2009 U.S. Conference of Mayors

June 12-16th will mark the 77th United States Conference of Mayors Annual Meeting, a conference designed to set and propose and discuss urban and suburban policy amongst many other goals. Mayors from around the country will meet and discuss/vote on over 100 proposals ranging from public transit to green energy and, for the first time (I believe), marriage equality.

Meet Resolution #46, as proposed by Mayors Sam Adams (Portland), David Cicilline (Providence), and Christopher Cabaldon (West Sacramento) (full proposal list here -- warning: big file and PDF format!):

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that The U.S. Conference of Mayors endorses the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, the Military Readiness Enhancement Act, the Uniting American Families Act, and the Matthew Shepard Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that The U.S. Conference of Mayors supports marriage equality for same-sex couples, and the recognition and extension of full equal rights to such unions, including family and medical leave, tax equity, and insurance and retirement benefits, and opposes the enshrinement of discrimination in the federal or state constitutions.

It is a strongly wordy pro-LGBTQ proposal from some (maybe not so unexpected) friends from around the country. Now, these proposals, if passed, are not binding and do not require anybody to act on them. Rather, they are just political posturing and statements meant to influence national change. Most of the proposals, in fact, are easy "duh's" -- it's hard to vote against greening streets, improving education, and reducing crime. Very few are really groundbreaking, in fact, which is why this one slipped in is such a surprise, to my mind.

I think it's probably a little more divisive than 95% of those on the list, and I'm curious to know just how many -- and which ones -- will sign on.

And I think it's important to send Mayor Mallory our request that he vote for this proposal, don't you? Considering that this weekend is Cincinnati's Pride, I think it would be especially poignant to have a ringing endorsement of both LGBTQ national policies and marriage equality (though it would have been nice to separate them, as more could sign onto ENDA, I think, than marriage... especially through the South).

Don't know how to get ahold of Mayor Mallory? Simple. Just email him -- mark dot mallory at cincinnati-oh dot gov. (If you can't read anti-spam email addy's, just click here to see it... or say it outloud, it should make sense.)

RI/PA: The next marriage fights?

With the addition of four states into the marraige equality family over the last few months, the question becomes: what next? With 29 state constitutions specifically banning same-sex marriage, 19 of which (including Ohio) ban marriage and other forms of recognition, what do we do? There are two states left with no statutes or amendments defining marriage as between a man and a woman -- Rhode Island and New Mexico. We'll get to that in a moment. 

Ten states only have a statute passed by the legislature defining marriage -- HI (some rights granted), WA (everything but marriage), MD (some rights granted, possible out of state marriages recognized), WY, MN, IL (civil union bill recently died), IN, PA, WV, and NC. In theory, these are the states where the DOMA's can be overturned by legislative action, which would be the next big step before we start taking on voter-enacted laws (only California looks likely at this point, with recent polls showing an even split at 47-48 for-against).

Daniel Leach (D), State Senator in Pennsylvania, will be introducing a bill next week allowing same-sex marriage in that state. In short: the next round of states is starting to teeter, and this round is harder than the last. Especially because a Constitutional amendment has also been proposed in the state banning same-sex marriage. *sigh* Really? Again: I thought we were done with those. But yet we carry on.

Meanwhile, in Rhode Island, protests are planned at the statehouse asking the legislators to pass a same sex marriage ... after 12 years of action. (On the flip side, they haven't moved against marriage, either.) The state seems to be torn between the relative progressive nature of the populace, and the overwhelming conservative leadership and the influence of the Roman Catholic church. In short: don't expect anything anytime soon, but it's nice to dream, innit?

And, finally, nothing is happening in New York but everyone is acting like it has.

As for New Mexico, that final state with no laws where you'd think it would be easy to squeeze through considering it's relative supportive atmosphere... zero. Zilch. Nada. Well, sort of maybe... in 2009, the statehouse defeated a DP law. So, maybe not completely supportive. *sigh*

Whither Rhode Island?

