Gays in NJ Say Christie's veto of Gay Marriage Isn't the end
N.J. Gov. Chris Christie vetoed the gay marriage bill within only hours of it reaching his desk.
It came as no shock when Gov. Chris Christie quickly vetoed the same-sex marriage bill without batting an eyelid last week, but momentum and a game plan are keeping the state’s gay marriage advocates from getting discouraged.
“It was not surprising,” said Steve Goldstein, CEO of gay rights organization Garden State Equality, of Christie’s decision. And of course it wasn’t, as the Republican governor promised for weeks that he wouldn’t let the legislation get past his desk if and when the time came.
“It’s why I chose not to waste a breath in pleading with the governor not to veto and have put Garden State Equality immediately to work to achieve an override,” Goldstein said in an online statement immediately following Christie’s anticipated stamp of disapproval.
“The great news is, we have until the end of the legislative session, in January 2014, to do it,” Goldstein said.
An override would require 54 votes in the Assembly and 27 in the Senate, with Republican votes being key in both chambers to succeed.
The bill initially passed with 42 votes in the Assembly and 24 in the Senate.
Though it’s been said that turning a Christie veto around is no small task, state Sen. President Stephen M. Sweeney believes it’s not far-fetched.
“We were three votes short of an override [in the Senate],” said Sweeney, D-3, of West Deptford Township. “We’ve got to work to be beyond the issues, and we have to work to get beyond the primaries.”
After speaking with a select number of Republicans, Sweeney said he believes they voted along with Christie because they felt their seats in office were “threatened.”
Others believe Christie’s swift veto was a politically savvy move to ensure his conservative supporters stay in his ring if he were to consider a presidential race in 2016.
“We’re going to go to work. We’ve already shown enormous growth in two years,” proclaimed Sweeney, the poster child for political evolution as far as many gay-marriage supporters are concerned. “This is not an impossible task.”
When a similar bill was considered two years earlier, then-Gov. Jon Corzine pledged to sign it before leaving office. But Sweeney abstained from voting at the time and perhaps directly aided in the measure’s defeat — a move he now claims to be one of the biggest regrets of his life.
The Senate also churned out 10 fewer votes in favor of gay marriage just two years earlier.
Though Sweeney happens to be a product of the Catholic church which opposes gay nuptials, the Senate leader has emphasized that the issue of legalizing gay nuptials doesn’t fall into the realm of religion.
“This is a civil rights issue,” Sweeney has repeatedly said. “And I found that most people don’t even care. They’re more concerned with gas prices and paying their bills.”
In 2006, New Jersey legalized civil unions, a move which was supposed to provide the same legal protections, benefits and recognition to committed gay couples as married heterosexual couples have.
Along with his veto, however, Christie proposed the creation of an ombudsman to ensure compliance with the civil union law. It’s widely believed that civil unions haven’t accomplished what they were created to do, according to what the equal rights organization Lamda Legal has been arguing on behalf of many.
In June 2011, under the representation of Lamda Legal, seven gay couples and their children who claim to have been harmed by the discrepancies of civil unions filed a lawsuit in New Jersey Superior Court demanding that New Jersey recognize gay marriage.
The couples testify that when it comes to insurance offices, workplace benefits and hospital emergency rooms, a marriage license always trumps a “civil union,” whether it’s because of a lack of education or discrimination.
In November, the court ruled that Lambda Legal could proceed with a claim that the concept of civil unions violates the constitutional “equal protection” clause.
As the result of a ruling last Tuesday, the court will allow Lambda Legal to proceed with both a state and federal equal protection claim.
“We are pleased that the New Jersey Superior Court will allow us to show how civil unions fail to provide to same-sex couples the equality promised by both the New Jersey Constitution and the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution,” said Jon Davidson, legal director at Lambda Legal. “Having both a state and federal equal protection claim will only make our case stronger. We look forward to presenting a complete record of the discrimination that New Jersey’s same-sex couples and their children face because of their relegation to civil unions rather than marriage.”
But, if not a highly-contested issue of equality in the state or the country, could gay marriage beg the question of economics?
According to an impact study completed by the Williams Institute two years ago, extending marriage to same-sex couples would boost the state economy by more than $200 million, create and sustain 1,400 new jobs, and generate $15.1 million in new revenue for state and local governments within the first three years of legalization.
This potential economic boon is attributed to weddings costs, license fees, tax revenue, and the massive amount of tourism from wedding guests as well as out-of-state couples looking to settle down in the Garden State.
The study also suggests that approximately 35,000 same-sex couples from other states would come to tie the knot in New Jersey.
Even in a state with nearly $40 billion in debt, it’s uncertain whether money is enough of a reason for the legislature to override the governor’s veto.
The movement continues for many supporters, however, to grant all taxpayers in the state the right to wed under the law, despite any obstacles.
Six other states and the District of Columbia currently grant marriage licenses to same-sex couples.
“We’re keeping on top of this. We’re doing what we’ve always done. We’re educating people one-by-one, and same-sex couples are very encouraged by the passage of the bill and the Lamda Legal lawsuit,” said Goldstein.
“Obviously, we would like marriage equality today. But we know it will come sooner rather than later.”
http://www.nj.com/gloucester-county
By
Comments