Illinois Senate Marriage Equality Debate

[Ninja108]

Not a surprise sadly. THe same scenario is being played out in Rhode Island as well. Just because someone has a D next to their name doesn't mean they'll be on board with marriage equality.

[JockBoy87]

Not a surprise sadly. THe same scenario is being played out in Rhode Island as well. Just because someone has a D next to their name doesn't mean they'll be on board with marriage equality.

And Rhode Island to boot; Democrats have an 84% majority there.

I think there will be primary challenges in Rhode Island if nothing happens, although Paiva-Weed has promised a debate.

[scream4ever]

The bill may have to be amended to afford stronger religious exemptions (they should look to us here in Minnesota for help in that area!). Remember that this survey is based off speculation, not what some lawmakers have explicity stated. The good news is that a second Republican seems to be supportive.

[scream4ever]

Some possible positive developments:

http://chicagophoenix.com/2013/03/01...l-on-the-line/

[JockBoy87]

The bill may have to be amended to afford stronger religious exemptions (they should look to us here in Minnesota for help in that area!). Remember that this survey is based off speculation, not what some lawmakers have explicitly stated. The good news is that a second Republican seems to be supportive.

It is of no import. Challenges to religious freedom would never stand in a court of law anyway. But if that is what is politically required to pass the bill, be my guest. It will just pass again in the senate, and maybe even pick up a vote or two.

Some possible positive developments:

http://chicagophoenix.com/2013/03/01...l-on-the-line/

That's how it's done. Good old fashioned hard work.

For the average person, it isn't all that hard. A one minute phone call. A one minute email. A one minute letter. But if 1000 people do it in one district, that has a huge impact.

[Ninja108]

And Rhode Island to boot; Democrats have an 84% majority there.

I think there will be primary challenges in Rhode Island if nothing happens, although Paiva-Weed has promised a debate.

I think so as well. The only reason Paiva-Weed has promised a debate is because she knows with the tide turning so fast,especially in the NE that there's no way she and others can keep putting it off or shelving the bill. THis isn't Wyoming or the South.
BUt make no mistake,she is one of the key reasons gay marriage isn't in Rhode Island right now and she should be called out on it.

[JockBoy87]

I think so as well. The only reason Paiva-Weed has promised a debate is because she knows with the tide turning so fast,especially in the NE that there's no way she and others can keep putting it off or shelving the bill. THis isn't Wyoming or the South.

I agree. Opposed to even four years ago, a Democrat using her office to block progress on this bill would damage the party in Rhode Island. The session goes on until the end of June, and nobody knows when leadership will get the ball rolling in the Senate.

[Ninja108]

http://www.chicagomag.com/Chicago-Ma...l-in-Illinois/

Here's a list of all the people needed to be reached. And myself and others have pointed out,just because a person had a D next to their name,doesn't mean they will support same sex marriage rights.
Quite a few D's among the no votes.

[JockBoy87]

http://www.chicagomag.com/Chicago-Ma...l-in-Illinois/

Here's a list of all the people needed to be reached. And myself and others have pointed out,just because a person had a D next to their name,doesn't mean they will support same sex marriage rights.
Quite a few D's among the no votes.

That list is getting good circulation across the blogosphere. It is especially important for people from those districts to email and call. Still, everyone should try to do as many as you can, all 118 if possible, but definitely from the 20 toss ups. We will need 17 of them!!

Illinoisans can use this site to contact their representative: http://www.illinoisunites.org/

We will likely need several Republicans, because it looks as though we will get a smaller percentage of Democrats than we did in the Senate.

[chrisrobin]

.
From the Mayor of Chicago:

Illinois Gay Marriage: Rahm Emanuel Says 'Clock Is Ticking' On Marriage Equality Bill


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...hp_ref=chicago

How 'bout it Illinois!

[scream4ever]

Something tells me that the Republicans are going to save this bill. Remember earlier how they did say that they wanted the bill passed fast and out of the way.

