NY: Gay Marriage Passage Close to Reality

[D_Ireonsyd_Colonrinse]

Dammit, Jason. You're not kidding about this character. On gay issues, Diaz is indistinguishable from an evangelical conservative.


This is from wikipedia:

Opposition to same-sex marriage

In 2007, as his party, led by Governor Eliot Spitzer and Lt. Governor David Paterson, sought to recognize gay marriage and expand rights for the LGBT community, Díaz was a vocal opponent of the gay marriage bill and was highly critical of Democratic support for the bill.[12] Senator Díaz's opposition to same-sex marriage continued in 2008, when he vowed to vote against same-sex marriage legislation [13] and participated (along with hundreds of clergy) in an anti-same-sex marriage "Power in the Pulpit" rally held by New Yorkers for Constitutional Freedoms[14] in the Legislative Office Building;[15] at the rally, Sen. Díaz was reportedly presented with over 15,000 petitions in support of traditional marriage.[16]

Opposition to Gay Games

In 1994, while on the Civilian Complaint Review Board, Díaz was critical of the city hosting the Gay Games, claiming that doing so would lead to an increase in AIDS cases and to wider acceptance of homosexuality by young people.[17] Díaz wrote that hosting the Games would lead children "to conclude that if there are so many gay and lesbian athletes then there is nothing wrong, nor any risks involved."[17] The other members of the Board issued a unanimous rebuke of Díaz's comments.[17]

Criticism of Harvey Milk School policy

In 2003, Díaz filed a lawsuit to stop the expansion of the Harvey Milk School (a school for gay students who suffer discrimination in traditional settings), claiming that the school infringed the rights of heterosexual students.[18][19] The lawsuit was settled in 2006 after the school agreed not to discriminate against heterosexual students and not to restrict admission to students who identify as homosexual, and after the City of New York agreed that the school would be open to all students.[20]



Can't the NY gay community do anything to strongarm this guy? He is a democrat. I can't imagine this kind of dem can yield so much power in liberal NY.

 

[B_Nick8]

Diaz is a pentecostal minister who feeds on hatred and vitriol and will risk anything to bring the bill down including derailing his party and career. These are the types of people we're fighting all over this country.

http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dailypolitics/2009/06/diaz-sr-to-duane-release-the-n.html

http://jewkey.com/albany-ny-sen-diaz-gay-bill-will-not-come-to-the-floor-for-a-vote/business-news/

 

[2322]

NY is only liberal from the waist down. That's why Diaz is a Democrat and not a Republican. Outside of NYC, New York is fairly conservative, hence the very close Senate numbers. The GOP controlled the Senate for 70 something years before the Dems finally got a majority in 2008. Diaz immediately became an asshole with 3 other guys, one of whom is under indictment for assaulting his girlfriend (and removal from office if convicted) refusing to caucus with the Democrats. That's when they started demanding concessions of all kinds from the Republicans and the Democrats. Paterson really wants this bill passed and so do many other people, but so long as Diaz has both parties by the balls, he can dictate terms. That's why I think this is more a show of force than actually creating a threat. He's just demonstrating that he will act as he promises.

 

[Industrialsize]

I'm so glad I live in Massachusetts. My Husband and I just celebrated our 5 year Marriage anniversary. We've actually been together 31 years. At first when same sex marriage passed in Massachusetts, there was a BIG push to get a ballot initiative on the ballot to ban gay marriage. But Massachusetts makes it difficult to amend the State Constitution. Massachusetts was the FIRST State constitution. To get a citizen initiated petition on the Ballot requires that the petition be passed by a majority at 2 consecutive Constitutional Conventions of the Legislature. In Massacusetts it passed by a slim majority during one Constitutional Convention. Then the gay community got VERY busy. We worked hard and bounced many congress people out who had voted against Gay marriage. At the next Constitutional Convention the Citizen initiated petition to ban Gay marriage failed. It never made it to the ballot. Then something happened. The sky did not fall down. Life went on as usual. The anti-gay marriage movement just shriveled up and went away. Gay Marriage has become a total non issue. No one has blinked an eye when I fill out some official form and mark that I'm married and my spouse's name is Chuck. I wish I knew how to get the rest of the country and the Federal Government to see what has happened in Massachusetts. This guy Diaz, why do Democrats elect him? Why don't more progressive candidates run against him???

