"We don't have the votes" (Updated)

when you put it like that.... (4.00 / 2)

....it seems like a slam dunk! 

activist for hire.

---

by: Jay Lassiter @ Tue Dec 12, 2006 at 13:47:49 PM CST

Which is worse (4.00 / 3)

really not having the support at all or having the support without the courage to act on it

---

by: Jason Springer @ Tue Dec 12, 2006 at 13:56:10 PM CST

I would really like to know what Codey and Roberts are afraid of (0.00 / 0)

I would really like to know what Codey and Roberts are afraid of.  I single them out because they are the "leaders" and it is seeming pretty clear that they are the force behind this rush to Civil Unioning (unless it is Corzine behind the scenes).  BUT are they afraid the State House will change hands in the next election cycle if they supported Equal Marriage?  Are they afraid the White House will disapprove of NJ (more than they already do).  Are they afraid it will cost the Dems the possibility of the White House in 08?  That seems far fetched as it is a long time away and the number one issues is the WAR and after that HEALTH CARE.  What is really up because this issue "gay marriage" is certainly not on the radar screen of NJ residents.  They want TAX REDUCTION!!!  And, not having Marriage Equality in NJ puts them further away from getting that.  Any ideas on what this is really all about?

---

by: deme38 @ Tue Dec 12, 2006 at 14:31:21 PM CST

What could well be happening is... (0.00 / 0)

A focused campaign of emails, phone calls and snail mail from small groups opposed to calling it "marriage". Don't be surprised if a good amount of it is coming from outside the state and from astroturfing, email-generator websites. The right has a very effective and well-funded structure to shift  lawmakers in situations like this. They know what to do and they do it well, creating an effect far in excess of their real numbers.

Another thing to consider is that opposition to this, well-couched and constructed with just the right words, phrases and accompanying gestures that communicate the real point of the speaker, is coming from right within the Democratic Party. Shocking? No. The Dems have those, in their ranks, who have no time for or appreciation of our GLBTI brothers and sisters. They are just far better housebroken and trained then their counterparts on the right, who seem to have no compunction about descending to the lowest depth of discourse and actions.

One more element could well be the pressures being brought to bear by employers, insurance companies, medical care providers and others with a fiduciary dog in this hunt. All will be impacted by this legislation and all are responsible for a lot of campaign contributions. This will cost them and they are gonna want to mitigate the pain as much as they can. You can be certain that our representatives are hearing from orgs like The US Chamber of Commerce and other groups comparable.

 

The nom de plume has a long and distinguished history.

---

by: Tandalayo Scheisskopf @ Tue Dec 12, 2006 at 15:18:42 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Outside agitators (0.00 / 0)

anyone out there working in a legislator's office care to comment on Tandalayo's theory? I would be very interested to know if this is actually happening. Just send an e-mail to Juan, he can certainly be trusted not to blow your cover.

I suspect there isn't anyone calling to oppose, or damn few, no disrepect to Tandalayo -- I just think the entire 'the world ain't ready' excuse is homophobia, pure, plain and simple. Ick! There certainly aren't enough calls to justify opposing 100% marriage equality. LOOK at how the legislators are wavering -- oh, if I could just do this now, you know, I would ...

Oh, get over it. DO IT NOW. Enter 2007 with a clean slate re: 100 marriage equality and then go solve the budget crisis. By November, only Cardinale, Carooll, Merkt, Deo and Tomicki will remember what you did here today.

Oh, yeah, and 450,000 grateful full citizens of New Jersey!

---

by: denniscmcgrath @ Tue Dec 12, 2006 at 15:34:41 PM CST

[ Parent ]

It is my understanding ... (0.00 / 0)

That form letters, while noted, are not taken very seriously. Form letters from around the country, doubly so.

---

by: JRB @ Tue Dec 12, 2006 at 15:51:33 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I seriously doubt... (0.00 / 0)

...that there is any organized movement behind civil unions.  The people in the state who are passionate about this issue, both pro-marriage equality progressives and anti-marriage regressives, are all opposed to civil unions.

In fact, based on what I observed at the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing yesterday, I feel that as disappointed as our side was with the result, their side was completely out of their gourds with rage.

