Liz is reporting that the Slasher's minions have been handing out this flyer in the district, accusing Assemblyman Peralta of being a tool of "Rich Gay Fanatics." I kid you not:
Marriage is a sacred covenant between a man and his physically abused wife. Just when you thought the Slasher couldn't go any lower.
State Sen. George Onorato, a veteran Queens Democrat, won't seek reelection to the seat he has held since 1983, clearing the way for a run this fall by Assemblyman Michael Gianaris.
At 82, Onorato is the Senate Democrats' oldest member. His recent "no" vote on gay marriage made him vulnerable to a primary challenge, worrying party leaders who urged him to step aside, insiders said.
Jeremiah Frei-Pearson, who had been touted by reformers as a breath of fresh air untainted by the Albany incumbency, has bowed out of the race.
But soon-to-be-former Senator Onorato can stand as a testament to the career-ending risks inherent in opposing civil rights for all Americans.
This ain't Oklahoma - or Tennessee, for that matter.
There are plenty of interesting things in the Q poll released today that I have already covered and plenty more that will be covered.
The subject of marriage equality was brought up in the poll and deserves its own post, mainly because there are a few key factors at play that affect the support (or opposition) for marriage equality.
The Q poll found that 47 percent of New Yorkers support marriage equality and 46 percent oppose it. There are a small percentage of individuals - seven percent - who don't know or have no opinion on the issue.
Support for marriage equality in the Q poll has fluctuated slightly this year. In May, support and opposition to equality were even at 46 percent. In June, however, that increased to 51 percent (a majority of voters) saying they supported marriage equality with 41 percent opposing.
This Q poll breaks it down to where the support and opposition come from. And the three major factors at work are age, education and income.
AGE
The most support for marriage equality in terms of age falls in the obvious category: Young people ages 18 to 34. This is where 58 percent of respondents said they support marriage equality while only 37 percent oppose it. This isn't surprising, as these numbers are in line with what we have seen in other states where marriage equality is a hot-button issue.
Even though that younger generation is where strong support lies, there is support for marriage equality in the 35 to 54 age group. More respondents - 48 percent - support marriage equality than those who oppose it (45 percent). This age group, like in another states, is considered the turning point.
When the question is asked of those over 55, the support for marriage equality decreases significantly to 37 percent with 56 percent opposing equal rights.
Therefore, there is a strong conclusion to make: The younger a person is, the more likely they are to support marriage equality. Or to go the other way, the older a person is, the more likely they are to oppose marriage equality.
INCOME
Who knew that one of the factors at work in the marriage equality debate is income? But that's exactly what the Q poll tells us.
In the category of those making under $50,000, 42 percent said they support marriage equality while 51 percent said they oppose it. Support became stronger in the $50,000 to $100,000 population with 46 percent supporting marriage equality and 48 percent saying they opposed marriage equality.
The greatest support for marriage equality comes from those making over $100,000. A strong majority of these individuals - 59 percent - said they support marriage equality while only 34 percent said they opposed it.
The conclusion to draw from the poll is a clear one. The greater a person's income, the more likely they are to support marriage equality. The lower the person's income, the more likely they are to oppose marriage equality.
EDUCATION
The education of voters plays a big role in where they stand on certain issues and who they vote for, what party they support, among other things. This is a fact we have known for some time. You can tell a lot by a voter just based on one question: Do you have a college education (or more specifically, a college degree)?
The Q poll found that there was opposition to marriage equality among those without a college education. In this group, 52 percent of those surveyed said they opposed marriage equality and 41 percent said they supported it. Those numbers aren't bad, although they do reinforce the point about education and politics.
It should be no surprise that those with a college education supported marriage equality (59 percent) in huge numbers compared to those who opposed it (35 percent).
The more education a person has, the more likely they are to support marriage equality. Education has a huge impact on this and, I might argue, that the college experience opens your mind up to a diverse audience. On a personal level, I didn't have any friends among the LGBT community in high school (at least at the time). But in college, I encountered many people, including those who lived in a nearby room or went to the same classes as I did that were a part of the LGBT community.