 

[2322]

Because New York is based upon machine politics which has little to do with what the people want. The people of The Bronx are not the most progressive people in the world. Many are Catholic immigrants, minorities, and poorly educated. It's not difficult to play to traditional values and get elected.

And the people of Vermont might disagree with you about the constitution thing. Theirs was adopted in 1777 with minor amendments to reflect their 1791 absorption into the Union.

 

[D_Tully Tunnelrat]

SCOTUS does NOT want an anti-gay marriage amendment because it would set a dangerous precedent of what SCOTUS has decried since the 14th amendment and that's, "invidious discrimination;" the exact reasoning that removed miscegenation and separate-but-equal and anti-sodomy laws in SCOTUS decisions.

What an incredible amount of political machinations just so two guys, or two girls can get hitched. I cannot see how an anti-gay marriage constitutional amendment would stand the repeated appeals, you know would be forthcoming, on a state by state basis. Right wing states rights champions would be mightily conflicted should it reach that inverted debate. (BTW has any amendment ever been de-ratified, other than Prohibition?) If a constitutional amendment were to pass the degree of our domestic pettiness in full throat on the international stage would be astounding. Canada, Holland, Belgium, Sweden, Norway, Spain, and South Africa would become even more popular.

Pardon my ignorance, but who has passed gay marriage laws other than CT, Maine, NH, Mass, VT, Iowa, and... ? Colorado, Hawaii, Maryland, Nevada, Oregon, Washington, and the District of Columbia offer legal unions, how does this differ from marriage? Do you get "spousal" type rights in a legal union?

You are right about NY politics, like Chicago, and Boston, they have all been dominated by machine politics for the last hundred years. The Republican obstructionist gambit in NY is very similar to what they are doing in CA regarding the budget. Amazing that the new gay rights protest grounds will be Jackson Heights, Queens - that's a long way from Stonewall. Diaz is an amazing piece of work, does he take his cues from Sharpton? I wonder if gay marriage would have sailed in through NY if Elliot had used his (big) head...

 

[B_Nick8]

Pardon my ignorance, but who has passed gay marriage laws other than CT, Maine, NH, Mass, VT, Iowa, and... ? Colorado, Hawaii, Maryland, Nevada, Oregon, Washington, and the District of Columbia offer legal unions, how does this differ from marriage? Do you get "spousal" type rights in a legal union?

Because it's reeeeeally late and I don't feel like typing, I'm just going to quote myself from another thread to answer your question:

Quote:
Originally Posted by SEXXXX

Nick, I never cared much about the word marriage as long as we have all the legal benefits similar to marriage, call it tralalalala for all I care

THAT is pressing

I took that position for a long time, too, Sexxxx. I considered "marriage" a religious word and didn't particularly care what a partnership between two people was called. The problem is, it doesn't work. The way laws are written, "Civil Unions", or " Domestic Partnerships" or any other wording other than that of "Marriage" will not equate to or bestow over 1,700 legal rights and privileges that "marriage" will for same sex couples. Therefor only the word "marriage" is acceptable; we must be legally allowed to marry to attain equality.

 

[D_Ireonsyd_Colonrinse]

Today's New York Times:


G.O.P. Regains Control of New York State Senate

ALBANY — The Democrats’ tenuous control of the New York State Senate abruptly collapsed on Monday, throwing the Legislature into chaos with just two weeks remaining in its session.

Two dissident Democrats, who had been secretly strategizing with Republicans for weeks, bucked their party’s leaders and joined with 30 Republican senators to form what they said would be a bipartisan power-sharing deal. But the arrangement effectively re-establishes Republican control.

