Yesterday's Senate session was historic - the passage of S1, the Marriage Equality and Religious Exemption bill.
Due to some technical glitches, the audio feed from the Senate was not of high quality, so it's best to listen to this video using headphones. My apologies for the sub-par audio, but you'll be watching one of the most significant events in the history of the New Jersey legislature.
Even if you don't view the entire 35 minutes, fast forward to 34:07 to see the vote and especially the jubilant reaction of Garden State Equality's Steven Goldstein.
Time marks for the senators' remarks are:
Senate President Sweeney - 00:00
Senate Majority Leader Weinberg - 06:01
Senator Ray Lesniak - 18:39
Senator Gerald Cardinale - 20:15
Senator Richard Codey - 26:01
Senator Barbara Buono - 29:32
Senator Jennifer Beck - 32:30
It was an odd mood in the Senate today. Celebratory because even going in to the session, we knew there were enough votes to pass the marriage equality bill. But in the back of everyone's mind was the inevitable veto by our politically ambitions bully of a governor.
Yet, Garden State Equality's Steven Goldstein's optimism prevailed. If there's a way to ensure civil rights to all couples who love each other, Goldstein's tenacity along with the support from Senate President Sweeney and the bill's sponsors will make that happen.
Next up is the Assembly vote on Thursday afternoon. Blue Jersey will be there.
Here's the press conference where Sweeney spoke along with the sponsors, Senators Weinberg and Lesniak. Another key supporter, Senator Codey, also spoke, along with Steven Goldstein.
Following almost seven hours of testimony on Thursday, the members of the Assembly Judiciary Committee went on record with their votes to move the Marriage Equality and Religious Exemption bill to the full chamber. As in the Senate committee, the vote was along party lines, with some Democrats expressing reservations but ultimately voting for equality while other Democrats were solidly in favor.
The two Republicans on the committee had interesting views and their remarks are worth listening to. It still surprises me how a libertarian like Michael Patrick Carroll can be for discrimination and government intervention in a civil rights issue. His argument comes right out of the Santorum playbook - since there is no societal benefit to equal rights, it's fine to vote against them.
Freshman GOP Assemblywoman Holly Schepisi appeared torn and indecisive. Her rambling remarks argued both sides of the issue but she ultimately voted for discrimination. I don't know if she can be flipped, but it would certainly be worthwhile if she could hear from pro-equality constituents. In the arc of the history of the New Jersey Assembly, she'll go down as having cast her first vote in favor of discrimination. I wonder if she wants this to be the legacy of her political career.
The video is 29 minutes long. If you want to jump ahead, here are the starting times for each speaker:
Gordon Johnson (D) 00:00
Reed Gusciora (D) 02:03
Ralph Caputo (D) 05:58
Annette Quijano (D) 07:40
Holly Schepisi (R) 13:20
Michael Patrick Carroll (R) 21:35
Peter Barnes (D) 22:33
Voting 28:01
In case you missed (I did), here is an unsmiling, and deadly serious NJ Speaker Sheila Oliver discussing Gov. Chris Christie's ignorant remark about the civil rights movement, made this week.
btw - New Jersey was the last state in the union to abolish slavery. Did you know that? It's part of the history lesson Oliver, Rush Holt, Reed Gusciora, Loretta Weinberg, John Wisniewski, Gordon Johnson, Rep. John Lewis and others have been required to review this week for the benefit of a governor who let a bit too much of his own prejudices show, as he attempted to make his stand against a rising tide of Equality in marriage going on in the New Jersey Legislature.
You've seen a minyan of rabbis testify in favor of the Marriage Equality bill at the Senate Judiciary Committee meeting this week. There were also dozens of Christian clergy supporting the bill. Their testimony provides a common sense, compassionate, and compelling case for the bill.
Responding to the apparent fact that the NJ Legislature may be finally getting its head together in treating gay couples in love with respect and recognizing their right to marry, Gov. Christie tried a headline-grabbing, but morally bankrupt dodge: He proposed a referendum, political cover for his obedient, spineless GOP legislative Muppets.