Let's re-examine the "6 by 12" strategy shall we? 

The hope is to have full marriage equality in all 6 New England states by 2012. Maine -- done (provisionally). Vermont -- done (with seemingly no challenges coming). New Hampshire -- sitting on the governor's desk. Massachusetts -- done (long time). Connecticut -- done (the legislature just followed up the ruling with a law). Rhode Island...

...well...

Rhode Island is the final hold out. Sure, New Hampshire is not guaranteed, and we might see a vote come up in Maine, but why Rhode Island? I have this image in my head of a semi-large liberal city, much like Portland, snuggled up against a placcid bay where people care more about lobsters than who is porking whom. But a recent AP story indicates that the heavy Roman Catholic influence in the state may leave the Ocean State as the last hold out for marriage inequality in that section of the world for years to come. Even were the legislature to pass a bill, Republican and Catholic Governor Dan Carcieri will not sign it. That takes us all the way to January 2011, when he is term-limited out. The Democratic primary field is pro-marriage, but no word yet on the Republican nominees (don't hold your breath). 

Marriage Equality Rhode Island (MERI) is trying, though. The marriage equality bill is going to be heard in the House this Wednesday the 13th (for the text of H5744, click here).

It's not enough, though, for Cassandra Ormiston, who was one of the two women would tried to get their Massachusetts marriage ended in Rhode Island. For years, she has been working to get a divorce, but the Supreme Court of the state said no. She's starting her own one woman movement -- Equality Rising (no website yet) -- to push faster, harder, stronger. Ormiston is disappointed with the glacial pace of the movement and tired of the "patience" line she's being fed. I can't say I blame her. 

But I don't see how this can happen yet, though we were sure NH was dead in the water. 

So, perhaps, there is still a chance.

Maine Marriage Equality!

As my friend said via text message today: Gay Marriage! Gay Marriage for everyone!

Likely, though, the equal marriage bill that was signed by Gov. John Baldacci (D) will go into referendum, but we shall see if the Maine Family Policy Council can collect the 55,000 signatures necessary to take it to the voters. That has only been done 27 times since 1910. For now, the law goes into effect in September.

Thank you, Governor Baldacci, and congratulations, Mainers!

Of additional interest, New Hampshire's equal marraige bill got back through the Senate with, again, a slim margin -- 178-167 -- and is sitting on Gov. John Lynch's (D) desk, who has not yet said if he will sign it or not. (I accidentally said he was a Republican yesterday.)

Also, the New York Assembly could take up the marriage equality bill anyday, and New Jersey is poised to make the attempt in the coming weeks, with advocates saying it could be done this year.

That leaves Rhode Island in that section of the world...

National Gay News Roundup

With all the stuff that's been happening lately, I feel like I've been lax in my news duties. Between Smitherman, rallies/marches, gay marriage, etc. etc. etc... well, everything else got drowned out. I wanted to at least give y'all some links to news stories that have popped up on the web just over the last day to give you a taste of what's going on in the world:

• Out magazine put out its top 50 out media celebrities, and include two non-out individuals -- Barry Diller and Matt Drudge. Drudge is the one who is actively denying it. Ironically enough, Anderson Cooper is saying nothing. Did he come out and I missed it? Many strange and interesting choices on that list, btw. Worth a look.
• 19-year old Spenser Vogt was killed after he went to hook up with a man he met on a chat room. Lee Carl Banks eventually confessed to the murder and told the authories where the body was found. Seriously, guys, this is becoming a problem.
• Rhode Island -- marked as one of the next possible states to pass equal marriage -- will have a loud new anti-marriage voice... its governor who will be coming out against a media campaign targeted equality swing states.
• Maryland's DP law may be expanding to allow exemptions for inheritance taxation.
• Texas Christian University is offering a dorm that focuses exclusively on LGBT and supportive individuals -- entitled "DiversCity Q." Colleges offer dorm environments where individuals can live with people with similar interests. I don't know about you, but a gay dorm would be a lot of problems for me.
• Former UK PM Tony Blair is urging the Catholic Church to rethink their attitudes towards LGBT individuals. Seriously. I like the language he uses.
• Rick Warren -- who apparently did not support Prop 8? what? -- says that stopping gay marriage is not a priority. Instead, he would like to focus on other issues, including genocide and poverty. Didn't I say this a long time ago when the Rick Warren controversy came up during the inauguration? Meh. Old sour grapes. :-)
• Other states, post-Iowa, DC, and Vermont, are starting to assess their own chances at passing equal marriage laws, or defeating current anti laws. Don't believe me? The New York Times thinks so. How long before Ohio, I wonder?
• Columbia, Missouri has passed a domestic partner registry with some actual teeth in it, but not a lot. YEA!

