Virginians, who will vote this November on a constitutional amendment excluding any "unmarried individuals" from "union, partnership or other legal status similar to marriage," live with an untested 2004 law prohibiting "civil unions, partnership contracts or other arrangements between persons of the same sex purporting to bestow the privileges or obligations of marriage."
Gay couples now fear (with some justification, say some family-law attorneys) that their shared ownership of homes and businesses could be cast in doubt if a state court feels the underlying contracts too closely mimic the intent of marriage. So it's no surprise that gays are beginning to flee the Old Dominion, reports the Washington Post:
...even though it is more expensive to live in the District or Maryland, where taxes are higher than in Virginia. One former Virginian who moved to the District was shocked to face a $14,000 recordation tax on the purchase of a $650,000 condo; the same tax in Virginia would have been less than $1,000, Johnson said. The buyer proceeded with the sale anyway.
People are not solely motivated by economic ends (although they are more so than liberals will admit); nevertheless, Virginia has succeeded in making even the confiscatory, redistributionist mecca of D.C. appear to be a more rational economic choice for gay people.
More. The Outright Libertarians blog has words of warning using the example of Alabama, which wasted millions on a failed campaign to attract Silicon Valley firms. A first-hand description of one unsuccessful pitch:
The Alabama rep was furious. "You're saying we have to accept that lifestyle to get investment," he fumed. He didn't understand that not harassing or targeting gays is not "accepting a lifestyle," but rather following the dictates of the Bill of Rights.
He insisted that Intel, Apple, AMD, Hewlett-Packard and other companies could simply force their employees to move to Alabama - he wasn't aware that most of the top marketing, strategy, design, engineering and finance people at all of those companies have standing offers for employment at competitors which they could take at any time.
He then insisted that the companies could move their heterosexual-only employees to Alabama. Ignoring the absurdity of such a proposition (can you imagine the HR implications?), he didn't understand (or care to understand) that often, gay employees are the decision-makers in such a scenario and would never go for it.
Priceless.
30 Comments for “Virginia Attacks Gay Couples’ Property Rights; Gays Flee.”
posted by Greg Capaldini on
I live in Virginia and I was appalled by these laws when they were instituted. I’ve sought the opinions of several legal experts, and none believes these laws will survive a constitutional challenge. As to the steep recordation tax, I believe that’s merely one of many points on which D.C. suffers by comparison, municipal services like law enforcement and infrastructure maintenance being key issues. Not every gay individual or couple owns real estate, the occasional demographic generalization notwithstanding, and I find Virginia to be the better bargain for those of us who rent.
posted by Randy R. on
Hey Greg!
It’s true that these laws should not survive a constitutional challenge. When has that ever stopped conservative activist judges, though? And do you want to be the test case, and expend thousands in legal fees just to find out? There is no guarantee that the conservative minds at the Virginia Supreme Court will favor gays — unless you really believe in the tooth fairy.
posted by Br. Katana for Reasoned Discussion on
This could be a great moment for other nearby states to poach citizenry from VA with a resonable ad campaign.
posted by etjb on
But, but I thought that Republicans just loved gays, and the only homophobes were the dirty, little liberals? 😉
posted by Bobby on
Puh-leeze! I live in Florida where gays are banned from adopting. That hasn’t stop South Beach and Fort Lauderdale from being gay meccas.
How easy is for some rich gays to say “ooh, I’m not gonna live in a homophobic state.”
Besides, a shared ownership of a business or a home has nothing to do with marriage. Very few companies are owned by solely one person, and sometimes two invididuals pool their money together to buy a house as an investment. Florida has plenty of empty apartments owned by speculators, case in point.
If I have to choose between making $45,000 in Miami and $25,000 in California, I choose Miami.
posted by Mark on
Fleing Virginia seems premature until the courts have ruled on the law in question.
posted by randy R. on
Uh, Bobby… you may want to actually read the proposed amendment that is up for a vote. It would ban all contracts between gay people. That means all the paperwork that gays have to go through to insure proper inheritance, survivorship, hospital visitation rights, living wills, even the ability to live together, would be illegal. This is particularly troublesome if a gay couple have kids: It puts their whole future in jeopardy.
posted by Xeno on
My parents currently live in Reston. When they moved there, I was very dissapointed that they couldn’t find a decent house in Montgomory County or even in the Diamond.
posted by Drew on
Don’t know. Nebraskans have a similar ban now know as section 29. Of course the ban was not challenged under the terms of property rights.
posted by Northeast Libertarian on
Fleing Virginia seems premature until the courts have ruled on the law in question.