CONCLUSION
I have made other conclusions pertinent to the individual subjects, but there is also one conclusion to draw from this poll that couldn't be made in the other areas. This issue is highly complicated. For progressives, we see this as a cut-and-dry issue. We should grant equality to everyone, not just a certain group and we should not let outside influences (i.e. religious leaders) tell us otherwise. I know that African Americans have opposed marriage equality efforts. How soon they have forgotten their own plight and their own efforts to gain equality. Religious leaders forget the beginnings of our country, when this nation was founded by a large group of those seeking religious freedom. If equality was important to them (and presumably still is), it should be important to us all. If we don't live by that guiding principle, we fail to live up to our founders who said in the Declaration of Independence, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
We must not forget those words. They are not reserved for one group over another. They are reserved for everyone who calls this country home and who deserve to be treated with the proper respect and afforded the same rights as everyone else.
Yesterday afternoon, 47 Rockland and Orange County residents braved the pouring, freezing rain and stood across from State Senator Thomas Morahan's office in Nanuet to protest his vote against gay marriage.
There were gay families, there were straight families, and there were both the young and the old. There were seasoned politicians and there were those who never attended a political event before. Many of us were strangers, and those of us that know each other often vehemently disagree on many topics. Despite this, we stood in solidarity and delivered a strong statement to Senator Morahan and the entire State Senate:
We will accept nothing short of marriage equality.
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.
Bill Stachowski (SD-58)
Democrats: 108,163 Republicans: 43,307 Independence: 8,073 Conservative: 4,888 Working Families: 972 Blank: 32,129
TOTAL: 198,033
Believe in replacing these Democrats with the best Democrats? We can.
The only Democrat who voted against marriage equality who gets a pass is Darrel Aubertine, who is a social conservative and has made his stance known for some time. While he is a no vote, he comes from a district where there are 26,500 more Republicans than Democrats (SD-48). Yes, it would have been better for him to support this, but given the seven others who come from very blue districts, he gets a pass.
A side story here is the fact that half of the Democrats who voted against the bill hail from Queens. Huntley, Onorato, Monserrate and Addabbo all represent districts in Queens and voted against equality. More senators from what is known as conservative upstate voted for marriage equality (three) than senators from the more blue, Democratic and alleged progressive territories in the city.
But there is no excuse for this. The eight votes against marriage equality was the difference. Eight Democrats voting against their party on a key issue like this is never acceptable. This is a matter of equal rights. Apparently these senators are sending a message that they do not wish for equal rights.
Next year will be the year of the primary on both sides of the aisle. Democrats will see their share come September 2010.
There's a lot to be angry about from today's vote. Some of the following rank at the top of my list:
1) Ruben Diaz was the only one on the "No" side to state his convictions and speak publicly about his No vote. None of the rest of the 38 had the courage to get up and explain their vote.
2) Hiram Monserrate, a man that supported marriage equality in the City Council and in his Senate campaign, flipped and voted no. Hiram Monserrate, a man convicted of assault against his girlfriend, wants to tell same sex couples that their right to marry a partner of their choice are less important than his.
3) 8 Democrats broke rank and voted against equality. That's 25% of the Democratic caucus in the State Senate.
4) Zero Republicans voted for the bill. This includes people like Vincent Leibell, who counsels gay couples on estate planning, as well as Jim Alesi, who attends a church where gay couples are given the church's blessings. This includes 3 Republicans who represents New York City. This includes 7 Republicans who represent Long Island. 100% of the Republican caucus voted for discrimination.
5) John Sampson, our new caucus leader (or whatever his title is) was nowhere to be found during today's debate or in comments after the press. Supposedly he spent his time pressuring borderline Senators to vote yes. The one one to do so was Senator Valesky.
Shame, shame, shame.
But let it not go without saying that we now have these people on record. Even if the No side hid their votes until the very end, we have a record showing their support for discrimination. It's up to us to pound the pavement in every one of their districts and remind voters that their state senator supports discrimination.
All 30 Republicans voted no on marriage equality, as did eight Democrats: Addabbo, Aubertine, Diaz, Huntley, Kruger, Monserrate, Onorato, and Stachowski.
Anybody else watching this? Diaz sounded like a bigot, Schneiderman sounded GOOD. Just figured this would be a good place for a discussion, but can't embed the player.