The change upends the agenda in Albany, where Democrats had assumed power in the Senate in January, with 32 seats, after more than 40 years in the minority. Democrats were pushing bills to give tenants more rights, strengthen abortion rights and legalize same-sex marriage this session. And the move underscores the continuing tumult of New York politics, where there have been three governors in less than three years and four Senate presidents since last summer.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/09/nyregion/09switch.html?_r=1&hp





So, it kind of looks like gay marriage just died a quick death in New York.

 

[B_Nick8]

So, it kind of looks like gay marriage just died a quick death in New York.

It's a temporary "death", Will. We're still half way there. We still have the House pretty firmly on our side and the bill will simply be reintroduced again as it has been before when the votes in the Senate are more firmly lined up. The timing just wasn't what it could have been.

It will be interesting how this Republican "coup" plays out with the voters particularly when it seems to go against all prevailing political currents in the country right now.

 

[SEXXXX]

Today's New York Times:


G.O.P. Regains Control of New York State Senate

ALBANY — The Democrats’ tenuous control of the New York State Senate abruptly collapsed on Monday, throwing the Legislature into chaos with just two weeks remaining in its session.

Two dissident Democrats, who had been secretly strategizing with Republicans for weeks, bucked their party’s leaders and joined with 30 Republican senators to form what they said would be a bipartisan power-sharing deal. But the arrangement effectively re-establishes Republican control.

The change upends the agenda in Albany, where Democrats had assumed power in the Senate in January, with 32 seats, after more than 40 years in the minority. Democrats were pushing bills to give tenants more rights, strengthen abortion rights and legalize same-sex marriage this session. And the move underscores the continuing tumult of New York politics, where there have been three governors in less than three years and four Senate presidents since last summer.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/09/nyregion/09switch.html?_r=1&hp





So, it kind of looks like gay marriage just died a quick death in New York.

and why can't Lefties stay still on the LEFT?

 

[2322]

and why can't Lefties stay still on the LEFT?

Because they weren't lefties to begin with!

You've got to realize that political affiliations aren't necessarily the result of a belief in any particular dogma. These guys are Democrats because the Democratic machine holds power in these areas. Those who run as Republicans have no hope of winning in areas which are predominantly poor or lower middle class and composed largely of minorities. So the REAL election in many parts of New York is the Democratic primary, not the general election. Whomever wins the primary is the de facto winner of the general election. Because of this, people who would ordinarily fit the Republican ideology join the Democratic party just to have a shot at actually winning an election.

This practice isn't confined to New York. It's found in many states or districts where party representation is so lopsided that there is effectively no opposition.

 

[D_Ireonsyd_Colonrinse]

Jason Els/Nick8:

i believe the NY legislative session ends on June 22. Even if there aren't enough votes to pass a gay marriage bill, why can't there still be an up or down vote just to see where everybody stands? (I remember a previous article stating a large number of undecided dems)

Can't somebody force a senate vote? For gay activists, there is at least some comfort in knowing how far off the mark we are, who the opposition is.

At last tally,

27 senators opposed the bill (22 republicans, 5 dems)

20 supported it (all dems)

10 undecided

5 declined to say

(32 votes needed to pass)


At least if people could know where those 15 undecided/declined stood, activists could have an idea what lies ahead.

 

[B_Nick8]

As far as I know, there will be a vote. Here's part of what I got from HRC today:


Dear P.,

As you may have heard, there was a shocking flip in control of the New York State Senate yesterday.

Two Democratic Senators from New York City, Pedro Espada (Bronx) and Hiram Monseratte (Queens) voted with the Republicans to change Senate leadership.

The new majority leader is Dean Skelos from Long Island, and Pedro Espada is the new President of the Senate.

With so much change taking place in Albany, supporters of marriage equality must increase their visibility in order to keep this bill alive.

Most opinion-makers and elected officials in New York know that marriage equality is coming to the Empire State. The only question is when.