Would you be willing to risk the integrity of your home, your bank account, your health, your partner’s health care (if on DP benefits), your children, etc. on the outcome of an as-yet-unknown court decision. . . while also suffering the imposition of this law until the court rules?
Neither would most other gay people. Not only will this law hollow out Virginia’s gay population (all the folks who can move will), it will decimate the Virginia economy.
What high-tech firm worth its salt would locate in a state which discriminates so thoroughly against gay people? It would shut down access to a large portion of the best design, engineering, software coding, marketing and advertising talent in the business.
The residents of Virginia who support this law, similar to residents of Ohio who pushed a similar law, are gleeful that “the gays are going to have to get out of town, we don’t want them here.” But they’re also, like their Ohio bretheren, going to be singing the blues when the economy commences a downward spiral from which it seems unable to recover.
The irony is that then, the state will demand huge transfer payments from other states via the federal government — demanding that the gay and gay-friendly taxpayers elsewhere subsidize their own stupidity. Here’s hoping they receive a giant “no friggin’ way” as an answer.
posted by Bobby on
“Uh, Bobby… you may want to actually read the proposed amendment that is up for a vote. It would ban all contracts between gay people.”
—Not really, it only closes the loopholes for any same-sex marriage in Virginia. Straigth men have been making contracts with other straight men for years. I doubt this law will affect them.
posted by Mark on
“It would ban all contracts between gay people. ”
I can’t believe any court would uphold that interpretation.
posted by MM on
The issue is not so much the banning of ALL contracts between gay people, but of contracts between gay persons that in some way approximate marriage, or seek to replicate rights/obligations that are incidents of marriage. So, two gay men may co-own a racehorse and have a contract that calls for splitting the horse’s earnings. Sounds OK; owning racehorses has nothing to do with marriage. But, it could well be a different matter when you look at joint bank accounts, co-owning a home in which a gay couple co-habitates, hospital visitation and medical decision arrangements, and all the other things that gay couples have to arrange by multiple separate legal documents because they lack access to marriage, civil unions, domestic partnerships, etc.
When I break all these things down individually, I wonder, which are intrinsic aspects of marriage, and which are not. That’s the question. And that is the question that judges will have to answer. And being a former Virginian, I can tell you that there are a lot of very conservative judges in the state who are quite sympathetic to anti-gay politics.
As well, one has to wonder why the language of both the statute and the amendment are so broad if the proponents only want to prevent same-sex marriage. While both laws may ultimately be unconstituitonal violations of private property and contracting rights, it could be a long, ugly battle for the gay folks of Virginia. And it is sad because it is so unnecessary.
posted by Northeast Libertarian on
one has to wonder why the language of both the statute and the amendment are so broad if the proponents only want to prevent same-sex marriage
Not really. It’s well-established that the people behind such laws well and truly hate gay and lesbian people and want them to suffer.
What’s amusing will be the shocked aftermath when California continues to prosper, despite its high taxes, while Virginia stagnates. California’s tax situation is suboptimal (to be charitable), but what gay individual or family with career ambitions is going to work in Virginia?
The Virginian bewilderment at the Californian success story will likely resemble the British incredulity at the same phenomenon — I finished watching a hilarious British “documentary” which portrayed the entire state as a deathtrap of mudslides, killer quakes and wildfires which are ready to consume the entire populace — AND there’s NO NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE! So why is California so prosperous compared to Britain then? They were desperately searching for the answer. . . two sides to the same coin when it comes to cluelessness about fostering and maintaining innovative environments which lead to economic success.
You need the gays and you need the brave and risktakers. The world’s got plenty of closed-minded bigots and people who value personal security and “sure things” over risk — and there’s a reason why there aren’t a lot of bigoted self-made tycoons of high tech or ones who always choose “the safe and steady option.”
posted by Bobby on
“But, it could well be a different matter when you look at joint bank accounts”
—Not necesarily, banks are private institutions, they decide to whom they can give joint bank accounts. Think about this, if I buy a car, I can get my boss to co-sign and unless his credit is bad, his signature will be acepted.