Diaz - no (yikes)
Schneiderman - yes (understands the law, as usual)
Adams - yes (passionate appeal)
Klein - yes
Valesky - yes (big vote)
Parker - yes
Espada - yes (even, Pedro is a yes)
Savino - yes (personal appeal)
Liz Krueger - yes (everyone's favorite Senator. It's about personal discrimination)
Squadron - yes (little bill with big impact)
Montgomery - yes (to keep people from having to live in sin. Interesting point.)
Serano - yes (I have always liked him)
Hassell-Thompson - yes (touching family appeal)
C. Johnson - yes (Thanks to Tom Duane)
Perkins - yes
Oppenheimer - yes (very emotional)
Stavisky - yes (single sentence argument...and right)
Smith - yes (his religion allows him to vote yes)
Duane - yes (No. Thank YOU, Senator Duane.)
UPDATE: Senate adjourned until tomorrow morning at 10 a.m.
All signs are pointing to the New York State Senate voting on the Marriage Equality Act (S4401) tonight. The debate and vote won't take place until late tonight, but multiple sources are telling me it is going to happen.
The historic nature of this bill won't be lost on the Assembly either. Assemblyman Danny O'Donnell, who is the sponsor of the Assembly version of the bill, said earlier today that his chamber will pass marriage equality again which will set the stage for the Senate later tonight.
It is the Senate where the bill faces uncertainty. Sen. Ruben Diaz Sr. - a vocal opponent of marriage equality based on his religious beliefs - has resorted to prayer. He has tried to stand in the way of a vote in the past, but the fact he is now praying means that a vote is not only coming, but a real chance at passing.
So what does this bill need to pass? There are no less than 22 votes for the bill right now. Those votes are all Democrats. Sponsor of the bill Tom Duane and 19 co-sponsors: Senators Adams, Breslin, Dilan, Espada, Craig Johnson, Klein, Krueger, Montgomery, Oppenheimer, Parker, Perkins, Savino, Schneiderman, Serrano, Squadron, Stavisky, Stewart-Cousins, Hassell-Thompson and Thompson. In addition to those 20, the two leaders of the Democratic conference, John Sampson and Malcolm Smith, are supporting the bill.
That leaves 10 votes needed and a lot of uncertainty.
In May, Nate Silver whipped the votes for marriage equality. He found what we know: This is an uphill battle. There are at least two definite no votes in the Senate Democratic conference: The aforementioned Diaz and Darrel Aubertine, who is a conservative on the social issues (he is also anti-choice). Silver listed five Democrats - Aubertine, Diaz, Shirley Huntley, George Onorato and Bill Stachowski - who were on the record as opposed to marriage equality. However, because of the nature of this vote, there could be at least one of those who are opposed that will vote in the affirmative.
The Republicans have at least 20 members in their conference who will vote against the bill in addition to the two Democrats who are certain no votes. That means there are 18 members who are up in the air. Some will certainly be no votes. Others will be yes votes.
The 18 undecideds are:
DEMOCRATS
- Brian Foley. Foley has been on the fence about marriage equality and has been undecided on the issue since campaigning for the seat in 2008. But when the time comes, he could be a yes vote. It has been said that out of all the undecideds on the Democratic side, he is one of the ones that will vote yes.
- Shirley Huntley. While she is listed as a no, that was in May. This is December. Things can change and a vote for marriage equality would be helpful for her in a conference that is ready to replace her with someone better.
- George Onorato. Onorato has faced protests over his opposition or undecided status. That pressure could turn him into a yes vote.
- Hiram Monserrate. Monserrate isn't exactly beloved. But his vote would be important. He is one of the few representatives from Queens where a vote on marriage equality is possible. Other Hispanic members (including Espada) are supportive. Monserrate might be as well.
- Joseph Addabbo. He is on record as saying he believes there are other important issues to discuss prior to marriage equality. Whether that means he is against equal rights is another issue. He replaced a man who was in opposition, so voting for this bill will mean that 2008 wasn't a loss for those who fought for change and made Addabbo one of two Democrats to overtake Republican incumbents in November (Foley was the other).
