Photo credit: Bob Summersgill, who helped write the legislation
This morning, Mayor Adrian Fenty signed legislation legalizing marriage equality in DC (pending Congressional approval). His remarks regarding race, to me, were very poignant:
"We knew this day would come," Fenty said. "I say to the world: An era of struggle ends for thousands in Washington, D.C. . . . Our city is taking a leap forward."
Before he signed the bill, Fenty spoke of his interracial upbringing, noting it was illegal for his parents to get married 40 years ago.
"This is one of the churches my parents would have brought me to when I was a boy," he said as his parents sat among advocates in a second pew. "Things have a way of coming full circle. When you're mayor."
Several months prior to today, in my testimony to the DC Council on this bill, I felt the same way:
As the son of a Catholic father and a Jewish mother, I wouldn't be here if marriage was denied to two loving, committed people. Neither would my boyfriend, the son of a Native American father and a Filipina mother. We are only here because those who have come before us have recognized that marriage is about love and commitment.
A good day here in DC.
Update: Andy Towle's got a video if anyone wants to watch.
Michael Jones at Change.org raises the question of whether the Catholic Archdiocese will follow through on its threat to end its social services now that the marriage equality bill has passed the DC Council. In response to today's vote, the Archdiocese released a statement that, to me, didn't firmly state a decision one way or another. I actually think that if I were the Archbishop, I would rather avoid this choice altogether and wait until the last possible minute- e.g., when the bill finally becomes law. That won't happen until it passes the Congressional review process, and even then there are some landmines around the appropriations process and a potential lawsuit. So I don't expect to see much soon, but HRC has a petition out to the Archbishop anyway. Once again, I was heartened by how many members of the DC Council- Democrats and Independents- told the Archdiocese to get lost and passed the bill with no changes. Not something you'd see many places.
Also, National Organization for Marriage blasted its list today, urging people to tell their member of Congress to stop the marriage bill during the 30-day review period. As an organizing strategy, that is almost certainly not going to happen in the next 30 legislative days, as bills to overturn the law must be passed in both houses and signed by the President. I imagine it is more geared towards screwing with the legislation through the appropriations process down the line, and making their donors happy.
Also, please take a second to thank your DC Councilmember if you live here. A few Councilmembers stuck their necks out. Here's a list, and here's some help if you're not sure which Ward you're in. Remember the at-large members, too.
The DC Council just passed the marriage equality bill. You may remember earlier this month the Council passed the bill, 11-2. It's required to pass a "second reading" under law, and it did today by the same margin. The bill will now go to Mayor Fenty's desk for signature (he will sign it), then to Capitol Hill for the 30-day review period.
Folks close to the process tell me that based on the Congressional schedule in January, it should take about two months, and we are cautiously optimistic that the bill will be fine through the review process. At that point it will become law. The real landmines are in the appropriations process later next year, where Congress has, in the past, screwed with our laws (needle exchange, among others) via funding mechanisms. There may be a fight around that next year.
One other thing that has been interesting to me is the amount of support African-American legislators have lent to the effort. You saw the same in New York State, where African-American Senators like Ruth Hassell-Thompson gave incredible speeches- hers was about her brother coming out, which she had never spoken about publicly before. Last night, Councilmember Harry Thomas spoke at a rally I attended. He spoke movingly about this being a human rights issue, and concluded with "I will stand with you until the day I die." It was an amazing moment.
After Prop 8 passed, there was a narrative based on exit polling that the African-American vote was the real key to the bill passing. While there is an element of truth to the lack of support in the African-American community on this issue, it is something we will chip away at by winning over leaders in that community and asking them to speak out in support. Half of the Councilmembers voting for this bill are African-American. In New York, the entire debate, every Senator's speech, was captured on video. That is all important to have and use to work to build support.
A good day in DC in the midst of the mess at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue.
