| The vote for marriage equality failed today by a 38 to 24 vote. While this is a sad day in New York, it is also a positive one. The vote today, while not the result we wanted, is a first step in the pursuit of equality. We know where we stand. We have 24 votes. We need eight more.
The disappointing fact is that in the Democratic conference, we had eight members who voted against equality. There were five who had hinted that they were definitely no votes or possible no votes. We knew that Senator Ruben Diaz Sr. was going to vote no. He wanted to suspend democracy by not having a vote at all (he considered it "treason" today that a vote was even held, regardless of the outcome) and has been the Senate's most outspoken critic of marriage equality, even outdoing the 30 members of the Republican conference who have said very little on the subject.
The other seven Democrats who voted against the bill with Diaz are:
- Joseph Addabbo
- Darrel Aubertine
- Shirley Huntley
- Carl Kruger
- Hiram Monserrate
- George Onorato
- Bill Stachowski
So who won this round of the marriage fight in New York? Who lost? Here are those answers.
WINNERS
Marriage Equality Advocates: It might not feel like it now, but this is a small victory. It's not the outcome groups like Empire State Pride Agenda wanted, but it is a vote. It gives them what they need to push forward and help primary some of these Democrats (Onorato and Huntley come to mind) who voted against the bill and prevented equality.
Gang Of Four: Remember the original "Gang of Four?" It consisted of Diaz, Pedro Espada, Kruger and Monserrate. Three of those four voted against the bill today and played a part in assuring the failure of this bill. Only Espada, who argued passionately for equality, voted for it. But this goes to show that the so-called "Amigos" shouldn't have been negotiated with in the first place and voted against the Democratic conference.
Republicans: It is hard to argue that the more united party in the state senate is the Republican Party. It was speculated that a few Republicans would break with their party and vote for this bill. In the end, none of them did. Of course, this could be a politically convenient for some, since such a vote would draw the ire of social conservatives within the party and with Republicans like Vincent Leibell being subjected to a primary, but they come away from this vote unscathed (for the most part).
LOSERS
Senator Tom Duane: On several occasions, Duane has said he has the votes to pass this. In the end, that was wishful thinking. The leading voice for marriage equality in the Senate and the Senate's only openly gay member was eight votes off of what he needed to pass a bill that is very important to him personally and politically.
Democratic Conference: Like Duane, the conference made the mistake of indicating that they might have the votes and expressed feelings of optimism. The vote should have taken place, but the overconfidence could have been left at the door. They had no less than 22 votes to start with and ended up with 24. It wasn't even close. It is good that they brought it to the floor for a vote - a rarity in Albany when a bill faces such uncertainty - but saying it might pass was overdoing it.
Queens Democrats: The excuses are plenty. In Addabbo's case, it is the Catholic Church's pressure. In Huntley's case, it is her predominantly African American district. As Yorkvillian pointed out in another thread, these districts are represented in the Assembly by progressives AND supporters of marriage equality. So the argument that they had to vote against equality is weak. Credit goes to Malcolm Smith and Toby Ann Stavisky for voting in favor of the bill.
Governor David Paterson was not a winner or loser. He called for a vote and he got what he called for. In that sense, he was a winner. As a supporter of marriage equality, he didn't win, but it wasn't his job to pass the bill. His job is to sign it. He won't have that chance.
This vote will have consequences for both parties. There will be primaries for Democrats next year. Will this vote be the sole reason for that? No. There are Democrats who were being eyed for primaries before (Huntley, Monserrate, Onorato) whose votes won't help them and will only make the case against them stronger.
It is a disappointing outcome, but at least it is an outcome. This starting point will be helpful for future votes. |