Just today, Senator Espada was quoted as saying:

"I'm going to be pushing very very hard for issues like same-sex marriage to not be pre-determined in a smoke-filled room, but to let it air out in full debate on the Senate floor as soon as possible. You know, people haven't been asking for guaranteed results. They've been asking for an honest full debate on the floor so we can vote it up or down."

"We have about eight or ten undecided senators on this issue. That's what we do here we debate and try to convince people with opposing points of view to reach common ground."

What is clear is that our strategic investments in New York have helped get us to the point where we are so close to marriage equality. Only with increased grassroots organizing will we be able to keep the pressure on the entire Senate to take a vote on this bill, and to ensure that the vote is positive.

We have 16 field staff on-the-ground across New York; from Long Island to Staten Island, from Queens and Westchester to Rochester and Syracuse. Dozens of volunteers in Manhattan, Long Island and elsewhere are mobilizing supporters to contact their state Senators. They all feel the momentum for marriage. Their work is making a difference.

In order to keep attention focused on marriage equality, we need you to step up and join our efforts.

Over the next few days there is likely to be a lot of information about the unprecedented change in Albany. If we are to win marriage equality this year, we must put our nose to the grindstone, let our fingers do the walking and stay focused on our work. Together we can win marriage equality in New York.

Thank you for your continued support,

Marty Rouse
National Field Director, Human Rights Campaign

P.S. As a native Long Islander and a New York City resident for a decade, I, like millions of others, love New York. If you care deeply about our state and just as strongly about marriage equality, now is the time to take action.

Tell a friend: Click here to safely forward this message to a friend.

© 2009 Human Rights Campaign
Click here to read our privacy policy. Human Rights Campaign
1640 Rhode Island Ave., N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20036-3278
Phone: 202/628-4160 TTY: 202/216-1572 Fax: 202/347-5323
E-mail: field@hrc.org

 

[2322]

"I'm going to be pushing very very hard for issues like same-sex marriage to not be pre-determined in a smoke-filled room, but to let it air out in full debate on the Senate floor as soon as possible. You know, people haven't been asking for guaranteed results. They've been asking for an honest full debate on the floor so we can vote it up or down."

"We have about eight or ten undecided senators on this issue. That's what we do here we debate and try to convince people with opposing points of view to reach common ground."

You know what this really means, don't you? Espada is one of the defecting Democrats under control of Diaz. Of course they're going to open it to debate because they know how the voting will go. This will give the GOP and their Dem turncoats a chance to air their bigoted views and then the bill will fail. They already know how the undecideds are going to vote even if the undecideds haven't publicly announced their positions. There simply aren't enough votes. A key sentence gives it away, "You know, people haven't been asking for guaranteed results." The only way Diaz would allow the bill to be debated is if it would fail.

The other grand complication is the fact that the Democrats have literally locked the doors to the senate chamber. They're not surrendering the keys as their position is the coup was illegal because it occurred after the Senate session was officially adjourned.

Nor can Governor Paterson leave the state. The moment he steps out of New York, Espada becomes acting governor (if the coup is legal, which it eventually will be, court case or not). Paterson doesn't want that not only because Espada is now working for the GOP, but because Espada is going to run for governor next year, backed by Forbes 400 member Tom Golisano, who now lives legally in Florida!

Not leaving New York produces a slight difficulty for the governor as the quickest way from Albany to the City of New York is through New Jersey. All three major access routes to enter Manhattan go through New Jersey. The only way the governor can get from here to there is through The Bronx. Same deal to get to Queens, Brooklyn, Staten Island, and Long Island. I find it ironically amusing that the governor is now a prisoner in his own state.

Ah New York..... always colorful!

 

[B_Nick8]

Y


Not leaving New York produces a slight difficulty for the governor as the quickest way from Albany to the City of New York is through New Jersey. All three major access routes to enter Manhattan go through New Jersey. The only way the governor can get from here to there is through The Bronx. Same deal to get to Queens, Brooklyn, Staten Island, and Long Island. I find it ironically amusing that the governor is now a prisoner in his own state.