Look people, the world has better things to do than find ways to screw us over. We’re not th only subject of conversation.
posted by Northeast Libertarian on
banks are private institutions, they decide to whom they can give joint bank accounts
That’s completely incorrect. Not only are banks regulated as to who they may and may not provide accounts to, but the Virginia law arguably would ban the issuance of joint accounts as “something which is typically associated with married couples.”
the world has better things to do than find ways to screw us over
If that was true, we wouldn’t see “the world” (or more accurately, the right wing) spending so much time passing laws designed to. . . screw us over.
posted by Randy R. on
Bobby is right: All those bills that were passed to amend state constitutions to ban us from marriage, the Defense of Marriage Act that was signed by Clinton, and Congress’s two-timed attempt to pass a Constitutional amendment against us marrying, were mere mirages. They never happened, because, after all, why would any think of screwing us over?
posted by Bobby on
When the sodomy law were abolished by SCOTUS. Did the reps call for a constitutional amendment to ban it? No.
Marriage is different, while most people don’t want to know what we do in our bedrooms, everyone knows what a marriage is, and many people are afraid of us being included, that’s why they vote the way they vote.
“but the Virginia law arguably would ban the issuance of joint accounts as “something which is typically associated with married couples.””
—-Not really, because that would affect straight people. Think of it this way, Bob and Joe own a steakhouse. They both have to make purchases, pay salaries, make deposits. Are they gonna have different bank accounts for one business? No! They will have a joint account, it’s more convenient.
posted by MM on
Dear Bobby,
I think that you are mssing the point. The issue is not legal arrangements made pursuant to a business relationship. It is legal arangements–joint accounts, etc–made pursuant to a personal, domestic relationship. The concern is that the law, arguably, forces courts to look at the relationship that underlies various legal arrangements to determine if the two people are a gay or lesbian couple actually trying to co-opt some aspect of marriage. The law is not about straight couples or business relationships, it is about gay/lesbian couples who pursue various avenues to cement their relationships because marriage is not available to them. Knowe what I mean?
posted by North Dallas Thirty on
But they’re also, like their Ohio bretheren, going to be singing the blues when the economy commences a downward spiral from which it seems unable to recover.
“Going to be” is future tense — which is odd, because the Ohio law has been in place for almost two years. You’d think that, if it were going to crater Ohio’s economy, it would have done so by now.
What this boils down to is that you’re talking about barely 5% of the population, much less of the workforce — and what I find hilarious is that we scream bloody murder when people stereotype gays as being rich corporate types, but then try to claim that we are when trying to lever things out of state governments.
Furthermore, given the insistence here that people will be going to court to strip gays of contract rights in Virginia, why hasn’t it happened yet? You would think the antigay bigots that people insist are everywhere would have launched instant jihad trying to get existing contracts, wills, etc. invalidated.
What this likely boils down to is the fact that passing the law did the bulk of what Virginians wanted, which was to put the kibosh on attempts to impose gay marriage. If the point had been to strip gays of all rights, they wouldn’t have waited ’til this point to do it.
posted by Randy on
The reason why it hasn’t happened yet is quite simple — the law gets voted on in November. That’s why gay groups are working overtime to prevent it from passing.
Virginia ALREADY has a law than bans gay marriage, so if your theory was correct, so there is absolutey no need to ban it again. So why then are these people pressing to to not only ban gay marriage — again — but also to strip gays of the ability to enter into contracts that resemble marriage? At best, it is a colossal waste of time, but more likely, it’s because they want to go beyond just banning marriage.
BTW, when Ohio passed it’s law prohiting gay marriage, supporters of the bill insisted that it would not affect civil marriage. As soon as the bill passed, those SAME supporters started arguing in courts that it was meant to invalidate civil unions as well.
posted by Bobby on
Dear MN,
“The law is not about straight couples or business relationships, it is about gay/lesbian couples who pursue various avenues to cement their relationships because marriage is not available to them. Knowe what I mean?”
—I know what you mean. My argument is that there are loopholds and tricks within the law to get what you want. For example, ever heard of one partner adopting the other? It’s legal.
