How New York Can Get Around Sen. Ruben Diaz (But Possibly Won't)
 
 

newyorkstatemap2

Yesterday could have been a big day in New York. The State Assembly passed a same-sex marriage bill, just like it did in 2007, but this time with even more backers thanks to the efforts of Daniel O'Donnell. So why aren't we jumping up and down?

Because the New York State Senate doesn't care about all this progress. In fact, the Senate doesn't even have a date to vote on the bill, all because Democratic Majority Leader Malcolm Smith says he won't bring the bill up for a vote unless he knows he has the support for it — something he doesn't have us convinced he's even working on, thanks to the promise he made anti-gay Sen. Ruben Diaz.

Which means even with the Democrats having a majority (a slim 32-30), there will be no action on S.B. 4401, which has 19 sponsors; Smith is only a "supporter." But how could we get there? Excel wizard Nate Silver runs the numbers:

Based on recent public statements and press accounts, we count 5 Democrats — Shirley Huntley of Queens and George Onorato of Queens, Ruben Diaz of the Bronx, Darrel Aubertine of Cape Vincent, and William Stachowski of Buffalo — as definitively being opposed to the measure. We also count 7 Democrats as undecided, one of whom — David Valesky of Oneida — we characterize as leaning toward a no vote.

[...] The most plausible path to 32 votes involves picking up the 20 definite yes votes, plus the 5 Democrats and 7 Republicans that we characterize as truly undecided or leaning yes. Although a clean sweep of these votes would seem unlikely, there are some backup options in the form of 1 Democrat and 4 Republicans who we describe as leaning — but not definitively — against the bill.

Interestingly, notes Silver, if the Senate scored a 31-31 vote tie, the sitting Lt. Governor would make the tie breaking vote. Except since David Paterson was elevated to the top spot after Gov. Eliot Spitzer resigned, we have no Lt. Governor. And they call us sexual deviants.

(PLUS: Read why some State Assembly members changed their vote from no to yes on the same-sex marriage bill. Our favorite comes from Republican Fred Thiele, who said in a press release last week: "I didn’t support the bill in 2007 because I thought equal rights could be guaranteed through civil unions. Since then, more states have experimented with civil unions as separate but equal, only to find that discrimination persisted in health care and other areas. The only way to ensure equality is by giving all couples access to the same civil right — the right to marry.")

 
 
Fark Facebook Digg StumbleUpon Del.icio.us Reddit
Comments (11)

No. 1 · The Gay Numbers

The article seems confused. It's trying to make a negative point, but you provide nothing to back it up. Since you mention Silver, go back to see who is supporting what, and where Smith stands. Also, one point I am not certain about- I am not sure that its necessary for the leader of the Senate to work on the votes so long as there are forces and people working in the Senate on obtaining the vote. Is this customary to expect the leadership to work on the bill?

Posted: May 14, 2009 at 2:54 pm
No. 2 · Chitown Kev

If there is a tie vote, who can break the tie?

Posted: May 14, 2009 at 3:15 pm
No. 3 · petted

@Chitown Kev: Currently no one until a new Lt. Governor is elected.

Posted: May 14, 2009 at 3:40 pm
No. 4 · KCinDC

A tie vote means the legislation didn't get a majority, so no legislation passes.

Posted: May 14, 2009 at 4:43 pm
No. 5 · Cam

Bring it up for a vote. I want to know who votes against us so I can donate money to their opponents in the next election.

Posted: May 14, 2009 at 5:03 pm
No. 6 · Bruno

Even Nate's info is a little bit off…for instance, Huntley has been saying she's looking at the issue and is therefore not a definite "no." However, the chances of this passing the senate there this year are close to nil, so we probably won't see it up for a vote.

I think too much is being made of Smith's deal with the Diaz Diablo. He just doesn't want to bring a bill up for a vote if it would fail, which it would, I'm sorry to say.

Posted: May 14, 2009 at 6:20 pm
No. 7 · daftpunkydavid

i, for one, want to keep hope alive. it won't be easy. the nys legislature is never easy to navigate, is always lobbied behind closed doors for some reason, and is so non-transparent, it's crazy.

i do have some faith in alan van capelle of espa, o'donnell, duane, glick and the rest. i do wish sometimes that the eliot the steamroller spitzer were still the governor. but paterson makes up in genuine and heartfelt feelings what he misses in authority over his own flock at albany. that must count for something.

in any case this rests upon us to be achieved. please contact your lawmakers. donate to espa if you can. but most importantly contact your lawmakers and tell them to support marriage equality now. especially if you're a constituent of one of these legislators: http://andrewsullivan.theatlan.....rkers.html

Posted: May 14, 2009 at 7:23 pm
No. 8 · An Other Greek

Unseat Ruben Diaz.

He wants a fight?

Ruben Diaz must go.

——————————–

Posted: May 14, 2009 at 11:46 pm
No. 9 · Rob

@An Other Greek: When is Ruben Diaz next up for reelection? Is there a serious chance of a primary challenge?

Posted: May 15, 2009 at 12:51 am
No. 10 · mgh

Anyone know NY parliamentary rules? What happens if it's 30-29? Can we just convince some people who don't feel so strongly to just not show up? Plenty of Assemblypeople didn't show up…

Posted: May 15, 2009 at 2:17 am
No. 11 · CHIP

@mgh:

In case you never got your answer, one needs 32 votes in the Senate to pass a bill (if there was a Lt. Governor, a 31-31 tie would be broken by the Lt. Governor.)

Posted: Jul 4, 2009 at 1:28 am
Leave a Comment

It's easier to leave comments when you register for an account. It's quick.

Already have an account? Then log in!

By posting, you agree to our Comments Policy.

 
 
Scroll Posts
Queerty Home | Advertise | Copyright 2009 Jossip Initiatives