[T-Rexx]

.
From the Mayor of Chicago:

Illinois Gay Marriage: Rahm Emanuel Says 'Clock Is Ticking' On Marriage Equality Bill


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...hp_ref=chicago

How 'bout it Illinois!

Why is Rahm giving us the finger in the picture at that link?

[Ninja108]

In a funny way,the Republicians very well may save this bill,purely for political purposes. They want the governor's mansion back and if they can get the votes in,Quinn won't be able to use this as an issue.

P.S. sad that our rights should be determined this way to begin with.

[JockBoy87]

Guys, don't assume that everything possible is being taken care of. The team in Illinois is working hard, but they cannot do it without our support. Our opponents are trying to scream down the bill with messages and phone calls.

Citizens of Illinois, it is especially important for you to make just a 30-second call or email to your representative in the House. All you have to say is that you support Senate Bill 10 (believe me the secretary will know which one it is), that you are from Illinois, and anything else you want to add.

Harris says that we are "very" close to getting the required support, and the bill may come up for a vote this week.

Remember, many Democrats in Illinois are from conservative rural areas bordering Missouri, Kentucky, and Indiana. We cannot count on their support. Urban and suburban Republicans will be absolutely necessary for passage. While we can afford to lose a dozen Democrats, it is likely we will need more than just one or two of Republicans.

[Rolyo85]

Ugh, it's times like these that make me really frustrated that I'm not a citizen yet...

[JockBoy87]

Ugh, it's times like these that make me really frustrated that I'm not a citizen yet...

You can still say you are an Illinois resident. You have a say in the laws that affect you. Anyone regardless of citizenship can apply for a marriage or civil union in Illinois.

[Ninja108]

I have sent messages to the undecideds but if you live in these areas MAKE YOUR VOICE HEARD.

[JockBoy87]

Opponents think we're 10 votes short, which means it is probably less and we are close to the magic 60.

http://illinoisreview.typepad.com/il...-marriage.html

[JockBoy87]

Illinois seems to have numbered their districts starting from Chicago to the suburbs, and downstate, such that district 118 is at the southern tip of the state. In fact the first 35 districts are solid 'yes' votes.

After reading the above link, it looks like we have to concentrate the most on the following districts in order to gain passage:

Natalie Manley (D-98)
Sue Scherer (D-96)
Emily McAsey (D-85)
Stephanie Kifowit (D-84)
Rita Mayfield (D-60)
Ron Sandack (R-81)
Michelle Mussman (D-56)
Kay Hatcher (R-50)
Darlene Senger (R-41)
Fred Crespo (D-44)
Kelly Burke (D-36)

[JockBoy87]

House speaker says we are 12 votes short...

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2013/03/13...qual-marriage/

[Ninja108]

Sadly saw this coming. Too many undecided on the Democrats and Republicians side. And I'll say what I've said before. If the Catholic church and other religious groups want to get involved in politics like this,revoke their tax extempt status.

[scream4ever]

There are always several who don't publicly reveal how they will vote until it's time. Regardless, Harris says we are MUCH closer then that, and I trust his word more then the speaker.

[Ninja108]

we'll have to wait and see I guess.

[chrisrobin]

Sadly saw this coming. Too many undecided on the Democrats and Republicians side. And I'll say what I've said before. If the Catholic church and other religious groups want to get involved in politics like this,revoke their tax extempt status.

Remember: the Catholic and Mormon Church contributed heavily to approval of Prop. 8 in California. Revoke their tax exempt status? In the words of the illustrious Chris Wallace of Fox, "Not going to happen."

[JockBoy87]

We are getting closer to getting the votes according to Bernard Cherkasov, CEO of Equality Illinois.

He also added that a vote will likely be after the spring break ends on April 8.

[White Eagle]

The same thing is said about gay adoption, that as soon as we got the right to adopt jointly, then all the sudden gay men everywhere would be pressured to adopt children. Well that didn't happen, and neither will it happen on marriage.

It is also ironic that the people in the gay community opposing gay marriage because it is too traditional are all so worried about being pressured to be traditional.