Or one partner could leave a written and videotaped will to prevent the family of the deceased from stealing the property.
And as far as I know, powers of attorney aren’t gay marriage or anything similar. I’m sure they were invented by straight people that wanted someone other than their biologicals to control their medical and other decisions.
My point is that until most Americans are ready for gay marriage, we’re simply gonna have to adapt the current reality.
Sodomy Laws didn’t stop bathhoues, they simply adapted themselves in a way that the cops had to get a court order to raid the place. How? By declaring themselves private clubs and selling cheap private memberships.
In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if American Express comes to the gays rescue. They have several options for gay couples, even their very own bank! America is a profit driven country, where there’s a need, there’s always a way.
posted by Northeast Libertarian on
odd, because the Ohio law has been in place for almost two years. You’d think that, if it were going to crater Ohio’s economy, it would have done so by now.
Checked Ohio’s economic numbers lately?
Didn’t think you had. I know facts are not happy things for you.
Quick — which states are posting job growth which is significant enough to support a growing population? Not Ohio. When the law was announced and passed, the economy sank quite quickly.
Even you understand this, “North Dallas” — hell, you moved from Texas to San Francisco. It’s easy to post about how great life is in red state America when you’re basking in the queerest burgh on earth.
posted by Bobby on
Hey Libertarian, life is indeed great in the red states. Rents and property values are much lower, taxes are smaller, government services are unheard of so people tend to be more independent, tobaco is cheaper, your kid can wear a confederate flag t-shirt in a public school without being censored, gun laws are friendlier towards law abiding people, and we’re eager users of the death penalty.
In fact, it’s places like Arkansas that have experienced huge economic growth. Fortune 500 corporations are always looking for cheaper places to do business, without strong unions, at-will employment, and a pro-business attitude.
Blue states and blue cities are fun places for the rich. The rest of us, the middle class and lower class, we need cheaper places.
It’s either that or maxin out your credit cards to live a lifestyle you can’t afford. As someone who’s $3,700 away from being debt free, I don’t need the glitz and ritz of blue states.
posted by North Dallas Thirty on
LOL….I love how people like NL try to spin these things.
Note the emphasis:
Checked Ohio’s economic numbers lately?
Didn’t think you had. I know facts are not happy things for you.
Quick — which states are posting job growth which is significant enough to support a growing population? Not Ohio. When the law was announced and passed, the economy sank quite quickly.
First off, have some facts. Notice in particular that the largest sector in Ohio is manufacturing, and of that, automobile/auto parts production is the largest portion.
This is how “gay activists” like NL try to manipulate facts — they make economic claims, but ignore the underlying cause, namely the problems into which the American automobile manufacturing industy has run in the past two years that have nothing to do with glbt employment.
Furthermore, you notice that NL attempted to use a manipulated statistic to minimize the fact that the number of jobs in Ohio is actually GROWING — something that runs directly opposite to activist claims.
There are economic reasons to be for nondiscrimination and against such amendments. However, the lying and manipulation used so commonly by gay activists like NL cheapens these and reinforces peoples’ beliefs that gays are dishonest.
Even you understand this, “North Dallas” — hell, you moved from Texas to San Francisco. It’s easy to post about how great life is in red state America when you’re basking in the queerest burgh on earth.
The reason I left had nothing to do with it being easier to be gay here; it had everything to do with the fact that my partner is here and that his career precluded his relocating to Texas. Believe me, if I had my way, we’d be back there, where our housing dollars would go five times as far, our net take-home incomes would be higher after taxes, and our neighbors threw a celebratory bash for our commitment.
posted by Northeast Libertarian on
the largest sector in Ohio is manufacturing, and of that, automobile/auto parts production is the largest portion.
This is how “gay activists” like NL try to manipulate facts — they make economic claims, but ignore the underlying cause, namely the problems into which the American automobile manufacturing industy has run in the past two years
While right-wing kooks like ND30 ignore basic economics, which indicates that thriving economies, like California, are diversified — while stagnant, dying economies are based on manufacturing.
When manufacturing vanished from New York and California, financial services and high technology stepped in to pick up the slack and grow the economies and populations of those two states. Whereas they haven’t in Ohio.
Why?
