4 users logged onTips: BlueJerseyDotCom (AIM) |      

Log In
Sign Up | Forgot Password?

Christie tries to duck marriage equality with referendum proposal

by: the_promised_land

Tue Jan 24, 2012 at 03:00:00 PM EST



Chris Christie, usually one to rush to put his stamp on any given issue, is scared of marriage equality.

So scared that he doesn't want to be the one who decides it.

This is how he probably figures it:

1. He realizes he is on the wrong side of history here and how damaging outright opposition to marriage equality could be to his political fortunes in the long term.

2. But he has to placate the parts of the Republican base which are rabidly anti-marriage equality.

3. So he tries to claim that he takes a middle road by letting people vote on it.

4. And he tells Republicans who are caught in a similar bind - like Kip Bateman, scared of support for marriage equality in places in his district like Princeton and South Brunswick - to do the same.

But civil rights aren't for the ballot box. Should the right to interracial marriage have been decided at the ballot box forty years ago? The right of Muslim-Americans to enjoy equal rights as Americans be decided that way today? What makes marriage equality different from those scenarios?

Governor, this is your chance to lead - not to cower behind leaving the decision to others. There's still time.

the_promised_land :: Christie tries to duck marriage equality with referendum proposal
Tags: , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

Referendum (0.00 / 0)
GOP members of Senate Judiciary repeated their boss' call for referendum today. Apparently the only civil right they think the public should vote up or down.  

It's not a particularly snappy signature, but here's what I think we need in the next NJ Democratic State Chair.  

IANAL, but (0.00 / 0)
Didn't the Supreme Court already say that same-sex couples have the right to marriage? And that it was up to the leg to determine CU or ME?

They gave us CU, which has been shown, time and time again, not to work and isn't equal. My email from Citarelli said that he prefers buffing up CU (that old canard), or, failing that, the great and glorious referendum.

It strikes me that a referendum goes against the Supreme Ct decision.

Lawyers? What say you?

Linda


Rrepresentational Democracy (4.00 / 2)
was brought up twice today and how that is supposed to work.  I forget who was speaking - I was listening in from home, but I think one was Sweeney.  The reference to the fact that "this isn't California", may have been lost on some, but I think this should be a good starting point to argue from.  We elect folks to make these decisions for us, otherwise, why have a legislature?  The danger of referendums on civil rights is that you can have popular opinion on one hand and justice on the other.  The two are not mutually exclusive but sometimes they don't agree.  We shouldn't wait to give justice to all  just because some folks want to preserve the right to discriminate.

One Vote.  Yours.  It really does matter.

1915 (4.00 / 1)
Last referendum on a civil right in New Jersey. Women's suffrage, in 1915. We lost.  

It's not a particularly snappy signature, but here's what I think we need in the next NJ Democratic State Chair.  

[ Parent ]
Unless... (0.00 / 0)
...women were temporarily extended the right to vote so that they could have a say as to whether or not they should have the right to vote, I am not sure that this is the best argument against a referendum.  

Regardless of whether or not a referendum is an appropriate way to decide a civil rights issue, the LGBT community would probably be the first one who had the right to vote for or against their civil rights.

That said, I do agree that civil rights should not be subject to popular vote.  I just think that we should be careful about the arguments that we use to defend this position.


[ Parent ]
The LGBT is still well in the minority.. (0.00 / 0)
...so their votes would only count for so much if put to a popular vote, nearly the same as not having any votes at all.  Since their numbers are relatively small, I think the analogy to the women's movement is a good one.  Not a perfect analogy, but the point is a good one.  Either way, we all agree that a popular vote is certainly not the way to go with this one.    

[ Parent ]
California is a great example... (0.00 / 0)
...of how government can grind to a halt when everything is put on a ballot and they have a long history of budget problems in good times and in bad to prove it. Meanwhile, at the Federal level, the Founding Fathers took pains to craft a representational form of government, not a direct democracy, precisely because of fears of a tyranny of the majority among other concerns. For all the plodding and often exasperating nature of representative government, it works best when it shields aggrieved minorities's basic rights from the oppression of an antagonistic majority. Christie, who surely must have a passing knowledge of the Federalist Papers at least, must know this.

[ Parent ]
I agree (0.00 / 0)
I have been saying this for years. If voters do not like the decisions made by their legislators, they have their chance to remove them from office every 2-4 years.

[ Parent ]
This doesn't have to be about "stalemate" and (4.00 / 1)
"torture" as one Senator said. Get a veto-proof majority and let Christie off the hook.  Christie can look at his rightwing friends and shrug and say it's out of his hands.  

