NY Times takes NJ to task over Civil Unions

by: Jason Springer

Sun Dec 21, 2008 at 02:41:39 PM EST

Civil unions are an inadequate substitute for marriage. Creating a separate, new legal structure to confer some benefits on same-sex couples neither honors American ideals of fairness, nor does it grant true equality. The results are clearly visible in New Jersey, which continues to deny same-sex couples some of the tangible civil benefits that come with marriage.

Shadowed by a national recession and plummeting state revenues, Corzine said issues like enacting gay marriage will be shoved to the sidelines while he tries to stimulate New Jersey's economy and push ethics reform through a reluctant Legislature.

Maybe we should be looking at the potential economic benefits of same sex marriage to help ease some of our budget pain. According to a Williams Institute Study:

Over the next three years, the direct spending from same-sex couples on weddings and tourism will generate approximately $19 million in revenues for state and local governments.

Spending on weddings by couples living in New Jersey, and tourism and weddings by out-of-state couples, will generate over $17.3 million in state and local sales tax revenues and occupancy fee revenues. This estimate is conservative in that it does not include increased revenue from many other taxes that are harder to estimate, such as New Jersey's motor fuels tax, earnings taxes, property taxes, excise tax on alcoholic beverages, or taxes on indirect spending or earnings.

In addition, the weddings of in-state and out-of-state couples will generate approximately $1.6 million in marriage license fees.

Separate from the fiscal impact, the Times also goes after the legislature for not advancing the bill:

We regret that the leaders of the state's Democratic-controlled Legislature do not view this issue with the same urgency. Senate President Richard Codey, for instance, said recently that progress in civil rights areas "is typically achieved in incremental steps." We suspect that political expedience is clouding Mr. Codey's sense of fairness. Next year in New Jersey, the governorship and all seats in the Assembly are up for grabs in an election. Some Republicans already are talking about making their opposition to same-sex marriage a campaign issue.

Second, I was watching ESPN yesterday and they were talking about integration in the 60's. One of the football players made the point that when a white player got cut, their blood was red, and when a black player got cut, their blood was red too.  That really summed up how I feel about this issue.  Their blood is red just like everyone else's, so what's the difference?