What high-tech company would succeed in attracting bright, upwardly-mobile professionals to Dayton, Cleveland or Cincinatti? None.
As gays continue to leave the state and it sinks ever deeper into an economic morass, ND30 will screech about how it’s all manufacturing’s fault — ignoring the fact that most states with successful economies had manufacturing shut down en masse, yet had no problems whatsoever attracting new investments. However, Ohio cannot even get off the ground — not that anyone particularly wants to get off the ground there anyway.
Another interesting question to consider is why American manufacturing, particularly automotive, is in such trouble in Ohio. It would probably have something to do with the fantastic new cars from Hyundai, Honda, Toyota, Volkswagen, Nissan, Suzuki, and other firms — usually designed by creative, innovative designers in studios throughout the USA (especially California) with large populations of gay designers. The Hyundai studio in California is a great example.
GM, Ford, and to a lesser extent, Chrysler, have been patriarchal, anti-gay environments which reward good-old-boyism over results. So the smart designers, managers, etc. (including the gay ones) went to where their creativity and initiative was rewarded. They’re designing and producing fantastic cars and trucks which are eating the lunch of the moribund Detroit automakers turning out shit products like the Focus and Malibu.
Perhaps if Ohio (and Detroit) had more openly gay talent — and allowed that talent to shine sans the good old boy environment of decades past — they’d be doing better.
But what does ND30 know about meritocracy? He’s made a “career” for himself masquerading as a gay man from a red state when it’s not at all certain that he’s gay, and he’s posting from the heart of the ultimate ultra-left-liberal blue-state gay ghetto of San Francisco — a very very long way from the red state values he claims to embrace.
I judge by actions, not words, bubba. 😉
posted by North Dallas Thirty on
GM, Ford, and to a lesser extent, Chrysler, have been patriarchal, anti-gay environments which reward good-old-boyism over results. So the smart designers, managers, etc. (including the gay ones) went to where their creativity and initiative was rewarded.
Thank you for so completely displaying your ignorance in this matter.
You cite Hyundai as a great example, but are you aware that Hyundai doesn’t even offer domestic partner benefits?
Meanwhile, the companies you are so quick to criticize, like Ford, GM, and DaimlerChrysler, do.
Now to this:
What high-tech company would succeed in attracting bright, upwardly-mobile professionals to Dayton, Cleveland or Cincinatti? None.
Unfortunately, those are not the only people who can do high-tech.
Once those “bright, upwardly-mobile” professionals figure out what they need to spend to have homes, live, and educate their children in said cities, Ohio, the Midwest, and other places with much lower costs of living, less crime, and more family-friendly activities start to look very, very good.
posted by Bobby on
“Perhaps if Ohio (and Detroit) had more openly gay talent — and allowed that talent to shine sans the good old boy environment of decades past — they’d be doing better.”
—Detroit has a lot of gays that live in Ferndale, and there’s plenty of gay groups in the auto industry. It doesn’t mean squat, though. Talent and profit is not about gays, goddammit! It’s about INDIVIDUALS.
Maybe if companies were more focused on hiring talented individuals instead of minorities, things would be better. Instead, they treat people like animals, separating them like chickens and roosters and cows. They make you declare your race! What’s next? Government forms that ask about sexual orientation?
Anyway, here’s an article about the 10 best cities to find a job. The results will surprise you.
College grads often flock to New York City, San Francisco, Los Angeles and Chicago to start their careers. But they’d be far better off in Washington D.C., Phoenix and Las Vegas.
http://realestate.msn.com/Rentals/Articleforbes.aspx?cp-documentid=723446>1=8479
Here’s the top 10 cities.
Washington DC
Phoenix
Las Vegas
Orlando, FL
Bethesda, MD
Richmond, VA
Raleigh, NC
Jacksonville, FL
Oklahoma City
Virginia Beach, VA
All of them conservative cities, except for DC.
posted by Greg Capaldini on
Bethesda, MD a conservative city? A heavily Democratic-voting community close to DC? I beg to differ.
posted by morgan on
the laws that raise taxes is bullshit and these laws have begone to remind me of germany in 1945 but no struggle no progress. Has any one heard of the couple that had been together 50 years and one died and the other lost everything because of it if any one knows the story please send me the details on it or the website that i can find it at