Blue Jersey's "Think Equal" Campaign nabs Commercial Closet Award

Should just put it on the ballot (0.00 / 0)

Then, the only "risky" vote the Legislature made is to give the people a chance to decide.  California's Supreme Court has brought the issue back to the forefront, so there isn't a reason not to put it on the ballot.

Unfortunately, I doubt that the votes are there even for that in the Legislature, but at least then everybody knows that.

---

by: Creed Pogue @ Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 21:45:30 PM UTC

You were against a court deciding for marriage (4.00 / 1)

And now you're against the legislature deciding.

On any other matter of civil rights - take equal marriage rights regardless of race, e.g. - do you really think a ballot question would have been a better route to take?

---

by: Jeff Gardner @ Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 21:53:27 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

No, you've garbled it. (0.00 / 0)

If you want it to stick, then you need the support of the people.

Courts alone aren't going to do that.  I have not been opposed to the Legislature taking action.  I have simply said that those who believe the "votes are there!" are either fooling themselves, trying to fool the rest of us or both.  If you want movement, then pushing for them to put it on the ballot at least has the people deciding in a year where turnout should set records.

---

by: Creed Pogue @ Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 22:25:46 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I don't think I garbled anything (4.00 / 1)

I called on the legislature to extend the freedom to marry to same-sex couples, just as many legislatures had done in extending the freedom to marry to mixed-race couples in the 19th and 20th centuries (until the holdouts were ultimately bypassed by a 1967 Supreme Court decision).

I believe those 19th and 20th century legislatures, and the 1967 Supreme Court, did the right thing when they ended one form of discrimination in marriage, even if at the time polls would have indicated popular opposition to their actions. I think it would have been a mistake then (as it would be now) to decide the issue with a ballot question.

You're entitled to disagree.

---

by: Jeff Gardner @ Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 13:57:11 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

how do you plan to get from Point A to Point B? (0.00 / 0)

It is likely (and Steven apparently agrees with me) that you have gotten everything out of the state Supreme Court that is going to happen at this point.

Simply calling on the Legislature to act because of some new event hasn't and isn't going to get you anywhere.  It would be nice if it did, but it doesn't work that way in the real world.

Putting up a referendum is at least a way to get some movement.  The problem is that there are probably a lot more legislators who want to completely stay away from this issue than the crack vote counters at GSE think (or at least want us to think).

The Assembly is not going to do anything when they are facing re-election without knowing whether the Senate is going to leave them hanging or not.  So, you need to get the Senate to vote for it first.

I have suggested pushing for co-sponsors because that would flush out the ones who say "I'll vote for it when they post it for a vote" but are privately pushing for it to never be posted.  If you co-sponsor it, then you are likely to vote for it.  If there are 21 co-sponsors in the Senate, then it is kinda hard to justify not posting the bill for a vote.

My remark about yours and Jay's senators is to make the point that you don't even have hometown support for this.  If this was easy, then it would already have been done.

---

by: Creed Pogue @ Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 14:42:39 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

As we've seen repeatedly, (0.00 / 0)

and as you know, "tough" issues, with few public co-sponsors, have a way of very quickly becoming law in NJ. Time will tell if this is another such issue.

---

by: Jeff Gardner @ Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 14:51:47 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

This isn't paid family leave or death penalty abolition. (0.00 / 0)

Paid family leave had the strong support of organized labor and still got watered down.

The abolition of the death penalty had the strong and public support of the Governor and still passed with only the minimum.

---

by: Creed Pogue @ Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 14:58:46 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Hope, not fear n/t (0.00 / 0)

---

by: Jeff Gardner @ Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 15:56:23 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

How about reality and fantasy, instead? (0.00 / 0)

I am all in favor of hope.  

But, this whole discussion (for months) has repeatedly stayed with fantasy instead of coming back to the real world the rest of us inhabit.

Fantasy is fun for TV or books or even BS sessions, but we need to keep it out of our politics.

---

by: Creed Pogue @ Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 17:45:02 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Again (0.00 / 0)

You're entitled to disagree.

---

by: Jeff Gardner @ Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 19:17:05 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Yeah, but I am working with facts. n/t (0.00 / 0)

---

by: Creed Pogue @ Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 13:34:11 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

And I don't see Girgenti or Adler as co-sponsors of S1967. n/t (0.00 / 0)

---

by: Creed Pogue @ Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 22:31:35 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Me neither (0.00 / 0)

Though, not sure what point you are trying to make.

---

by: Jeff Gardner @ Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 13:43:16 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

congratulations (4.00 / 3)

Frank LoBiondo Record and Jon Runyan Watch

---

by: Hopeful @ Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 01:06:13 AM UTC