This morning the DC Council passed legislation legalizing marriage equality. The vote was 11-2. The two against were former Mayor Marion Barry and Yvette Alexander. Neither vote was surprising, and both had been active in trying to weaken the bill or put it to a ballot vote. What is heartening is how many Councilmembers stood up for equality today, and stood firm in the face of the Washington Archdioecese's recent disingenuous blackmail threats to cut off charity services.
On the religious note, even better was that the lead sponsor, Chairman Mendelson, adopted a proposed amendment by GLAA, one of the local LGBT activist groups, and other supporting organizations. It would delete the words "same-sex" from the following bill text (bolding mine):
"a religious society, or a nonprofit organization which is operated, supervised, or controlled by or in conjunction with a religious society, shall not be required to provide services, accommodations, facilities, or goods for a purpose related to the solemnization or celebration of a same-sex marriage, or the promotion of same-sex marriage through religious programs, counseling, courses, or retreats, that is in violation of the religious society's beliefs."
Full justification for adding it can be found in this brief, but the short version is that the term would "confuse" the law because it suggests that religious organizations are legally obligated to provide services and facilities, or solemnize other sorts of marriages that violate their religious beliefs; and because it opens up the possibility of a legal challenge that DC has a less compelling interest to protect same-sex marriages from discrimination than other kinds of marriages. It's a good addition. The other amendment I want to emphasize as important was added upon committee passage, which retains the ability for same-sex and opposite-sex couples to register as domestic partners. Full details on that here.
The bill will now proceed to a "second reading" later this month, where it will pass easily, be signed by Mayor Fenty, then go to Capitol Hill for the Congressional review process.
There are too many folks individually to name who worked hard to get to this point, so I will just say thanks and congratulations to them and our allies who spent a lot of time on this, and to DC Councilmembers who stood up for equality.
While the New York State Senate has put off marriage for the moment (it may still be voted upon later this week or next, and calls are still important), two big wins today in DC.
Today, the Committee on Public Safety & Judiciary (part of the DC Council) passed legislation legalizing same-sex marriage equality, 4-1. The committee legislation also retained the ability to register for new domestic partnerships, which was the one big part of the bill I didn't like. There are some gay couples who don't believe in the term marriage but need to have the rights that come with it. There are also heterosexual individuals who benefit- I know two sisters living together who are both single and heterosexual, but want each other to have, for example, medical decision rights. The original draft of the bill phased this out but Councilmember Catania and Chairman Mendelson wisely put them back in.
The bill will be put on the agenda for the Committee of the Whole on Nov. 17th and a full Council vote will take place on Dec. 1st, with a second vote to take place on either Dec. 15th or Jan. 5th. The bill is then sent to the Mayor, who has two weeks to act. He is fully expected to sign, and in the case of the law recognizing marriages from outside DC, he signed it on the same day.
Then the 30-day legislative review process begins. This is complicated, but a legislative day is any day that a house of Congress is in session. If it's a three-day weekend because of a holiday, all three days count. If it's more than three days, the Monday and Tuesday doesn't count. It gets even more fun, but the point is that the 30-day process next year should take about 2.5 months.
The real obstacle is in the budget process. With the 30-day thing, it takes a joint resolution of Congress, and a signature by the President, to prevent an act of Congress from becoming law- extremely unlikely. The 30-day thing is more of a delay than an obstacle. With the budget process, because Congress controls our purse strings, Congress can restrict enactment of the law through the DC Appropriations bill. They've done so in the past with DC's needle exchange law, preventing funds from being used to actually implement the law. That will be up for debate next summer and fall and where we are likely to have a fight on our hands. But unless a different effect date is added to the bill, it will become a law when the review period ends early next year.
Yesterday, there was inaccurate reporting on Congressional review of laws passed by the DC Council. (Even Ezra Klein got it wrong, which is rare!) It's an easily misunderstood process and very few people have a full understanding of it. I've attempted to simply the process and apply it to the circumstances which prompted the inaccurate reporting.
STATE BLOGS