Others and I are not going to stop advocating equality for the gay community just so you and others can be *assured* that you will never feel hypothetical pressure that has not materialized in other areas of gay rights.

Ya know after all that you do to help the gay community for us, I can really say I appreciate what you do. Now after today.......... no I can't do that to you. PM to follow.

[Ninja108]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...r=Gay%20Voices

This fool could very well hurt the gay marriage debate in Illinois. Expect the anti-gay people to milk this for all it's worth.

[scream4ever]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...r=Gay%20Voices

This fool could very well hurt the gay marriage debate in Illinois. Expect the anti-gay people to milk this for all it's worth.

Eh, the FRC shooting didn't kill any of the ballot efforts in 2012. I expect this won't do any real harm to the effort.

[JockBoy87]

Prop 8 and DOMA are both brain dead and on life support. Nate Silver projects almost 60% support in Illinois by 2016. The force of circumstances is going to smother Illinois's opposition one way or another. A couple of death threats by idiots on our side aren't going to put a dent in that.

[scream4ever]

Here in Minnesota everyone was freaking out about the glitter bombing craze and how it was going to kill support for our side.

[JockBoy87]

Here in Minnesota everyone was freaking out about the glitter bombing craze and how it was going to kill support for our side.

LMFAO!! Seriously... a glitter bomb? That's kind of silly actually.

[chrisrobin]

Prop 8 and DOMA are both brain dead and on life support. Nate Silver projects almost 60% support in Illinois by 2016. The force of circumstances is going to smother Illinois's opposition one way or another. A couple of death threats by idiots on our side aren't going to put a dent in that.

Recent history has taught us that it's counter-productive to contradict Nate Silver's numbers!

[JockBoy87]

Recent history has taught us that it's counter-productive to contradict Nate Silver's numbers!

The man is freakishly accurate, down to 2% error margin.

[Rolyo85]

Yeah, I would believe him.

[Ninja108]

I would as well..no surprise Alabama and good ol Miss will be among the last ones to allow gay marriage

[JockBoy87]

I would as well..no surprise Alabama and good ol Miss will be among the last ones to allow gay marriage

They were the last ones to repeal interracial marriage, and slavery, respectively.

[GiancarloC]

They were the last ones to repeal interracial marriage, and slavery, respectively.

LOL... didn't one just recently strike slavery off the books? Claiming it was just a clerical error? I believe it was Mississippi. Talk about an embarrassment.

[JockBoy87]

LOL... didn't one just recently strike slavery off the books? Claiming it was just a clerical error? I believe it was Mississippi. Talk about an embarrassment.

That's what I just said yeah [slavery...respectively].

Mississippi repealed it in the 90s, but failed to notify the US Archives.

[Ninja108]

There are good people,even in the BIble Belt states but sadly just as many bigots too.

[JockBoy87]

^^^

It's white Evangelicals who are the most intractable, and ultimately will be the last roadblock. It is the group with the slowest growing support, and you find them in highest concentrations in the south.

[RazorzEdge88]

Recent history has taught us that it's counter-productive to contradict Nate Silver's numbers!

He's been wrong on marriage equality (as he admitted in this latest post - they're a revision from the last time he tried this), and he's likely wrong again this time.

He's basing a lot of these calculations on conjecture rather than hard polling, which is hard to do with a complex social issue like this.

[Telstra]

The feed is pretty choppy but here is the link to live coverage of the Senate debate today.

http://www.ilga.gov/senate/audvid.asp#

Illinois passed civil unions two years ago, but Democrats are already pushing an equal marriage bill expected to pass into law this year. Senator Heather Steans filed the bill earlier this year, with a successful committee vote 9-5. The Illinois Senate has a Democratic supermajority 40-19. The Democrats have a majority in the House as well, 71-47.

Hopefully a vote will follow today.

The site looks cheap, and why not everything is in the middle of the screen ?

[Ninja108]

Sad to say but I agree with Razor. I fear it will be another 20-30 years before we see equality in all the states.

