people's veto is voted on (which I must admit makes sense since otherwise lawmakers could pass a bill and have it take effect without the people being able to veto it at all, ignoring how stupid and archaically populist a people's veto is of an idea), so Maine will have same sex marriage on September 14th 2009 (right after Vermont on September 1st 2009) but it could be cut short until the vote if the threshhold of signatures can be passed.

Maine is also the first state I know of to reverse a gay marriage ban (albeit not a constitutional but state legislative statute/law one easily defeated by the legislature reversing its opinion) from 1997.

[Pint0 Xtreme]

NOM may have enormous resources to fight marriage equality in New England but with renewed fights elsewhere, such as California's bid to reverse Prop 8, hopefully it will have to reallocate their funds all over the country. I wish Maine the best of luck in the upcoming battle. Hopefully, Governor Lynch will follow suit and, in turn, help sway public opinion in Maine since closely bordering states with marriage equality tend to ease the unfounded fears of the religious right.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

And the New Hampshire amended law has been passed by the House:

New Hampshire legislators vote for gay marriage

19 minutes ago

CONCORD, N.H. (AP) — The New Hampshire Legislature has passed a bill allowing gay marriage, but the governor hasn't said whether he'll sign it.

Maine legislators voted earlier Wednesday to approve gay marriage. If it becomes law in both states, they would be the fifth and sixth to allow the practice.

The New Hampshire House voted Wednesday for a version of the bill passed by the Senate last week.

Gov. John Lynch has said he believes the word "marriage" should be reserved for the union of a man and a woman.

But he has not said whether he would sign the bill, veto it or let it become law without his signature.

Copyright © 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

Which means the ball is now in Lynch's court.


With some luck we might see Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, MA, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, and Iowa all committed to marriage equality in law by the end of the year.

[Duckie]

I'm glad the neologism Marriage Equality is catching on against Gay Marriage, and almost nobody says Homosexual Marriage (which is far more negative in my opinion). Maybe someday we'll see it in the media, but for now just getting supporters to all agree on it is good. It's all part of the psychology of the issue.

Maine is as big as every other New England state combined, and it makes the map a lot fuller looking, especially considering it's a corner piece of the puzzle and the solid NE region catches the eye. Only Iowa is a more striking state to the eye so far in my Psychological Theory of Gay Marriage Support (the closer to tied or supporting the map shows, the more mindless centrist people will support it.)

[Crossroads Inc.]

does anyone have a good map of the states that have approved Gay Marriage?

[RedImperator]

I wish the New Jersey legislature would gets its ass in gear, but we might not see any action this year because it's an election year (New Jersey holds its legislative and gubernatorial elections in odd-numbered years). The best chance for 2009 might be in the lame-duck session after the election. We also have a gubernatorial election this year that looks like it might be close, so who knows how that's going to screw up state politics.

EDIT: It would help the national marriage equality movement quite a bit if Jersey passed full equality. Not only would it put pressure on New York and extend the "map" outside New England, but if the NOM douchebags wanted to contest it, it would cost them a fortune, because all their ad buys would have to be in the New York and Philadelphia media markets, eating up resources they need in New England and Iowa.

[Crossroads Inc.]

For years so far all we've heard out of the right is "Activist Judges!!!, Activist Judges!!!" Over and over they say "its not the will of the people! Let the people speak out! Well finally we have Legislators and elected officials deciding to pass gay marriage, finally we have a state by state up swell of Support! At last the Far right can no longer say that this Isn't the will of the people!!!

The point is that this is not the voters' choice. Instead, it is being forced on them by the legislators who received millions of dollars in campaign contributions from gay activist groups between July and December 2008.

What a lot of people don't realize is that the guts of this campaign is essentially run out of the offices of the well-funded homosexual lobbies in Boston, particularly MassEquality and Gay Lesbian Advocates and Defenders (GLAD).

Working with local activists, they came in and used the tried and true method of a slick hyper-emotional campaign coupled with intense one-on-one interactions with the legislators, run by a group of lobbyists on site. They also work in the background with the local media. Emotion, civil rights, and more emotion. They focused enormous energy on the political leadership. This strong, heart-tugging, emotional / "civil rights" approach is usually strong enough to overcome the fact that their constituents may not agree. The legislators, not used to this kind of sophisticated tactics (and often not too bright, anyway) mostly never knew what hit them. They got turned into a giant bowl of jelly. They take a vote, and the constituents have no clue what happened.

So much of this comes down to money. That is the basis of their "marriage" wins.

Oh, huh, how about that?

[Pint0 Xtreme]

Well, when it comes to New Hampshire, they're probably hoping no one noticed that the majority of people in that state actually support marriage equality. But this is exactly why I think California repealing Prop 8 will be able to take that talking point out of their arsenal. Because Prop 8 can only be repealed with a voter referendum and that California is the closest state to doing that, I have a feeling that California may make gay rights history by being the first state to legalize same-sex marriage through a direct vote by the people. I'm still rather pissed that it will have to come down to winning a populous vote for me to retain my civil rights but, on a whole, it will do wonders for the movement.

[apocolypse]

Honestly, I'm both slightly amused and rather annoyed by the fact that the right has the audacity (and hypocrisy) to bitch, moan, and complain about "emotions" and "money" when it's exactly both those things that they used in California to pass Prop 8.

Misleading and emotionally driven commercials/campaigns? Check
Large sums of money being used to sway the people? Check

I guess it's only fair if one side is allowed to do it, huh?

Fuck off already.

[Slacker]

There's really not a lot of voodoo involved in the New York vote-the Dems hold the Senate by the skin of their teeth, and they're only doing it because two of the 'Democrats' both happen to be church ministers in New York City in their spare time.

Yeah, don't know how that one works. Patterson and Sheldon Silver tried to bring the gay marriage bill up right at the beginning of the term, and the two threatened to hand the Senate balance over to the Republicans. The issue was suddenly dropped. I have a feeling that, given that the Dems are still pushing the issue in Albany, they bought the two of them off, and are basically just trying to hedge their bets in case one or both decide to screw the bill over. Absolute worst case it'll be a lame duck session bill. Worst case. Best case, it'll be signed into law by the beginning of summer.

[Civil War Man]

Man, Rhode Island is going to be the laughing stock of New England if it doesn't get its ass in gear.

A bill that would legalize gay marriage was sponsored in the RI House late January, but it's not expected to pass this year. One would think that it would be a no-brainer, what with Cicilline being such an awesome mayor (for those who don't know, David Cicilline is the first openly gay mayor of a state capital) and Rhode Island being one of the more Liberal states in the country.

Of course, one of the reasons why it's not expected to pass this year is because Carcieri, the governor, is one of those NOM assholes. Fortunately he can't run for reelection in 2010 (and even if he did, he'd probably lose, seeing as how he's becoming an increasingly unpopular governor). If Lincoln Chafee runs for governor and wins (not too unlikely, seeing as how as a Senator, Chafee was so RINO that he makes Arlen Specter look like Genghis Khan), Rhode Island will probably join the rest of New England not long after.