- Carl Kruger. Kruger isn't the best Democrat in this conference (although Espada and Monserrate have made him look like a party loyalist over the last several months) but he knows a key vote when he sees it. He has been out in front, as finance chairman, on the issues with the governor's DRP. So if he gets what he wants with the DRP, maybe that will give him the motivation he needs to vote for marriage equality.
- David Valesky. He could be a no, but his leadership position in the Senate might change that. The upstate delegation is split on this and Valesky could give us a third vote from upstate. That would be important.
- Bill Stachowski. He is another whose weak showing in the 2008 elections would be helped by a vote for marriage equality vote. He needs to show that he will be there when it counts and this is a way for him to do that. He is previously a no against it (citing religious reasons) but has kept an open mind on the issue. We need a yes vote from him. This is important.
REPUBLICANS
- Long Island senators: Kenneth LaValle, John Flanagan, Owen Johnson, Kemp Hannon, Charles Fuschillo. Newsday found that six of the nine Long Island senators opposes marriage equality. That means some of these Republicans listed as undecided will be no votes. However, Owen Johnson is still on the fence. So while those Long Island senators (if their votes hold) make it tougher to pass the marriage equality bill, the door is still open.
- Andrew Lanza. Lanza is one of the few Republicans in New York City and might be one of the easier Republicans to bag as a yes vote. His vote, like others, is up in the air but he could be one vote in our column.
- Vincent Leibell. With Leibell getting a primary challenge from Greg Ball, will Leibell move to the right and vote against this? Or would he have voted against it anyway? It's hard to say, but he is another who could be a yes vote under normal circumstances, but might bail on this vote to save his political career.
- Betty Little. Little is leaning no, but would be one of the likely Republicans to vote yes. She is fairly moderate and just might be a surprise vote in favor of the bill.
- Jim Alesi. He is the only Republican on record as a yes vote giving us no less than 23 YES VOTES.
- Cathy Young. Being from a conservative upstate district, it won't be surprising if Young votes no. That is the likely vote, but she might pull a rabbit out of the hat.
My prediction? I say it passes one of two ways:
(1) We get 32 or 33 votes, mostly Democrats but also a few surprise Republicans (i.e. Lanza, Little, etc.). The number of undecided Democrats could also give us a higher number, especially if there are Republicans who will vote for this bill.
(2) We get 31 votes and Lieutenant Governor Richard Ravitch is called in to cast the tie-breaking vote. What a monumental situation that would be, given the controversy surrounding his appointment.
Will it pass? Possibly. Insiders are saying it is likely. We'll see what happens tonight.
Liz is reporting today that the chances of a vote taking place on marriage equality aren't looking good, but that isn't stopping advocates from fighting for one anyway.
The Empire State Pride Agenda is hoping that a vote takes place. Executive Director Alan Van Capelle issued this statement in support of a vote on marriage equality:
Today, as the State Senate goes back into session, we expect that the marriage equality bill will get the overdue, respectful debate that we've been waiting for since June.
Our community has spent the past few years making the case to 62 State Senators for why we should be treated equally by the laws of our state. The time for making cases is over. We've heard dozens of excuses and we've been told countless times that we'll have to wait for equality. We've been told before that the time isn't right to end discrimination against tens of thousands of families. The excuses and the waiting must end today.
Hundreds of LGBT New Yorkers will be coming to Albany today to hear their lives debated on the Senate floor. New York State Senators will now need to do the right thing and debate this human rights bill and vote to treat these families-and the millions of others that cannot be here-like all other New York families.
To not bring this bill to the floor for a debate would be a slap in the face to every LGBT New Yorker. We have waited far too long for the basic respect of a vote from our elected State Senators on an issue that affects our daily lives and the lives of our loved ones.
This vote will be a vote of conscience for all Democrat and Republican Senators. There is no room for politics in a human rights issue like this. When this bill passes, it will be bipartisan. This is a deeply personal issue for Senators because they know that they will have to go back home to their sons and daughters, their nieces and nephews, their friends and neighbors and explain how they voted on this bill.
ESPA has an action alert they are sending around to rally those in Albany to head to the state capital and support marriage equality and tell leaders there that a vote should take place today in the New York State Senate.
