Twisting arms to get marriage equality passed in Washington State!

Companion bills affording full marriage rights to same-sex couples were introduced this year in the Washington state House and Senate, but neither were voted on in committee, let alone the full floor of either legislative body. A key leader of this effort, Sen. Ed Murray, says in addition to the task of pinning down more support among his colleagues, a more herculean chore looms: winning at the ballot box.

"We are completely unprepared for a referendum campaign," said Murray, who represents the 43rd District. "I think Oregon has developed an organizational model we should develop. Outside of Seattle we are so, very, very, far behind in developing a legislative and ballot strategy. The last election is a good example, LGBT financial contributions were fairly marginal."

Plus, Murray, who introduced the first marriage bill in any state Legislature in the country in 1997, insists some Republicans will need to vote "yes," as well, which was the case with the LGBT Civil Rights Bill of 2005.

Like other states that have taken legislative votes on full marriage rights for same-sex couples, Murray expects Washington will not "have a lock" on Democrats voting in favor of it.

The votes are not there. There are still a large number of senators who have never heard from constituents on this issue," he said.

This was the case with a handful of delegates in Maryland, where it was reported that the House of Delegates was two votes shy of the 71 needed for passage of a marriage equality there in March. The bill had already passed the Senate, and the governor promised to sign it. But the 10 or so delegates who were on the fence basically told their leadership that they wanted to support the marriage equality bill, but they were worried about taking such a stand without having had time to solicit much input from constituents.

"On a bill of this political importance and high-media profile, I think a member who flips is probably not the most politically smart legislator," Murray said.

But "flipping" doesn't always work against the gay community and like-minded people. Murray points out that it was the republican senate majority leader who voted against the LGBT civil rights bill in 2005, killing it, and then voted for it 2006, ensuring its passage.

Democrats enjoy majority control in both chambers of the Washington Legislature--56 to 42 in the House and 27 to 22 in the Senate. The Democrats' numbers were a bit larger prior to the 2010 elections.
Even stronger Democratic majorities existed in Maryland's Legislature, and of course the bill was extremely close, but the fact that such a larger presence of Democratic lawmakers wasn't enough to push the bill over the line indicates how tough victory is on this issue.

Rhode Island is another state to watch, as it debates a marriage equality bill. Although the governor of that state is very supportive--stressing his desire to see full marriage rights during his inaugural speech--and the House Speaker is openly gay, plenty of Democrats have already stated opposition or hesitation, some on religious grounds.

The New York Senate is also expected to take a second crack at trying to secure the votes needed to pass a marriage equality bill. The new Gov. Andrew Cuomo has stated his intent to pass a bill before the end of session in June. At least a handful of Republican senators will be needed to get this bill over the finish line in New York, but some observers think Cuomo's long history with Albany politicians, his recent success in hammering out a budget with both parties on time and his approval ratings towering above 70 percent give him exceptional leverage to push tough legislation like this.

Public polling on marriage equality for same-sex couples is between 56 percent and 60 percent in New York and Rhode Island, a dramatic reversal from opposition just a few years ago.

A 2006 poll by SurveyUSA and a 2008 Washington Poll found that about 62 percent of respondents in Washington believe marriage is a union between one man and one woman, while 34 percent considered it a union between two adults, regardless of gender.

Washington passed a Defense of Marriage Act 13 years ago. It wasn't until July 2007 that a more friendly hand was extended to same-sex couples by their state government, when the Legislature created domestic partnerships that allowed same?sex couples of any age and heterosexual couples over age 62 to have some of the basic rights associated with marriage. Additional rights were conferred onto this institution with legislative action in 2009, and it survived a public vote, Referendum 71, by a close margin of 51 percent to 49 percent.

Although public polling showed support above 60 percent for domestic partnerships among Washingtonians, Murray said he wasn't terribly surprised by the narrow margin of victory.

"It should have been bigger, but again the lack of a strong statewide LGBT political organization had a lot to do with the numbers being so close."

Rep. Jim Moeller, who introduced the marriage bill this year in Washington on the House side, said he was surprised Referendum 71 passed at all.

"It overwhelmingly failed in my county (Clark)," said Moeller, who is Speaker Pro Tempore in the 49th District. He noted that "the votes are there" for the marriage bill in the House this year, but "the Senate is more challenging."

Some anti-gay marriage forces have "thanked" churches for their role in defeating marriage bills in some states, including most recently in Maryland. But Moeller thinks churches need to be won over, as well.

"Any winning civil rights movement in this country has always included the churches," he said.

Some states have won marriage rights for same-sex couples through the courts, but Moeller doesn't see this as the best option. The Washington Supreme Court has upheld the constitutionality of the state's DOMA already.

"I do not believe in the 'legal strategy' for getting marriage equality. I think it just gets us into more trouble than we want and does nothing to moving the rock forward towards acceptance," he said.

Moeller acknowledges that any marriage bill will likely face a public vote. He believes holding the vote in higher-turnout years, like presidential elections, would increase the chances for victory.