And that's all I got for you this morning. Kisses!

Gay Couples Better than Straight Couples?

It's an oldie, from June 2008, but my friend BadEvan brought it up in relationship to the Committee hearings in Vermont about the equal marriage bill.

From the NYT:

The stereotype for same-sex relationships is that they do not last. But that may be due, in large part, to the lack of legal and social recognition given to same-sex couples. Studies of dissolution rates vary widely.

After Vermont legalized same-sex civil unions in 2000, researchers surveyed nearly 1,000 couples, including same-sex couples and their heterosexual married siblings. The focus was on how the relationships were affected by common causes of marital strife like housework, sex and money.

Notably, same-sex relationships, whether between men or women, were far more egalitarian than heterosexual ones. In heterosexual couples, women did far more of the housework; men were more likely to have the financial responsibility; and men were more likely to initiate sex, while women were more likely to refuse it or to start a conversation about problems in the relationship. With same-sex couples, of course, none of these dichotomies were possible, and the partners tended to share the burdens far more equally.

While the gay and lesbian couples had about the same rate of conflict as the heterosexual ones, they appeared to have more relationship satisfaction, suggesting that the inequality of opposite-sex relationships can take a toll.

“Heterosexual married women live with a lot of anger about having to do the tasks not only in the house but in the relationship,” said Esther D. Rothblum, a professor of women’s studies at San Diego State University. “That’s very different than what same-sex couples and heterosexual men live with.”

The results of the Vermont hearings are as "on the edge of your seat" worthy, I think, as any of the court cases have been. We may pass an equal marriage bill through our elected representatives.

That's a beautiful thing.

And next, Maine. Rhode Island and New Hampshire seem to be stalled in committee... Though we're all still waiting on the Iowa Supreme Court to make a ruling.

California and New Hampshire

In case you've lived under a rock...

... you probably know that California's Supreme Court is hearing arguments about gay marriage again. This time, whether or not Proposition 8 was legal to pass this year. Oral arguments start on Thursday. The only reason I bring it up is this: a piece in the LA Times that does a great job talking about the legal issues surrounding this challenge. I have been decidedly ignorant on the legal issues being thrown around, so it was an excellent and informative primer in case you were interested.

What you may not have heard...

... on the back of the 6 by 12 campaign, and by the multitudes of New England equal marriage bills being proposed, the New Hampshire legislature is considering a bill to open up civil unions to heterosexual couples. Really? "We're going to create a special class for you homosexuals, but not let you into our club, but now we're going to let us into your special class." I don't mind, but, come on.

In related news, I have it from a person in the know, that the likely first state to legislatively pass an equal marriage bill will be Maine, followed probably by New Hampshire or Vermont, and finally Rhode Island. And most of those before then end of 2010.

Random Gay News Round-Up

...well, not really. Just a couple things this morning.