[RazorzEdge88]

Sad to say but I agree with Razor. I fear it will be another 20-30 years before we see equality in all the states.

That's not really what I meant. XD I just think Silver is wrong on certain individual states, particularly in the way he orders their level of support, and his projections are fairly unsubstantiated by data. Which is a shame because he is incredibly accurate on candidate elections, but there just isn't enough data to make an accurate projection system for ssm and I wish he'd just stop. Moreover, I wish everyone else would stop treating it as gospel just because he's Nate Silver.

You may or may not be right about the delay in equality in all states, but that statement kind of contradicts your previous statements about the Court facing an inevitable confrontation with the question of marriage equality across the country. I agree with that reasoning more; with cases like Jackson, Sevcik, etc. making their way through the system, SCOTUS will be met head-on with ssm whether they like it or not. I think, if forced to make a decision on this, Justice Kennedy ultimately sides with us.

[JockBoy87]

Sad to say but I agree with Razor. I fear it will be another 20-30 years before we see equality in all the states.

30 years is about right for Alabama and Tennessee, and so on. However, I think a majority of states is possible by 2020, which will include AZ, MI, OH, and MT.

It also depends on when the GOP really cracks on this. That is unpredictable, but it won't be next year. The Conservative Party has in the UK, split right down the middle. It is an ugly mess, but a critical bloc of Republicans is what will be needed to make political progress in the south.

Also, Nate Silver's projections are based, partially, on the population of white Evangelicals in each state. I disagree that having an error rate means someone is unreliable.

[RazorzEdge88]

Also, Nate Silver's projections are based, partially, on the population of white Evangelicals in each state. I disagree that having an error rate means someone is unreliable.

And given the complexity of religious pluralism in this country, that's a horribly unscientific and unreliable way of calculating such a thing.

[JockBoy87]

And given the complexity of religious pluralism in this country, that's a horribly unscientific and unreliable way of calculating such a thing.

That's why I said partially. Other groups have been polled too, including Jews, Catholics, Mormons, Agnostics, and Atheists.

[RazorzEdge88]

That's why I said partially. Other groups have been polled too, including Jews, Catholics, Mormons, Agnostics, and Atheists.

There are too many factors at play to simplify this so much. He has Iowa really low, for instance. It's unlikely, after over 4 years of marriage equality, that Iowans would theoretically vote against marriage equality before 2016 given a few polls from that state showing that people there are fine with it.

You have to ask things like: does this state already have marriage equality? If so, how long have they had it? What's the LGBT population in that state? Are there a lot of displaced residents of other states living in this state, and if so, which state(s) do they tend have lived in previously?

[JockBoy87]

There are too many factors at play to simplify this so much. He has Iowa really low, for instance. It's unlikely, after over 4 years of marriage equality, that Iowans would theoretically vote against marriage equality before 2016 given a few polls from that state showing that people there are fine with it.

I believe it.

The most recent PPP poll in February has it at 46-43. If it were necessary, I would not put marriage on the ballot in Iowa for at least another election cycle.

You have to ask things like: does this state already have marriage equality? If so, how long have they had it? What's the LGBT population in that state? Are there a lot of displaced residents of other states living in this state, and if so, which state(s) do they tend have lived in previously?

Of the reasons people state for support or opposition, none of those are ever reported. For example, nobody has ever said that they support it because the state has it, or that it is their geographic values. Instead, religion and knowing a gay person are the top two cited reasons, against and for, respectively.

You would think Florida would be so liberal with all those northerners flocking to the state, but it voted 62% to amend its constitution in 2008. North Carolina also has an influx of outsiders to its metro areas, same result. The reason, as I stated previously, it's white Evangelicals.

[RazorzEdge88]

Of the reasons people state for support or opposition, none of those are ever reported. For example, nobody has ever said that they support it because the state has it, or that it is their geographic values.

Of course it's not reported! These are things that weigh on people's psyche without them realizing it. Why do you think there were polls showing that Iowans were slightly in favor of marriage equality before most of the country? Because Iowa is a bastion of radical progressivism?