Senator Ruben Diaz Sr. has been loud in his opposition to a vote on marriage equality. That, of course, is not very democratic. The chances of marriage equality passing are slim, but even that slim chance has Diaz worried. That is a good thing. If Diaz is scared, we must be close.
It is my hope that a vote takes place today. Even if it is voted down, we know who is on the side of marriage equality and who is against it. That's what we need to know. We need to know who is willing to stand for equal rights and who isn't.
Senator George Maziarz has never been a friend of the marriage equality movement or the LGBT community. But even if you don't share the views of the community or movement, you could least give them a serious answer.
Case in point: The video below featuring a woman who is legally married to her partner. Anne Tischer and her partner Bess have been together for 15 years and have been married for five years.
Watch Anne tell her story to Maziarz and watch his response:
Anyone else feel the sympathy in the air as Maziarz said that? Neither did I. What a cold answer for two people who love each other and for a woman who obviously is trying to make sure her family is taken care of.
It's not enough that she pays the same taxes everyone else does or that she is barred from having the same benefits, in her words, because she isn't able to purchase a $40 civil marriage license (good point, by the way, on her part). All of that went in Maziarz's ear and out the other side.
Classless is a word that comes to mind. At least show some sort of interest in it. Don't just tell what your position is and move on.
New York State voters support 51 - 41 percent, with 8 percent undecided, a law allowing same-sex couples to marry, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.
This is the first poll by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University showing support for same-sex marriage in New York State, where voters split 46 - 46 percent on this issue in a May 14 survey and opposed same-sex marriage 55 - 37 percent in an April 15, 2004, poll.
In this latest survey, women support same-sex marriage 58 - 35 percent, while men oppose it by a narrow 48 - 44 percent margin. Same-sex marriage wins 65 - 28 percent from Democrats and 52 - 42 percent from independent voters, while Republicans oppose it 66 - 27 percent. The proposal wins 52 - 42 percent support from white voters and 55 - 39 percent from Hispanics. Black voters split with 43 percent in favor and 42 percent opposed.
Hispanics are actually the ethnic group most in favor of marriage equality in this poll.
Statement By NYS Senator Rev. Ruben Diaz (D-Bronx) On Today's Assembly Vote For Homosexual Marriage
Posted by Ruben Diaz on Tuesday, June 19th, 2007
As a legislator of Hispanic origin, today I am very disappointed with those members of the Hispanic delegation in the State Assembly for supporting homosexual marriage in New York.
It is sad that the Hispanic legislators in the NYS Assembly will vote in favor of homosexual marriage today. Our community as a whole, Black, White, Asian, Islamic and Hispanic is at least 80% against homosexual marriage. Most New Yorkers are from communities that believes in moral, traditional and family values.
(all bolds mine)
Support for marriage equality was probably lower among all groups when Diaz made this statement 2 years ago, but unlikely that low. Not that facts matter when you're dealing with an irrational bigot who hides behind his ethnicity to mask his bogotry, but if Ruben Diaz's gut says that 80% of Hispanics oppose marriage equality, it must be true!
I have come to the conclusion that I cannot support any Leader who does not demand that marriage equality come to the floor and pass in 2009. I urge that you, as a co-sponsor of the marriage equality legislation, will do the same...
If we allow our leadership to push marriage equality aside because it is politically expedient what is next?
Political expedience has long been popular in Albany, I know. Still, maybe this will break things open.
Marriage equality will pass this year. That's a prognostication, but I have two reasons for making it.
First, Pedro Espada supports it. I hate to think that someone with his less than stellar record has any power at all, but there it is. In addition, Tom Duane is willing to do whatever it takes to get it passed -- even conspire with such as Espada.
Second, Republicans want it to pass. They are tasting the possibility of being in control of the Senate again, and don't want to lose that control in a year and a half. If marriage equality is still an issue, there will be enormous amounts of money and people turning out for Democrats (real Democrats) next year. By passing marriage equality, Republicans will dam that flood.
Here's a bit of news that smacked me in the head this morning:
One of the senators who is believed to be considering breaking ranks with the Senate Democratic conference, Thomas K. Duane of Manhattan, would not say where he planned to cast his political allegiance.