After the hearing, Judiciary Committee Chair, John Adler had a very hard time getting out of the room, because he was surrounded by a large group of antis who were quite vocal about not being given the chance to testify.  I also imagine that they did not like the way that Adler verbally spanked their patron saint, Gerry Cardinale.

Also, everyone who testified with the exception of Loretta Weinberg, who was there as one of the Senators who introduced the bill, was opposed to civil unions.  When Adler asked if anyone wanted to testify in support of the legislation, the room became very quiet, proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that the only organized support for civil unions is inside Trenton and it consists of one person, Senate President, Dick Codey, who unfortunately happens to be the second most powerful person in Trenton.

It is my belief that the main reason that Codey prefers civil unions to full marriage equality is that he doesn't want to have to explain to his priest the next time that he goes to confession why he enabled same-sex couples to marry when he had the power to do otherwise.

I also believe that he doesn't want members of his caucus, who are facing tough re-election campaigns, like Ellen Karcher and Fred Madden, to be put in the position of alienating voters on either side of this issue by voting for or against marriage equality.

But I believe that the former reason is driving Codey more than the latter, because I believe that Codey knows as well as anybody that there are Republican votes to be found on this issue, starting with Rob Martin and two or three if not more others, which would enable endangered Democrats like Karcher and Madden to abstain and the no votes of conservative Democrats like Sharpe James, Ron Rice Sr., and Steve Sweeney to be overcome.

If I am wrong, then civil unions will be the law of the land for most of 2007, but will be replaced with marriage equality legislation during the post-election lame duck session.  If I am right, then Codey will continue to be the George Wallace of marriage equality for as long as he continues to preside over the State Senate, which would appear to be until 2011 at the earliest.

I really hope that I am wrong.

---

by: rachael'sdad @ Tue Dec 12, 2006 at 17:48:32 PM CST

[ Parent ]

What is up is that: Try Icky (0.00 / 0)

Icky is as good an answer as any. The leadership's inner fifth graders are coming out to play.

The leadership finds the issue icky, and cares not to field more of what they find embarrassing questions on it.

The leadership fears taking any hit at all on behalf of people they find icky, however imaginary that fear may be.

That's it in the proverbial nutshell, kids. And they have tossed us carrots: drug users are icky, too, but needle exchange is FINALLY a reality. Transpeople are icky, too, but now they're FINALLY in the LAD. We're getting over our sense of icky, say Joe and Dick. Just don't -- please -- ask us to vote for 100% marriage equality. We're not ready -- it's just too icky. It's an ick too far. We're just not ready. Haven't we sucked up enough ick for this session? Just take yer damned civil onions and GO AWAY, gay people, GO AWAY.

We're sorry Joe and Dick find us icky, but we're still human, we're alleged to be full citizens, and we are still entitled to every single right our striaght brothers and sisters enjoy, and everyone knows -- EVERYONE KNOWS -- that denying us these rights is wrong.

Icky pipple of the woild, unite!

---

by: denniscmcgrath @ Tue Dec 12, 2006 at 15:27:54 PM CST

[ Parent ]

We HAVE got the votes (0.00 / 0)

But we haven't found the fortitude. Yet. But we can still turn Profiles in Cowardice into Profiles in Courage.

I don't have time to finish the chart I'm working on tonight, but if you look at everyone who voted for stem cell research; for needle exchange; for transgended inclusion in the LAD; and for DP; and you assume that anyone who supported three or four of those measures should really NOT have a problem with 100% marriage equality; AND you factor in the truly brave indivuduals who have followed Reed Gusciora's lead; and you look at everyone who's fence-sitting; then you come damn close -- maybe you're over the top -- for full marriage equality.

There are more legislators willing to do this than not. They just need to know that a) they have the votes and b) Codey and Roberts want this.

We can't punish fencesitters, but Codey and Roberts can. We can't punish Codey and Roberts, but maybe we can shame them into doing the right thing. And don't think there aren't Republicans who will vote with the Democrats on this one. Bill Baroni, this is not the time to be shy! Charlotte Vandervalk, just DO IT!