One Vote.  Yours.  It really does matter.

Has anyone written a bill? (0.00 / 0)
If Bateman and any other pro-referendum advocates in the Assembly and the Senate wrote a constitutional amendment bill, is there any mechanism through which they could get a floor vote other than  the normal channels?

What leverage does Christie have to force Oliver and Sweeney (in addition to their bosses, Adubato and Norcross) to bring a referendum bill to the floor for a vote?

It would be great if SML Weinberg and/or Steven could educate us about the avenues that Christie and his allies might have to get a referendum bill to the floors of the Assembly and the Senate for a vote  so that we can put pressure on the right people to prevent this from happening.


Good for Sweeney (4.00 / 3)
I'll bet that the title of this comment is going to shock firstamend07.

But Senate President Steve Sweeney said "Let me address this issue right now. Civil rights is not to be placed on the ballot.''

Let's hope that he sticks to his guns on this position.


So much for us all being labeled as haters (0.00 / 0)


[ Parent ]
Sweeney (0.00 / 0)
At the hearing, Sweeney said the referendum was DOA within milliseconds after Bateman stopped talking.

Blog: http://www.deciminyan.org

[ Parent ]
Stick to his guns? (0.00 / 0)
that's a laugh ...this whole issue could have been avoided if he presented this bill to Corzine 2 years ago ,lets be glad he didn't stick to his guns but stick his finger in the air to which way the wind was blowing to change his mind !

[ Parent ]
Today Was Sweeney At His Best.... (0.00 / 0)
....and Christie at his worst.

Calling for a referendum will not give Republicans the cover they desire.

Being against Marriage Equality is both politically and morally bankrupt.  

Bigotry is wrong.  Period.


People need to be educated... (4.00 / 2)
Today a progressive colleague of mine told me he thought it would be good for ME to come up for a vote, because it would certainly pass in New Jersey. I had to set him straight:

1) It's absolutely insulting to a minority to have their civil rights put up for a majority vote. We wouldn't think of asking majority white resident communities to vote on whether they believe their public schools should be segregated (I dare say I fear how some might vote even today!) Separate but equal is wrong because it is inherently unjust - no matter how many people support it.

2) A positive outcome is by no means assured. Even though a good margin of NJ residents express support for ME, they may not be committed enough to come out and vote. Which voters would be committed? Those who ME affects directly (gay voters) and those who are motivated to stop it (backed by large institutions like the Catholic and LDS churches). In order for a ME referendum to succeed, all those armchair supporters who think ME is OK would have to bother to get off their butts to vote. Sorry, but I'd rather not trust my civil rights to our lazy electorate.

There are many people who see this as a good idea. We need to let them know why it's not.


This issue has already (0.00 / 0)
been put on ballots in over 30 states ...if it's good enough for over half the country it should be good enough for this state ! Put it to a vote  

No! (0.00 / 0)
Just because other states incorrectly think that civil rights should be up to a referendum doesn't make it right. Why not put heterosexual marriage on the ballot?  

Blog: http://www.deciminyan.org

[ Parent ]
We're better than that (0.00 / 0)
Just because other states may put up fundamental rights for a popular vote-thus violating the very spirit of our representative form of government-is no reason whatsoever to follow them. We can do better by being true to the Founders' desire to have a society in which the rights of a minority are never trampled on by the will of the majority, especially when that minority is so disliked by some. While there are many times in our country's history when we haven't lived up to that ideal, the fact that such errors persist even today is hardly a reason to repeat the mistake. Quite the opposite.

[ Parent ]
So we already know (0.00 / 0)
CC will veto the bill ,and once again Sweeney is putting his interest above the gay community .When will you people ever learn with this guy ,Sweeney only serves his own interests . We all know he never posted this bill two years ago because it felt it would hurt his reelection chances ,well now that that has past he's back on the band wagon to garner all the votes he can for his shot at being Governor ,at all our expense  

One Sweeney " Hater" still left (0.00 / 0)
Dear TS. You might be intelligent but your "Hater" mentality has shown you to be ignorant.

THERE IS JUST NO WAY ONE CAN ATTACK SWEENEY ON THIS.


[ Parent ]
True Sue is out of line, but... (0.00 / 0)
I believe True Sue is out of line on this issue. But I have this big fear lingering in the back of my mind that marriage equality supporters will ultimately be disappointed this time around.

We need the Supreme Court to rule in our favor or we need to find enough votes to override a veto or we need voters to approve a referendum.

I don't know as if any of those scenarios are likely to happen.