But the next day, Christie went further, and in doing so exposed both an ignorance of history, or given his intelligence, more likely a cunning attempt to twist it. He said this:
People would have been happy to have a referendum on civil rights rather than fighting and dying in the streets in the South.
- Gov. Chris Christie, Wednesday, Jan. 25, 2012
Cheryl Contee said it well:(Christie's assertion is) if Southern whites in the 1940s, 50s and 60s had just been given enough time, they would have totally been down for equality with their black neighbors. They would have even voted for it themselves!
But yesterday, closer to home, Cory Booker set the Governor straight, and it's a thing of beauty:
There were dozens of clergypersons at Tuesday's Senate Judiciary Hearings on marriage equality, representing many faiths and both sides of the issue. One of the largest contingents was a group of Reform, Reconstructionist, and Conservative rabbis from around the state, speaking in favor of marriage equality. Garden State Equality's Steven Goldstein referred to them as "a minyan of rabbis."
Yesterday's Senate Judiciary Committee hearings on marriage equality made me proud of several legislators - veterans and freshmen alike. Below the fold are videos of the remarks of Senate President Sweeney, Senate Majority Leader Loretta Weinberg, and two openly gay Assemblymen - Reed Gusciora and Tim Eustace. As a bonus, Assemblyman Eustance's son, Kyle, also testified.
Here is today's vote on marriage equality along with the statements from each of the senators. It's worth watching - from the eloquence of Senators Gill and Weinberg to the cowardice of Senator Bateman to the political posturing of Senator Kyrillos. Congratulations to Senators Lesniak, Weinberg, and Sweeney, and to Steven Goldstein for this momentous step.
I arrived early at the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Marriage Equality in order to get a good spot for my video camera. The hearings were scheduled for 11 AM. By 9:15, when I arrived, the line was all the way back to the lobby and more people were coming. I was the first reporter there, and was able to secure a prime spot adjacent to the witness table, a power outlet, and access to the audio feed. What more could a blogger and amateur videographer ask for?
I've been to a lot of committee hearings over the last year, but this was one of the most emotional for me. Yes, I've heard the stories about Danny and John, and about Marsha and Louise before, and they touched me deeply. But today, their stories were juxtaposed with those of marriage bigots who demand special rights for heterosexual couples. (And I'm sad to have to use the term "bigot", but their arguments hold no more water than those who worked to deny women's right to vote in the early 20th century or those who worked to deny rights to African Americans in mid-century.) My head reeled with the thoughts of how can these people call themselves religious? Religion involves compassion and understanding, but these people did not understand a word that was spoken.
The Senate Judiciary Committee is meeting today to hear testimony from opposing sides on the question of whether to extend the freedom to marry to same-sex couples by way of the Marriage Equality Act. Deja Vu. This time around, it appears that Democrats will be almost universally on the side of equal rights. (Yey!)
But, the big question, today and throughout this year's debates in the Senate and the Assembly, will be: where are the Republicans? Here's hoping enough Republicans will join us on the right side of this issue, the right side of history, and the right side of their own friends and family members - sons, daughters, nephews, nieces, grandchildren - who are aching for equality.
Because, as I said two years ago, "We're never ever going away. We'll be back year after year, year after year, until we are treated as equals." And today, we're back. So, I say to Governor Christie and legislators, Republican and Democratic: Let's put an end to this. Let's treat all New Jerseyans with the dignity and respect they deserve. Make marriage equality the law of the state. And do it now. You have the power.:
(Video courtesy of my fellow discriminatee, Jay Lassiter, with an assist from our friend, Lori Braunstein, who is a wizard at this kind of thing. Thanks Jay and Lori!)
The Star Ledger, typically a friendly voice on the subject of marriage equality, went off the rails today in an editorial suggesting the state consider a referendum on "Gay Marriage." I could not disagree more.
As an initial matter, I wish once and for all that educated people would stop referring to the issue of marriage equality as the right to "gay marriage." They may as well call it "schmarriage" (as some have). There is no such thing as a right to "Italian marriage" or "Black marriage" or "Hindu marriage" or "Second marriage" - and, it's insulting in 2012 for the Star Ledger to still be framing the issue that way. Same-sex couples are not seeking a special right to engage in some subset of actual marriage - we are seeking equality in the freedom to marry our partners and have those marriages recognized by the state, no more and no less. Labels matter.
