New Jersey State Senate defeats marriage equality, Lambda Legal to go back to the courts

by: Adam Bink

Thu Jan 07, 2010 at 16:45


Just now, the New Jersey Senate defeated marriage equality by a vote of 14-20. The defeat was not a surprise, but it is disappointing.

There are two things I want to get at before they start. The first is the likely chorus of "the Democrats have failed us! Primary them all!" that will come from advocates, since Democrats controlled both houses of the legislature and the governor's mansion. The same thing occurred after the New York State vote in which 75% of the Democratic caucus supported the bill and 0% of the Republican caucus didn't. In truth, we would have never gotten as far as we did in either state without Democratic support. Republicans wouldn't have even brought up the bill. In New York, the Democratic-controlled Assembly passed the bill not once, but twice, by similar margins in terms of caucus support. In NY and NJ, the Democratic-controlled Senate leadership kept their promise for a vote. Saying "The Democrats" failed us is self-defeating for three reasons. First, it causes activists and voters to think there is no difference between the two parties on this issue. That is false and unhelpful. Second, it will help hand over control to the Republicans and destroy chances of another vote for some time. Third, it leads to a misuse of resources in thinking the solution to this problem is just to primary all the Democrats. There is a target-rich environment of Republicans, too.

That's not to say you can't go after Democrats. If you want to assign blame and draw up a list of targets, be specific in naming the people responsible, and then go after them. Legislative wins are coalition-based, not Party-based. Build a coalition.

The second thing is that no doubt, the "time to shift to domestic partnerships!" folks (whose arguments I debunk here and here) will add this to their misleading count of states which have defeated marriage equality in some form, and use it as evidence that marriage equality as a movement has failed. However, I believe it was dealt a significant blow when Corzine, who campaigned heavily on the issue, lost in November. A defeat in New York State (which actually is also part of the media market in New Jersey) also hurt prospects. We also had a pro-equality Governor and very likely had the votes in the Assembly- same as in New York State. Garden State Equality failed to effectively organize, but we were also dealt a bad hand, and came close anyway. As with California, Maine and New York State, this is not some resounding defeat that prompts a major shift. We lost by a field goal, not five touchdowns, and it is a stumble on the road to full equality.

The good news is that I spoke today to Evan Wolfson, executive director of Freedom to Marry, who told me Lambda Legal will announce it is going back to courts in New Jersey. As you may know, the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled in 2006, 7-0, that legislators must either amend marriage laws to give same-sex couples full equality, or create a "parallel structure", which led to the New Jersey legislature legalizing civil unions. As has been demonstrated by the New Jersey Civil Union Review Commission set up to study how the new law was working, civil unions do not work.

Best of luck to Lambda Legal, and let's keep the fight up.

Adam Bink :: New Jersey State Senate defeats marriage equality, Lambda Legal to go back to the courts

Tags: , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Nice spin (4.00 / 1)
We lost by a field goal, not five touchdowns

Equal marriage rights received 41% of the vote and needed 52.5%, losing by a whopping 21.5%.

As in New York, it was a slaughter, reflecting a changed political climate.

I am jubilant to hear that Lambda Legal will take the case to court.  I only wish they had started the process a while ago. (Perhaps they did, but that isn't the implication of the statement).  It will be interesting to hear the defense of 'separate but unequal'.


Not quite right (0.00 / 0)
Sens. Sweeney and Beach abstained from the vote. They were both yes votes. That makes 16, five short. According to the GSE chair's statement following the vote, and a number of people I talked to, Christie convinced several Republicans to switch after the election. This was closer than it appears on paper.


Me on Facebook
Me on Twitter


[ Parent ]
do you think it helps (4.00 / 3)
to have these people on record opposing marriage equality? Maybe it would have been better not to have this vote at this time. I'm afraid those Republicans are now locked into voting no when it comes up again.

Join the Iowa progressive community at Bleeding Heartland.

[ Parent ]
I think so, in this instance (0.00 / 0)
The purpose being that Lambda is putting together a case to demonstrate that civil unions are inadequate.

Today, even some opponents of the bill talked on the floor about how civil unions are indeed inadequate. Not to mention all the supporters saying the same. Given that the Supreme Court already opened the door to saying marriage laws could be amended vs. civil unions, that's useful.


Me on Facebook
Me on Twitter


[ Parent ]
OT, just posted it here so you see it (0.00 / 0)
[ Parent ]
not fair, adam! (0.00 / 0)
That's not to say you can't go after Democrats. If you want to assign blame and draw up a list of targets, be specific in naming the people responsible

that is exactly what i meant in a private communication i think you saw earlier today. "primary challenge them all!" is knee jerk emotionalism. picking one or two of the worst "moderate" dems who fail to deliver on LGBT rights, as well  as on issues like health care, the environment and corporate regulation is a better strategy. because that way LGBT activists can get support and assistance from other disappointed groups fed up with Blue Dog voting records coming from people in safely blue seats.

pick just a few to primary challenge, find strong challengers who are real progressives, and fund them. i have been saying this since, well, 2001. it's so tiresome that progressive groups can't come together and just pick a few races in every state and concentrate our money and efforts. as we've seen, primary challenges, even when our candidates aren't elected, produce progressive voting from wishy washy dems who have no spine and go whatever way the wind blows on any given day.

but really, i don't know why the prog blogosphere expects anything from "our" elected officials if we ourselves can show enough Serious Effort and discipline to do something as simple as put up and fund and blog about a short, truly progressive, strategically targeted list of primary challengers. of course, now it's way too late for 2010. sigh.  


ME vote (0.00 / 0)
Blue Jersey had a discussion in this and several posters referenced"the ME vote."  It took me a couple minutes to figure out that this was Marriage Equality and not Maine.  Spelling out the words would avoid the confusion.

This, of course, reminded me of the classic line from the play, "The Odd Couple", "I kept seeing these little notes.  Pick up your clothes. FU.  Put away the dishes.  FU.  It took me two weeks to figure out that FU meant Felix Unger."


USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS
Powered by: SoapBlox