Wednesday, June 07, 2006
Gay Marriage Ban Fails in the Senate!
Normally here at the Factor we avoid political topics, but today we will be offering comprehensive coverage of the gay marriage debate in the Senate.
The Senate spent (wasted) the last three days debating a constitutional amentment to ban gay marriage. While the first sentence in the text was straightforward, the second sentence was so twisted that even the legal experts could not agree on its actual meaning. It could have potentially voided all current and future civil unions and domestic partnerships, and doomed gay marriage for ever.
The vote in the Senate was on cloture, not the amentment itself. 49 senators voted to proceed with the amentment, 48 voted against proceeding, and three (2 democrats and 1 republican) did not vote. Assuming those three would have voted as expected, the vote would have been 50-50. A couple of the senators who voted "yes" were actually against the ban, so they claim their "yes" vote was just procedural. (spin, spin?)
The last time this was before the Senate it failed with 48 in favor, 50 against and two not voting (Kerry and Edwards were busy campaigning at the time). Assuming those two would have voted against, this would have been 48 for, 52 against.
At first it looks like the supporters of banning gay marriage gained one vote. However, when you dig into the voting records at Senate.gov and compare the 2004 and 2006 votes, you discover that is not the case:
1) The Republicans gained more seats in the Senate after the 2004 elections. When those are factored in, the "Yes" block got five new "yes" votes in 2006 from the new Senators whose predecessors voted "no" in 2004. Also one "yes" vote in 2004 (a republican) was converted to a "No" in 2006 (new Demo senator Barack Obama in IL). So the "Yes" group gained a net of +4 because of the new senators coming in 2005, not because Senators changed their mind.
2) But this is the most important point: The "Yes" block lost two votes from 2004: Two republicans who voted "yes" in 2004, switched to "no" in 2006. The two switchers are very important to gay marriage: The powerful chair of the Judiciary Cmte Arlen Specter, and Gregg of New Hampshire who was pleasantly surprised by the smoothness of gay marriage in MA and the non-ramifications for New England (and his state) so he changed his mind. After all most of the New England Republicans voted against this, with Chaffee (RI) even supporting gay marriage (!).
3) Hagel who voted "yes" in 2004 did not vote in 2006 (he was travelling), so the "Yes" block lost another one of its 2004 "yes" votes, bringing the total to a net gain of +1. So they went from 48 to 49...
What is more important is point #2 above. From the group of Senators who voted both in 2004 and 2006, the "Yes" group lost two votes. This is great for Marriage Equality! But the debate is far from over: Next, the House is supposed to debate this next month (July-ish).
The O'Sneazy Factor would like to thank the following Senators for strongly supporting marriage equality on the Senate floor during the debate: Kennedy, Feingold, Boxer, Dayton, Durbin and Lautenburg.
A number of the other democrats were against the amendment but only supported marriage between a man and a woman. Some of them were probably worried about re-election, some may actually believe that...
The Senate spent (wasted) the last three days debating a constitutional amentment to ban gay marriage. While the first sentence in the text was straightforward, the second sentence was so twisted that even the legal experts could not agree on its actual meaning. It could have potentially voided all current and future civil unions and domestic partnerships, and doomed gay marriage for ever.
The vote in the Senate was on cloture, not the amentment itself. 49 senators voted to proceed with the amentment, 48 voted against proceeding, and three (2 democrats and 1 republican) did not vote. Assuming those three would have voted as expected, the vote would have been 50-50. A couple of the senators who voted "yes" were actually against the ban, so they claim their "yes" vote was just procedural. (spin, spin?)
The last time this was before the Senate it failed with 48 in favor, 50 against and two not voting (Kerry and Edwards were busy campaigning at the time). Assuming those two would have voted against, this would have been 48 for, 52 against.
At first it looks like the supporters of banning gay marriage gained one vote. However, when you dig into the voting records at Senate.gov and compare the 2004 and 2006 votes, you discover that is not the case:
1) The Republicans gained more seats in the Senate after the 2004 elections. When those are factored in, the "Yes" block got five new "yes" votes in 2006 from the new Senators whose predecessors voted "no" in 2004. Also one "yes" vote in 2004 (a republican) was converted to a "No" in 2006 (new Demo senator Barack Obama in IL). So the "Yes" group gained a net of +4 because of the new senators coming in 2005, not because Senators changed their mind.
2) But this is the most important point: The "Yes" block lost two votes from 2004: Two republicans who voted "yes" in 2004, switched to "no" in 2006. The two switchers are very important to gay marriage: The powerful chair of the Judiciary Cmte Arlen Specter, and Gregg of New Hampshire who was pleasantly surprised by the smoothness of gay marriage in MA and the non-ramifications for New England (and his state) so he changed his mind. After all most of the New England Republicans voted against this, with Chaffee (RI) even supporting gay marriage (!).
3) Hagel who voted "yes" in 2004 did not vote in 2006 (he was travelling), so the "Yes" block lost another one of its 2004 "yes" votes, bringing the total to a net gain of +1. So they went from 48 to 49...
What is more important is point #2 above. From the group of Senators who voted both in 2004 and 2006, the "Yes" group lost two votes. This is great for Marriage Equality! But the debate is far from over: Next, the House is supposed to debate this next month (July-ish).
The O'Sneazy Factor would like to thank the following Senators for strongly supporting marriage equality on the Senate floor during the debate: Kennedy, Feingold, Boxer, Dayton, Durbin and Lautenburg.
A number of the other democrats were against the amendment but only supported marriage between a man and a woman. Some of them were probably worried about re-election, some may actually believe that...