Because I'm a righteous and self-important queer blogger, imagine my enthusiasm when I read the piece in the Washington Post about the growing influence of gay bloggers on the political world. It focuses on the ever fabulous Pam's House Blend, but also mentions some other friends of this blog (including Bilerico):

In the past, someone like Spaulding would have been relegated to the sidelines. She doesn't work for national gay rights organizations such as the Human Rights Campaign or the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation. She lives with her partner, Kate, an audiologist, in Durham, far from San Francisco, New York or Washington, where gay activism has been historically based. But now she's helping shape the agenda, one voice in a chorus of sometimes dissonant, sometimes harmonious, often in-your-face voices that is pushing established gay groups and redefining the meaning of grass-roots action in this new media age...

"For me, blogging has been about looking outside my own lens. If it wasn't for reading blogs, for example, I wouldn't know as much as I know now about transgender issues," Spaulding says. "At first I thought, 'I'm not transgender. This is not my issue.' But then you read about it, you make the connections and you realize that, yes, I'm a part of that, too."

It's an interesting article that has highlighted a lot of the stuff that has happened over the past few months amongst gay bloggers -- including the Rick Warren debacle and the JoinTheImpact movement. It's well done, over all.

And just a few things on marriage: the New York Times calls for an actual vote (preferably a vote in the affirmative) for equal marriage in Rhode Island. The same could be said for New York State. Illinois has an equal marriage bill introduced. And financial analysts predict that equal marriage in Maine could bring about $60million to the state's economy for same-sex nuptials. I feel like we're in a race for the first legislatively-passed equal marriage law.

Oh, and the Utah State Senator Buttars thing goes on... the ass. Someone is finally pointing out that the man is a distraction and taking away from real work. The same could be said for the entire legislature who, apparently, hates gays just so much.

Six By Twelve: Update

For those who don't know, Six by Twelve (term coined by Joe.My.God.) is a strategy to make New England a full marriage equality zone by 2012.

Rhode Island just started down their path, and is officially the last New England state that we had not heard from in the quest for marriage equality. (Mass -- done; Conn -- done; VT/NH/ME -- laws proposed, court cases ready)

Welcome RI to the fray:

The fight for marriage equality in the Ocean State will be front and center on Thursday,February 26, as the Senate Judiciary Committee hears testimony pertaining to two bills - one prohibiting same-sex marriage and the other granting equal access to marriage for same-gender couples.

S0136, introduced by anti-gay Senator Leo Blais (R-Coventry), would amend the state constitution to limit the definition of marriage as "the legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife."

In addition, the measure would prohibit the state from recognizing same-sex marriages performed in other states.

Blais has sponsored similar legislation in the past and has been an outspoken opponent of same-sex marriage.

S0147, introduced by Senators Rhoda Perry (D-Providence), Susan Sosnowski (D-New Shoreham), Juan Pichardo (D-Providence), Joshua Miller (D-Cranston), and Charles Levesque(D-Bristol), would allow the state to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. The bill also guarantees protection of freedom of religion in marriage, stating:

"No court or other state or local governmental body, entity, agency or commission shall compel, prevent, or interfere in any way with any religious
institution’s decisions about marriage eligibility within that particular faith’s tradition."

"Anything less than full marriage equality is discrimination," Miller said. "This is about your friends, neighbors, and relatives being discriminated against."

Oh yea, kids, there are two bills. My guess, though, is that people will feel its an all-or-nothing type thing and then some "brilliant" "compromising" statesman will step forward and say, "I have a solution! Let's do civil unions!"

And we all know how that goes.

But seriously, folks, what's with all the "discrimination" talk coming from the Christian right. This from the religion that has persecuted everyone -- including themselves -- throughout history? Now you're concerned about a little man-on-man, or woman-on-woman love that threatens to destroy your world? Seriously. No one is discriminating against you.

Just laughing at you.

After all, it seems like all the big couples stirring up this marriage trouble end a few weeks after they get wed, so, no big deal, right? Oh, right, divorce bad too...

In other news, apparently the threat of death because of someone's sexual orientation is not enough to grant someone asylum in this country. Details, no doubt.