New York State of Mind?

by on

I confess I am no expert on New York politics, and might be able to use some help. This headline from the NY Times, No Gay Marriage Bill This Year, Smith Says," implies that the new Senate leader in New York will not bring a marriage bill up because he doesn't yet have the votes.

Is there some rule that prohibits unsuccessful bills from even being discussed in New York's legislature? I know some of the best debates in California's legislature were on gay rights bills that everyone knew would not be passed. It is good for gay rights supporters to have a formal platform to make their case. More important, there is enormous value in having gay rights opponents make their increasingly unpersuasive arguments in public with a spotlight on them. The more they are allowed to articulate their assertions where the general public can hear, the more sense our own arguments make.

5 Comments for “New York State of Mind?”

  1. posted by BobN on

    The line that “I need your help getting the votes for this” while not being willing to share which Senators need to be convinced seems pretty conveeeenient.

  2. posted by David Link on

    Is it possible that New Yorkers don’t know which Senators might be on the fence? My guess is that this might be fairly common knowledge — or would be by a fairly easy process of elimination.

  3. posted by Jorge on

    Is there some rule that prohibits unsuccessful bills from even being discussed in New York?s legislature?

    Oh, they don’t discriminate between the successful or unsuccessful bills in New York. The process is almost never public and takes place almost entirely behind closed doors between the majority leaders and the governor, and their respective lobbyists. A bill is almost never brought to the floor unless the majority leader wants it to pass.

    Sometimes it’s influenced by minority leaders, the committee chairmen, and the other legislators at large, as it appears to be here (Smith states he doesn’t have enough votes). Bills aren’t often brought to the floor if they’re going to fail, either.

    Hence, the New York State legislature’s reputation as the worst in the nation.

    I don’t know how common the knowledge is, but Malcolm Smith almost didn’t become Senate majority leader over some senators’ opposition to gay marriage (among other things). Those Democrats threatend to vote to give control of the State Senate to the Republicans. So this really comes as no surprise to me.

  4. posted by mgh on

    yes, there is such a rule, informally.

    NYU Law’s Brennan Center recently issued an updated report on the NY Legislature entitled “Still Broken…” One of the most impressive/disturbing statistics is that in the last few legislative sessions, literally EVERY bill brought to the Assembly or Senate floor in NY passed. Essentially, the Assembly Leader and Senate Majority Leader have almost unlimited power. It’s definitely worth reading.

    Jorge’s assessment is thus largely correct.

  5. posted by David Link on

    Thanks, Jorge and mgh. Smith’s struggle against the anti-gay Democratic contingent was a real soap opera with, unfortunately, real-life effects on actual people whose families are not soap opera characters. That style of playing politics with a group of human beings viewed as mere negotiating tactics was pretty appalling.

    This all helps to explain why I have never really seen the kind of lively and public debate over same-sex marriage in New York that we’ve seen in Hawaii, Vermont, even New Jersey. It sounds like New York’s politicians are, in fact, stifling the debate. In my view, this undermines the credibility of those who say they want a same-sex marriage bill to pass, since it’s the public debate, itself, that helps change minds. Stated most charitably, Smith and other Democrats are putting the cart before the horse in believing they can change legislative minds without airing the arguments on a public stage.

    Stated another way, it sounds like these are politicians who trust themselves to do what’s best for their constituents more than they trust their constituents. They don’t want to expose the other side’s arguments, perhaps with the belief that they can resolve the dispute on their own in a back room somewhere, then bring the bill as a fait accompli to the floor, have the vote and voila! same-sex marriage will be the law.

    Perhaps New Yorkers are ready for that, or will be when the Legislature decides the issue is ready for them. But I don’t think that’s how you build the majority in the population that you need for same-sex marriage to be viable. That can only happen when people actually have the heated and often irrational discussions for themselves. Again, I have no way of knowing how the folks in upstate New York really feel about same-sex marriage, and it’s possible that a majority of them are — or soon will be — ready for a same-sex marriage bill. But if they’re not, Smith is not helping what he says is his cause by preventing a public debate, and maybe even an initial loss, in the legislature. There is nothing dishonorable in a legislative loss. Like the market itself, politics is dynamic and can grow from a setback.

    And sometimes, the setback is a necessary precondition for growth.

Comments are closed.