Rush Holt attended last night's forum on the Rutgers campus in the wake of Tyler Clementi's suicide. The Trevor Project Lifeline and other help numbers are listed after the jump, if you know somebody who might like to have them. - promoted by Rosi
The fight for equality for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender individuals is the next front in America's struggle for civil rights.
The milestones of America's progress have marked fights for equal rights, liberty, and justice for all. The enduring struggle - to grant women the right to vote, to end Jim Crow, to provide opportunity and accessibility to individuals with disabilities - helps define who we are as a nation.
The tragedy of Tyler Clementi's death - like the suicides of three other teens in three other states whose deaths reportedly are linked to anti-gay bullying and abuse - is part of that struggle.
In the aftermath of Newark's infamous 1967 unrest, with stacks of citizen complaints in hand, the American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey made an impassioned plea to the federal courts to rein in the rampant Newark Police Department.
Decades later, after countless lawsuits and campaigns for reform failed to bring order to the department, the ACLU-NJ has taken another serious measure to address grave injustices against Newark citizens. Today we petitioned the U.S. Department of Justice to investigate the Newark Police Department, building a case for the federal agency to end the entrenched patterns of police abuse.
New Jersey made history with its most famous federal intervention. The consent decree signed in 1999 to address the New Jersey State Police's racial profiling practices brought major reforms to all areas of its operations. Similar consent decrees have transformed troubled police departments in Pittsburgh, Cincinnati and Los Angeles and inspired officials in New Orleans and Washington, D.C. to personally petition the DOJ to intervene.
This post, about the basis for the amicus brief ACLU-NJ wrote on behalf of marriage equality in New Jersey, was written by Ed Barocas, Legal Director of the American Civil Liberties Union-NJ. Separate is never equal. Over the weekend, ACLU of New Jersey received the Gibbons Prize for Law and Social Justice from Garden State Equality. - promoted by Rosi Efthim
Rights that exist merely in theory or on paper are meaningless. They only mean something to people's lives if they exist in reality. For rights to mean something, they must be on paper and in practice for perpetuity.
On February 19, 2007, New Jersey's Civil Unions Law took effect. While same-sex couples and their families throughout the state were, on paper, afforded some of the rights and responsibilities previously denied them, the day also marked a sad and unfulfilling moment in the history of our state. It has gone down as the day New Jersey officially wrote back into law the notion of "separate but equal."
The past three years have served as a reminder - for some unnecessary - that separate is never equal. And the same couples that initially brought the battle for equality to the courts in 2004 have once again petitioned the New Jersey Supreme Court for their constitutional right to equality.
During the Civil Unions Commission hearings that the Legislature mandated to review the effects of the law, as well as the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings during the December 2009 run-up to the vote on marriage equality, family after family testified about the discrimination they experienced because the title given to them, "civil unions," was an inferior institution that excluded them from well-understood title of marriage.
The titles we give to our rights matter. They affect whether those rights will be respected throughout our state at hospitals, in schools, in everyday business transactions, and in practically every endeavor susceptible to human error. Many New Jerseyans have no idea what civil unions are, much less a nuanced understanding of the rights they carry.
Simply put, the Civil Unions Law has failed to fulfill the promise of equality. And children of civil union couples suffer most of all.
The most compelling stories during the Senate hearings on marriage equality in December came from school children. One student had been mercilessly bullied at school, while other children told the committee how excluded they felt when their classmates failed understand their parents' (non)marital status. When businesses and hospital personnel routinely don't understand civil unions, how can we expect our children to?
Justice Louis Brandeis said, "Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example."
What kind of statement does the government make when it segregates one group from all of the others? That it's acceptable to have two classes of people with two sets of rights. When the state itself segregates people, it grants the rest of society permission to do the same. Through its example, the Civil Unions Law excuses bigotry and emboldens bullies.