[ Parent ]
The ME bill is DOE (0.00 / 0)
Sweeney refuses to let the people decide because of his fear the conservative vote will come out in droves to vote it down and ,this this being a election I'm sure Obama told Sweeney ...NO WAY ....so now we all lose .again  

Obama... (0.00 / 0)
...has nothing to do with this issue.  Nobody who cares about marriage equality and is opposed to a referendum is concerned about the impact that it will have on the November election.  The only issue is the principle that civil rights are not subject to majority rule.

As someone who has been as critical of Sweeney as anybody, I can promise you that if advocates for marriage equality wanted this issue to be decided by a winner-take-all referendum, Sweeney would be only too happy to get this issue off of his plate and comply.

However, as someone who has already betrayed the LGBT community once (and the progressive community many times), Sweeney knows that if he were to capitulate to Christie now, there would be no going back.  He would have no chance whatsoever to win a statewide election.

It is unclear by your comments whether you support marriage equality or not.  If you support marriage equality, then support the strategy that people like Steven Goldstein and organizations like Garden State Equality are advocating.  If you are opposed to marriage equality, then be honest about that.


[ Parent ]
DOE? (0.00 / 0)
As in doe, a deer, a female deer?

Has it not occurred to you that perhaps Sweeney and all the others who have voiced a strong no to the idea of a ballot initiative have done so because the very idea is contrary to our system of representative government and of protecting an aggrieved minority from the tyranny of a majority? These are two foundational principles of our form of government. Regardless of what motives you might ascribe to Sweeney, his is on firm ground on this.


[ Parent ]
Enjoying Your Ignorance (0.00 / 0)
Yes, Sweeney and Obama were on the phone yesterday talking about ME.

I hope you are just being sarcastic with your comments and just trying to get a  "rise" out of some people.  

If you are serious you are either dumb or ignorant.  


[ Parent ]
Featured Stories

Hate Ads? Make them disappear.
Subscribe:

Blue Jersey Essentials

 EDITORIAL DIRECTOR
 Rosi Efthim

 STAFF WRITERS
 Adam L a/k/a/ clammyc
 Bill Orr
 Deciminyan
 Hopeful
 Jeff Gardner
 Jersey Jazzman
 KendalJames
 Senator Loretta Weinberg
 the_promised_land
 Rosi Efthim

» About | FAQ | In the News
» 
» Tips:
» Front Page RSS Feed
» User Diaries RSS Feed
» Blue Jersey on Twitter » Blue Jersey on Facebook » Blue Jersey T-shirts
ADVERTISEMENT

Blog Roll

» Alicia Menendez
» Alive and Kickin
» Baristanet
» Blog the Fifth
» Capitol Quickies
» The Center of NJ Life
» Channel Surfing
» Channel Surfing
» Deciminyan
» The Englewood Report
» Frank Lobiondo Record
» Fred Snowflack
» Freedom to Tinker
» Garden State Grapevine
» ClearysNoteBook
» Herb Jackson
» Hoboken Journal
» Hoboken Now
» Jersey Blogs
» Jersey Jazzman
» Middletown Mike
» More Monmouth Musings
» NJ Domestic Partnership
» NJ Politics Unusual
» NJ Voices: Policy Watch
» On Our Radar
» The Opinion Mill
» Other Spaces
» Plainfield Plaintalker
» PolitickerNJ
» Retire Garrett
» Ruins of Trenton
» Senator Ray Lesniak
» Stovetop Diplomacy
» Sustainable Cherry Hill
» The Subversive Garden
» Teaneck Progress
» Trenton Kat
» We Don't Need Permission
» Xpatriated Texan

Cartoons

» M.e. Cohen
» Jimmy Margulies
» Drew Sheneman
» Rob Tornoe
Search




Advanced Search












Ads do not constitute
an endorsement
from Blue Jersey.



Blue Jersey Gear

Visit the Blue Jersey store. T-shirts, bumper stickers & more!


Shirts available in dozens of styles and colors.



Visit the Blue Jersey Store

Contact Us
» Editor: 
» Press releases: 
» Advertising inquiries: 
» Tips:
About Us
» About Blue Jersey
» Blue Jersey in the News
» FAQ/Usage
» 
» RSS Feed

Misc Stuff
» Blue Jersey Radio
» Blue Jersey on Twitter
» Facebook Group
» MySpace Page
» NJ Politics 101 Wiki
» Blue Jersey Podcast
» Screaming Carrot Award
» Contribute to Blue Jersey
7968 satisfied users, visits and 0 subpoenas served since Sept 28, 2005
© Blue Jersey, powered by the mighty SoapBlox.
Powered by: SoapBlox