I trust you're being ironic here. Despite recent events, we're not quite the Machiavellian farce you make it seem.

And HRC's and my point is that I'd rather, at this point, and even if the bill fails again as it likely will, have a vote taken so that we can see who our enemies are, once and for all, and work against them as they have us.

 

[2322]

I trust you're being ironic here. Despite recent events, we're not quite the Machiavellian farce you make it seem.

And HRC's and my point is that I'd rather, at this point, and even if the bill fails again as it likely will, have a vote taken so that we can see who our enemies are, once and for all, and work against them as they have us.

Sadly, no. I'm paraphrasing what Governor Paterson himself said:

And just to make sure he doesn't get burned, Gov. Paterson told reporters he's not planning on leaving the state anytime soon since, as it now stands, coup plotter Pedro Espada Jr. would become acting governor.

"I would not plan on the leaving the state right now," Paterson told reporters Tuesday.

"Right now, if there's any type of misunderstanding or who is next in charge, I would think the best thing for me to do is to stay here." -NY Daily News

 

[2322]

Oh it gets good! Today the Republicans declared that they WILL be meeting in the Senate chamber however the Democrats won't give them the keys. Some poor locksmith is going to have to decide who gets in.... unless the Democrat's Sergeant-at-Arms prevents anyone from going near the doors, if he still commands the Capitol police.

 

[2322]

Barnum couldn't have done better:

The leader of an insurgent coalition challenging the New York Senate's Democratic majority says the group now has the keys to the chamber, which has been locked for two days by Democrats.

Sen. Pedro Espada, the Democratic head of the new power-sharing alliance, won't say how he got the keys Democrats had refused to provide.


This apparently ends the coalition's threat to hold its inaugural day in control of the session in a nearby park Wednesday afternoon. -Fox News

 

[D_Ireonsyd_Colonrinse]

Jason Els, Nick8:


Another layer.

From today's Politico:


The New York mess


It's hard to follow if you don't know the players, but one thing of which it's a reminder is that statehouse politics are so often totally transactional, without even a whiff of principle or ideology.

On that front, the State Senate's leading same-sex marriage backer, Tom Duane, appears to see an opening in which Republicans would accept his allegiance in exchange for a path to passing a same-sex marriage bill this session.

From the Times:

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 Tuesday 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.

Mr. Duane did not attend the meeting of Democrats on Wednesday morning, and he has not been seen in the Capitol since Monday. Mr. Duane is the sponsor of legislation that would legalize same-sex marriage in New York. He has been working to garner the 32 votes necessary to pass the bill, and he said he would continue to do so.

Mr. Espada said Wednesday that he hoped to have Mr. Duane join him as a member of the new majority, and that he hoped to bring the same-sex marriage bill to a vote soon.

“I hope to take that up next week,” Mr. Espada said, adding that he fully supported Mr. Duane. “His signature issue is my signature issue at this point, and that has drawn us together closer this session.”

“I am for same-sex marriage,” Mr. Espada said, adding that he had not yet discussed the matter with Mr. Skelos, who opposes allowing gay couples to marry, but has said that he would let Republican lawmakers vote as they chose. “I think there will be a vote of conscience of the senators.”


--------------------

Now, I have never really followed NY state politics until Monday and am just learning the players. So Jason and Nick, please tell me what I am to think of Espada's generosity of bringing gay marriage legislation to the table this session -- in exchange for new recruitments to the new republican majority.
​

 

[B_Nick8]

Will, Espada is another Bronx (like Diaz) Democrat who is now in line for the governorship in case anything should "happen" to Paterson. He's also in league with the Republicans. Tom Duane is an openly gay man who's been sponsoring the same sex marriage bill from the get-go. Why Duane "hasn't been around" lately, I'm not entirely sure. Jason probably knows. He knows everything ;-). But it's my feeling that Espada is being disingenuous. Unless he's trying to build some kind of back room coalition of support, I can't see any reason why he'd want to hand any sort of victory to Paterson by pushing through a bill he supports.