That's all it's going to take. Enough people pointing their fingers and saying, c'mon guys, this IS a farce. WHY are we putting this constituency, who by and large are loyal Democratic voters, though this ridiculous mill? The church people WILL get over it.

Keep calling. Try sending a telegram, I'll bet none of them have seen one of those for a while.

---

by: denniscmcgrath @ Tue Dec 12, 2006 at 15:18:04 PM CST

More counts (0.00 / 0)

I received email from Asm Greenwald's office that

Our job continues to be one of expressing to leadership your concerns and support for the further advancement of this issue and to gauge its success going forward.

Again, thank you for taking the time to contact us, let's enjoy this great moment.

Sincerely,

Assemblyman Louis D. Greenwald
and
Assemblywoman Pamela R. Lampitt

Sounds like both of them are for full marriage equality too.

---

by: cktung @ Tue Dec 12, 2006 at 16:09:22 PM CST

I got that too (0.00 / 0)

and I didn't interpret it the way you did. If anyone gets a more clear response from their office (or any office), I'll update this post.

---

by: Juan Melli @ Tue Dec 12, 2006 at 16:30:34 PM CST

[ Parent ]

"I'd like to say you didn't forget ... (0.00 / 0)

Linda "Lionheart" Greenstein, but apparently not."

---

by: JRB @ Tue Dec 12, 2006 at 16:37:31 PM CST

[ Parent ]

can someone call greenwald and lampitt? (0.00 / 0)

they hate hearing from me, so if someone else can call that would be cool.
  (856) 435-1247

activist for hire.

---

by: Jay Lassiter @ Tue Dec 12, 2006 at 17:12:38 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Leadership (0.00 / 0)

"A leader is a person you will follow to a place you wouldn't go by yourself."  (from a Chinese fortune cookie)

It's time--in fact, it's past time--for leaders like Dick Codey and Joe Roberts to do some real leading on this issue.  With Senators like Nick Scutari calling the civil union bill what it is--a discriminatory fraud--it seems that perhaps the leaders ought to do some following at this point.

Forget Cardinale--he sounds more and more like Phyllis Schafly in drag.  The Extreme Right-Wing Hard Core is what it is--30% or less of the voters nationally, fewer than that here in New Jersey.  Cardinale's "logic" that gay marriage (and even civil unions) "discriminate against straight people" is beyond ludicrous:  I guess that means he thinks the Voting Rights Act discriminates against white people.  The ERWHC will always be rabid, so they're not worth the bother.

The legislature doesn't have to rush civil unions through--they've got time before the Court's 180 day limit runs out, and I'll bet the Court would extend that limit a bit if needed.  What our legislators should do (and will if they have any cojones) is to follow Scutari's lead and defeat this fraudulent half-measure in favor of a genuine marriage equality bill that says what it means and means what it says.  If they do it now, it's less likely to come back to bite them next fall.  It's much better to do things right the first time rather than have to come back and do them over. 

Wouldn't it be great to be able to celebrate genuine marriage equality early in 2007?

"Do what you can, with what you have, where you are."  (Teddy Roosevelt)

---

by: DottieG @ Tue Dec 12, 2006 at 17:17:05 PM CST

NJ-22 (0.00 / 0)

With Jerry Green, Linda Stender, and Nick Scutari all on board with marriage equality, I think we have the first true-blue legislative district in the state.

It's nice to live here, even in a Republican town like Dunellen, where most of the Republicans that I have met appear to be pretty decent.

That said, if any fellow liberals and progressives in general and LGBTIers in particular are looking for a place to live that allows for an easy commute into New York City, Dunellen will be starting a massive redevelopment next year (go to http://www.dunellen.... for more info) that is expected to be completed by 2012.

I believe that if the 400 residential units that are built are inhabited by "the right kind of people" (I know that this sounds awful), Dunellen has the potential to become a progressive (culturally, politically, and socially) nirvana like Maplewood and Montclair.

---

by: rachael'sdad @ Tue Dec 12, 2006 at 18:00:10 PM CST

For Marriage Equality (0.00 / 0)

All my representaitve in the 18th LD are for marriage equality:

Sen. Barbara Buono (as previously mentioned)

Asm. Pat Diegnan (as per his COS)

Asm. Peter Barnes (as per Asm Caraballo)

I'm sure there are a lot more.

