N.Y. Democrats May Skip Gay Marriage Vote

[Meeker Morgan]

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/29/nyregion/29marriage.html">N.Y. Democrats May Skip Gay Marriage Vote
The New York Times

ALBANY — After a pledge from New York Democratic leaders that their party would legalize same-sex marriage if they won control of the State Senate this year, money from gay rights supporters poured in from across the country, helping cinch a Democratic victory.

But now, party leaders have sent strong signals that they may not take up the issue during the 2009 legislative session. Some of them suggest it may be wise to wait until 2011 before considering it, in hopes that Democrats can pick up more Senate seats and Gov. David A. Paterson, a strong backer of gay rights, would then be safely into a second term.

Like this:

Get the governor elected by selling us out, because that will make it easier to get the law passed. Right?

Or sell us out again if necessary?

But wait, there's more:

And with a messy fight under way over who should be Senate majority leader — a fight threatening to fracture the thin Democratic Senate majority — even typically outspoken supporters of gay rights have become more measured about the issue.

Gotta get everything else out of the way. Then we can talk about your rights.

New York dammit! :evilfrown:

[mitchtv]

1. Welcome

To the back of the bus

[AndyTiedye]

5. Not the Back of the Bus, UNDER the Bus

[bluedawg12]

2. Are activists going to focus on the three dissident Dems and one open opponent ?

"Despite the fact that Democrats will hold 32 of the 62 Senate seats in the next legislative session, three dissident Democrats have not pledged their support for the would-be majority leader, Malcolm A. Smith. One of those senators, Rubén Díaz Sr., has specifically said he would not support a majority leader who would allow a same-sex marriage bill to come to the floor."

[TankLV]

3. oh god - not this shit again...!

yeah - WE are the fault of this SHIT...

without OUR vote - THEY wouldn't be in power now, would they?

if not now - WHEN is a "good time" to "upset people" to press for FULL EQUALITY?

YOU tell us - we're waiting...

One, two, five, ten, twenty, fifty, one hundred years?

Pick a number - any number - we're eager to hear your "wise" council...

[bluedawg12]

4. I guess we have to wait for a "perfect world" then, maybe, just maybe

gay issues won't be such a bother. :sarcasm:

[MNBrewer]

9. WHEN is a "good time" to "upset people" to press for FULL EQUALITY?

After the next election cycle, that's only two years away, right?:sarcasm:

[Meeker Morgan]

10. kick! n/t

[davidinalameda]

7. Rubén Díaz is a bigot of the first class

and if the Democrats lose him, they're going to have to make sure their ducks are in a row

[davidinalameda]

6. think about the DADT fight

I rather have them put this off for a while in order to make sure it passes than rather have some half-assed bill be introduced and defeated

[IndianaGreen]

8. If you really want someone that will fight for LGBT rights without compromise

Vote Red!

[t0dd]

11. Don't believe everything said in that article

I contacted Liz Krueger directly about the article, and here is her response:


Dear Todd,

Thank you for writing to me regarding your concerns about the recent NY Times article.

For the record, the reporter asked me if I thought that the Democrats would bring the same sex marriage bill to the floor of the Senate as one of our first bills in the new session.

I said that seemed unlikely, and that I certainly did not want us to risk having this be a bill brought to the floor without knowing we had the votes to pass it; because in Albany if something doesn't fly it can sometimes take a decade to get back on track...and we don't want to risk that situation.

I specifically said -- "we want to do it the right way, the way Danny O'Donnell moved this bill through the Assembly -- by reaching out to every member, addressing their concerns, making sure the votes were there. He even succeeded in getting Republican Assemblymembers to vote for the bill. That's what we need to do in the Senate...so I don't think we can deliver this in the first few months." Somehow my full quote never made it through writing/editing.

Also, I said I believed we could and would move this bill through before the end of our first session in the majority. The reporter never asked me about anyone pushing to hold off until after the 2010 elections. I don't know who else he was speaking with or where that came from.

I do think the California Proposition issue is making assorted groups re-think strategy....but never meant that quote to be used in the context of delaying moving forward in NYS through the legislative process or some perception that I was now reversing course based on the CA vote.

So, I am grown-up enough to know that what I say to any given reporter can and may be taken out of context...but did want to make sure that I was clear with you that I have not changed my position in support of same sex marriage in NYS and the importance of the legislature guaranteeing equal rights and protections to all!


Sincerely,

Liz Krueger

[bluedawg12]

14. So Liz Krueger is saying they are moving forward?

You qouted Liz Krueger:

"Also, I said I believed we could and would move this bill through before the end of our first session in the majority. The reporter never asked me about anyone pushing to hold off until after the 2010 elections. I don't know who else he was speaking with or where that came from."

Is there any source for this on the net? Maybe a clarification on her web site?

[t0dd]

15. That is what she told me

She didn't make an official public statement about this, but this was her response after I asked her about it. She generally replies to emails if you want to contact her yourself about it. But yeah, according to her, they are going to push for a vote during this session despite the rumors.

[bluedawg12]

16. If they push ahead I hope they have the votes, otherwise it's a token effort

and will fail and then quietly drift out of sight.