"I am not considering anything but trying to get passed all the legislation I've spent my whole life fighting for," he said. Mr. Duane, who did not attend meetings with his Democratic colleagues on Tuesday, said he had spent all day in discussions with senators from both parties...
The chances that the legislation could be acted on soon appeared to grow on Tuesday after Mr. Espada, who would share power with Dean G. Skelos, a Republican from Long Island, said he would like to see the bill come to a vote.
Um. Yeah. The Republicans jumped on rules reform, and now may use marriage equality as a further pivot?
Whoa.
We'll see if this happens, but I'm startled to see it even under consideration.
(If you'd rather read less startling news, about Tom Golisano, try here.)
A few weeks ago, I got frustrated and wondered why nobody was stepping up online for marriage equality in New York.
Then, as blogged here, the Manhattan Young Dems swooped in and have been really impressive on on social networks.
Now they're giving us a KILLER way to put our muscle into this fight.
copy and paste below: <a href="http://tools.advomatic.com/24/nyequality"><img src="http://tools.advomatic.com/files/c2c/widgets/3/c2c_header6.jpg" BORDER="0" ALT="Call Your Senators NOW"></a>
Spread this code around to your progressive New Yorker friends. The website will connect you to your senator for free and help you pressure her. This is what I love about the internet. This exactly.
The website features the quote "it's about family" at the top of the page and allows visitors to send a letter or fax to their state senator asking them to support marriage equality. It also provides the phone numbers of state senators so that supporters can urge their state senator to support marriage equality.
Jennifer Carnig, who serves as NYCLU's communications director, provided insight as to why NYCLU decided to create this website.
To deny lesbian and gay couples the right to marry is to label them second-class citizens unworthy of the 1,324 state rights and responsibilities that marriage creates. As the Connecticut Supreme Court pointed out, marriage fairness is about protecting families, and in particular, children. And as former New York State Chief Judge Judith Kaye observed in her dissent to the ruling in Hernandez v. Robles, the denial of marriage rights to same-sex couples has especially harmful physical and emotional effects on their children.
"Depriving these children of the benefits and protections available to the children of opposite-sex couples," wrote Chief Judge Kaye, "is antithetical to their welfare."
We will advocate for marriage no matter what happens this session. We commend the Assembly for passing the Marriage Fairness bill in 2007 and again in 2009, and we recognize these votes as historic victories for civil rights in the state. The re-election of every member who voted for the bill in 2007 is strong indication that New Yorkers recognize the legislation, at its core, is about fairness, justice, equality and acceptance. It is time for the senate to follow the important legislative precedent established by the Assembly. We are hopeful that MarriageNY.com can help apply that pressure. The families featured on MarriageNY.com come from key senate districts across New York, and we hope hearing from people in those districts will help convince any senators on the fence. We're also leading lobby visits, phone banking, and doing letter drives in those areas. We are so close to victory here, we are confident that the voices of New Yorkers will make the difference and encourage the senate to do the right thing and pass this bill.
Marriage equality is close to become reality in New York. The sponsor of the Marriage Equality Act in the Senate, Sen. Tom Duane, believes that he has the votes needed, according to PolitickerNY's Jimmy Vielkind:
"I don't want to seem overconfident, but I'm confident it's coming to the floor, I'm confident it's going to win, I'm confident we're going to have the vast majority of Democratic votes and several Republican votes as well," Duane said.
He was asked which Republicans support the measure, because none have gone on the record in favor.
"I would not want to deny them the pleasure of telling you themselves. That would just be wrong and really impolite of me to do that," Duane replied.
How many votes exactly do you have?
"A good elected official would never give up their vote count," he replied.
What will you say to Smith if it doesn't come to a vote this session?
"It's coming to the floor, it's passing," Duane replied.
Duane's confidence is worth noting, given the uncertainty that has surrounded the passage of this bill in the New York State Senate. Passage in the Assembly was easy and guaranteed, but the Senate has always been up in the air. It requires Republican support and if they have that support (and if a Democrat or two has switched their previous positions) then the bill has a very real chance of passing.
We need to keep working though. We need to keep the Senate on their feet. Let's make sure they, at the very least, bring this to a vote. Then we can know who is supportive and who isn't.