Last month, the ACLU-NJ submitted a friend-of-the-court brief to the New Jersey Supreme Court on behalf of ourselves and seven other leading rights organizations. It explained that, even when courts in the past initially permitted "separate but equal" institutions or systems to exist, those courts struck down, the segregated systems once evidence established that they continued to lead to different treatment. Even ardent opponents of marriage equality have conceded that denying same-sex couples the title of marriage has perpetuated these disparities.
If a system so separate were established on the basis of race, religion, ethnicity or gender, we would decry it, call it bigotry, see it as an affront to all New Jerseyans, and call it abhorrent and wrong. When it is done on the basis of sexual orientation, it is no less of an affront to all New Jerseyans, and no less abhorrent and wrong.
Hopefully, the New Jersey Supreme Court will be on the correct side of history - the side that long ago established that segregation of rights and people can never result in full equality.
First, he is dumbfounded (which I can understand if you only count the first syllable in that word) by the fact that Garden State Equality - a large organization whose purpose is to push for EQUAL treatment of same sex couples when it comes to civil (not religious) marriages - is refusing to give the hard earned and raised money of its members to those legislators who do not agree with their core principles (note, this basic misunderstanding is also shared by very prominent New Jersey Democrats, so Deo is far from alone in his "bewilderment").
Then, he talks about how marriage equality "proponents" - those who are so radical as to demand equal rights for civil (not religious) marriages between same sex couples - "fail to grasp" the will of the people, citing the New Jersey Constitution in stating "All political power is inherent in the people."
"Fail to grasp".
What Deo and his fellow bigots and homophobes fail to grasp is that marriage equality is neither a political matter that his supposed example applies to, nor is something subject to the "will of the people". Marriage equality is just that - equality. A basic human and civil right that shouldn't be voted away by a majority comprised of self-loathing bigoted homophobic fools who demonize entire groups to soothe their own fears.
This isn't something that should be put on a ballot. This isn't something that should be polled to see if it is a good idea "politically". This falls under one of the most basic tenets that this country was founded on - and later expanded upon as future generations came to see that past and precedent failed to satisfy that tenet:
Equality.
From "all men are created equal" to expanding the right to vote to those who were previously and unfairly denied this right to basic civil rights.
And now this.
There should be no "will of the people" - except if it is referring to the will of the people to look at themselves for what they are - either tolerant and in favor of equal rights or bigoted and homophobic - and in favor of oppression, unequal treatment, discrimination and "separate but equal".
Joey Novick put this status up on his facebook page comparing the MTV show Jersey Shore to the NJ State Senate and he comes up with this:
Ouch! Thurman Hart reminded us in the comments that thankfully we don't have to watch the Senators shake their money makers. When Babs questioned why Joey was demeaning neanderthals, he offered this clarification:
1-The only members of the State Senate who were actually referenced in the joke above were the 20 who voted to oppose ---6 Ds and 14 Rs. They were the only Neanderthals.
2- I apologize to any Neanderthals who felt demeaned by the comparison to members of the State Senate. I regret any harm done, which was unintended.
"I can only find solace in the fact that the next generation of Democrats, which overwhelmingly support marriage equality, will not balk at the opportunity to confer civil rights on their fellow citizens."
It's inspiring to know that our next generation of leaders understand what our leaders today can't seem to comprehend.
Thank you mconvente. Yes, you're right; far more than only gay people are disappointed in the NJ Senate. You say it well. - promoted by Rosi
Today's New Jersey State Senate vote against a bill that would legalize gay marriage is quite a hit to the cause of equality, the progressive community, and to me personally. To me, it is unconscionable that a legislative body could refuse their sworn oath to ensure that our laws uphold the Constitution, but that is exactly what happened this afternoon in the Senate chambers in Trenton.
While watching an online live stream of the debate, I was struck by the words of one particular Senator. Her name is Teresa Ruiz, and she represents District 29, which includes the very diverse city of Newark. Senator Ruiz is the first Latina state Senator in New Jersey's history, and her upraising clearly shined through with her words today.
While making her speech in favor of gay marriage, Senator Ruiz recalled her personal experience with being deemed "the other", concluding by stating she doesn't ever want to take a vote that says, "it's okay for me, but not for you."
.gif)