[t0dd]

17. Right..

Don't worry.. they won't vote on it unless the support is there, and it will definitely pass. Most democrats already support it (except for the notorious gang of three?), so they just need to convince a few Republican senators to be safe. I think with enough effort this is definitely possible.

[bluedawg12]

18. If NY Democrats pass gay marriage legislation that would be outstanding!

[Spryboy]

12. This is all due to one conservative religious bigot

The democrats, in attempting to put together a coalition, had to make this concession to one stupid, ignorant bigot in order to get him on board.

We should be targeting that individual for replacement in the next primary.

[bluedawg12]

13. That's right. This is the next fight and it seems our party is folding

frm pressure by a small group.

[Spryboy]

19. We need to target Ruden Diaz, among others...

An agreement not to bring gay marriage legislation for a vote in 2009 was part of a deal to reign in three rogue state senators - Pedro Espada Jr., Ruden Diaz, and Carl Kruger - to ensure a Democratic majority in the NYC Senate.

The main bone of contention with the 3 politicians was power sharing with Latino senators (especially those 3). The deal basically takes some of the majority leader's power and gives it to Espada.

Diaz, a raging homophobe and a bit of a nut job, is the one who was holding out for some guarantees about a gay marriage vote. So he got his way for the time being.

[bluedawg12]

20. That's Ruben Diaz, Sr.

There's a Jr. too.

>>Rubén Díaz Sr., has specifically said he would not support a majority leader who would allow a same-sex marriage bill to come to the floor.<<

Google this guy if you have a chance and the little dust up with money to charities going to his family?????

Here's one:

http://www.timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp?storyID=473854&category=STATE&newsdate=4/21/2006
Funds followed senator's kin
Charity lost taxpayer money after it stopped employing relatives of Ruben Diaz Sr.

>>By JAMES M. ODATO, Capitol bureau
First published in print: Friday, April 21, 2006

ALBANY -- In the past three years, Sen. Ruben Diaz Sr. and his son Assemblyman Ruben Diaz Jr. cut off state funding to a Bronx charity that stopped employing their relatives.
Afterward, they steered hundreds of thousands of dollars in taxpayer money to a different organization created by the senator and directed by his wife, according to state records and interviews.


The senator and presumably his son, Assemblyman Diaz, provided $940,000 to Christian Community Benevolent Association in the Bronx from 2003 through last year, the documents show.

Sen. Diaz, a minister, may have violated Senate guidelines for use of the funds, which are so-called "member item" expenditures. Member items come from a lump sum in the state budget each year of $200 million split among the Legislature and governor. The funds are shrouded in secrecy. Earlier this month, Gov. George Pataki vetoed the latest $200 million pot and lawmakers are planning to override him next week.<<

Also:
http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2008/11/state_sen_tom_duane_ruben_diaz.html

>>Tom Duane, the only openly gay New York state senator, says that Ruben Diaz Sr. is being "a little bit of a bully" by demanding that Democrats swear to him in writing that they won't try to pass a gay-marriage bill. Earlier this week, Diaz said he wouldn't caucus with them if they didn't. But Duane says that this simply is no longer the way to get things done in Albany, now that Malcolm Smith is in charge.

"It's absurd that Sen. Diaz thinks he can bully his way on this issue," Duane said. "I guess he thinks he hasn't been getting enough attention, so he feels need to bully his way to the forefront, but that's not going to fly in the Senate anymore. He'll get used to things running in a more democratic way."<<

.........

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruben_Diaz

>> Opposition to same-sex marriage
In 2007, as his party, led by Governor Eliot Spitzer and Lt. Governor David Paterson, sought to recognize gay marriage and expand rights for the LGBT community, Diaz was a vocal opponent of the gay marriage bill and was highly critical of Democratic support for the bill.<9> Senator Diaz's opposition to same-sex marriage continued in 2008, when he vowed to vote against same-sex marriage legislation <10> and participated (along with hundreds of clergy) in a pro-traditional-marriage "Power in the Pulpit" rally held by New Yorkers for Constitutional Freedoms<11> in the Legislative Office Building;<12> at the rally, Sen. Diaz was reportedly presented with over 15,000 petitions in support of traditional marriage.<13>


Gay community controversies

Opposition to Gay Games
In 1994, while on the Civilian Complaint Review Board, Diaz was critical of the city hosting the Gay Games, claiming that doing so would lead to an increase in AIDS cases and to wider acceptance of homosexuality by young people.<14> Diaz wrote that hosting the Games would lead children "to conclude that if there are so many gay and lesbian athletes then there is nothing wrong, nor any risks involved."<14> The other members of the Board issued a unanimous rebuke of Diaz’s comments.<14>


Criticism of Harvey Milk School policy
In 2003, Diaz filed a lawsuit to stop the expansion of the Harvey Milk School (a school for gay students who suffer discrimination in traditional settings), claiming that the school infringed the rights of heterosexual students.<15><16> The lawsuit was settled in 2006 after the school agreed not to discriminate against heterosexual students and not to restrict admission to students who identify as homosexual, and after the City of New York agreed that the school would be open to all students.<17><<

......