I think what is truly important is to identify those who have come out against, to find those races in 2007 where we can elect fair minded legislators and take action. We ought to try and keep Sen Martin in the Senate and try and keep Sen Sarlo...out! It will be important to keep Loretta Weinberg and Valerie huttle in ...  and prevent Joe Ferriero from having more influence.

Babs Casbar

"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness."
--John Kenneth Galbraith

---

by: Babs NJSD @ Wed Dec 13, 2006 at 23:23:53 PM CST

One problem. (0.00 / 0)

Martin is retiring.

---

by: JRB @ Wed Dec 13, 2006 at 23:40:10 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Sadly,... (0.00 / 0)

...after his amazing performance at the Senate Judiciary Committee meeting, I think that if Rob Martin wanted to run for re-election, he would probably find himself in a primary fight that he would have a very difficult time winning.  He barely staved off Jay Webber four years ago.

While there is no doubt in my mind that every Democrat in Trenton could support marriage equality and have no trouble getting re-elected next year, the same is not necessarily true for Republicans.

Although, if we did have the NJBIA and the Chamber of Commerce on board, I think that there are some Republicans who we could get simply because the economic benefits to their districts will outweigh the hostility of a smattering of wing-nuts.

Does anybody think that there is any merit to the idea of going to LGBTI-oriented publishing companies and asking them to give a year of free advertising to any wedding-related business that is in the legislative district of a Republican who supports marriage equality?

As awful as it might be that we are losing Martin as of January 2008, there is a good chance that we will also be getting rid of Sharpe James and Ron Rice Sr. as both are expected to face primary challenges and the loss of organizational support.

Someone should be talking to Cory Booker and making sure that whomever he recruits to run in these districts is an unwavering supporter of marriage equality and other LGBTI issues.  This will be his first and best chance to prove that he deserved the unwavering support that he received from the LGBTI and progressive communities.

---

by: rachael'sdad @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 06:35:13 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Barnes...wow! (0.00 / 0)

This is quite a change of heart for him.  He has cosponsored what is in this session A1398 ("Includes same sex  Marriages among  Marriages declared void; provides that New Jersey will not recognize  Marriages in other jurisdictions which are void in New Jersey") in the past.

---

by: Scott Weingart @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 11:12:01 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Barnes (0.00 / 0)

To be honest, it was a surprise to me, but in discussing votes with one of the Assembly leaders, his name was specifically mentioned! This civil union bill will have all sorts of problems ... which will excerbate the need for full marriage equality. Depending on how good our messaging is and how many homophobes ( including a bunch of "down low" hypocrites) we can vote out next November, it could be achievable in 2 years.

Babs

"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness."
--John Kenneth Galbraith

---

by: Babs NJSD @ Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 00:11:40 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Asm. Panter... (0.00 / 0)

just called this a "first step".

Talk about courage-Panter held his seat by only 64 votes in 2005.

Asw. Beck supports the CU bill, too.  Did not say anything about marriage.

Asm. Bramnick earlier said the CU bill "does not challenge the institution of marriage".  No word on whether he thinks marriage equality challenges said institution.

---

by: Scott Weingart @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 14:53:56 PM CST

Asm. Carroll grilled Caraballo (0.00 / 0)

Most of his questions would be irrelevant if we were debating A3685 instead of this bill.

---

by: Scott Weingart @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 15:00:39 PM CST

He wasn't questioning, really... (0.00 / 0)

he was trying to cross-examine Caraballo, as if he were in a courtroom cross-examining an unfriendly witness.  Maybe he didn't know Caraballo is a law school professor; Carroll didn't get anywhere, anc Caraballo was superb.

"Do what you can, with what you have, where you are."  (Teddy Roosevelt)

---

by: DottieG @ Fri Dec 15, 2006 at 10:06:38 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Baroni... (0.00 / 0)

"Let's begin to end this discrimination".  That sounds encouraging.

---

by: Scott Weingart @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 15:01:35 PM CST

Vote on 3RFP (0.00 / 0)

56-19, 5 absentions.  A lengthy round of applause, and on to the Senate!

---

by: Scott Weingart @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 15:02:37 PM CST