TAKE ACTION NOW: Kill Bill SB 27 (Anti-Civil Unions)
A tip from esteemed reader MJ:
SB 27 by Venables has a hearing tomorrow at 1:00 PM in his committee(Small Business). This is a DE version of DOMA. It appears that the swing vote is George Bunting. Please contact his office at (302) 744-4286 and tell him to vote against this bill.
It’s more than just the DE version of DOMA, MJ. Look at the text:
“A marriage between a man and a woman is the only legal union that shall be valid or recognized in this state.”
ONLY LEGAL UNION – that would OUTLAW Civil Unions. Is that the kind of message we want to send to the world? Is that the kind of message we want to send to the business community? Remember, some of our state’s biggest corporate employers (including DuPont, AstraZeneca, and the big banks) offer domestic partnership benefits. This bill will make our state less attractive for employers and prospective entrepeneurs.
Remember, 55% of Americans support Civil Unions, and Delaware is more socially progressive than the average state. So it’s not unreasonable to think that a wide majority of Delawareans support Civil Unions. And Delaware just elected the largest legislative majority of Democrats in recent history; Delaware’s 16-5 Democratic Senate majority is larger, percentage-wise, than that of the Senates of New Jersey, Maryland, New York, or even Connecticut – in fact, it’s on par with Vermont’s 23-7 split.
We have the power to fight this, and we have the power to win. Call the Delaware Senate – (302) 744-4286 – and ask for George Bunting’s office. Do it now. Remind Senator’s Bunting’s staffers that Bunting was endorsed by the Delaware Liberty Fund.
And when you’re done, call some Liberty Fund-endorsed Republicans (Senators Coutier, Sorenson, and Connor), and some non-endorsed Democrats (Senators Marshall, DeLuca, McBride, and Cook). Don’t bother with the bill’s sponsorts (Senators Venables (D), Adams (D), Ennis (D), Bonini (R), and Simpson (R)).
DO THIS NOW.
Tags: Civil Unions, SB 27, State Senate
I heard Bunting’s vote was already in the bag because of the location of his business, and how the wrong vote may affect it.
That’s one kind of pressure, Mis. We can apply another. And then go for Marshall, Sorenson, and the rest! Call ’em all!
FYI – Bunting is a State Farm Insurance agent. Are you insured with State Farm?
“Are you insured with State Farm?”
Yes, for over 30 years, but not through George, and I’m not about to change horses now.
“That’s one kind of pressure, Mis. We can apply another. ”
I didn’t actually hear him say it, but the local radio station said he did, and it was the subject of some very lively discussion. He’s probably in a quandary right now and I don’t envy his position, but George usually votes his conscience and will hopefully do the right thing.
I hope you’re right, Mis. If he votes against the bill, I will make sure that we recognize his support, and I will call to thank him.
By the way, the hand of Thurman Adams is clear in selecting the Small Business Committee for this hearing.
From Rebecca:
Venables and Ennis are sponsors, Sorenson is a Republican, Katz is a freshman, and Bunting represents Sussex (part of the infamous Indian River School District, in fact).
Two items:
“And Delaware just elected the largest legislative majority of Democrats in recent history; Delaware’s 16-5 Democratic Senate majority is larger, percentage-wise, than that of the Senates of New Jersey, Maryland, New York, or even Connecticut – in fact, it’s on par with Vermont’s 23-7 split.” Of course the head Democrat in the Senate, Adams, co-sponsored this bill, so it seems like Democrat in Delaware doesn’t necessarily mean what is meant in NJ, MD, NY, CT, etc.
Second, Liane Sorenson (R, Newark), is a firm supporter of equal rights for all, and opposes this bill.
Michael Katz in the fall affirmed his support in banning discrimination based on sexual orientation and/or identity. We hope that he is true to his word. SB27’s expansion of such discrimination seems to be clear.
Unfortunately, they are only two out of five.
What’s the deal with Ennis? Can we put pressure on him as well?
Xstryker – thanks for the post. I was writing very quickly last night. And yes, this bill does go further than than just banning same-sex marriage. It’s bad legislation that needs to be defeated.
Good luck with that, guys! I’ll telll you there’s a damn lot wrong with Massachusetts, but allowing two loving people to get married independant of their sexual organs is not one of them.
And with several states recognising MA Marrage certificates at face value, we’re certainly getting some nice influx of monies with gay couples throwing parties here rather than their home states.
I haven’t read anything about gays settling here to get away from restrictive states, but I bet that’s happening too.
http://www.boston.com/news/local/vermont/articles/2009/03/24/same_sex_marriage_bills_gain_in_ne/
Related news.
Still I’m worried about it. Seems even the bluest of blue states are voting bills like this down. Hell the Mass law was just a bench ruling, and was never allowed to go to popular vote.
Seriously, putting this bill in the Small Business Committee is a joke. It’s clearly 2-2 (Sorenson/Katz are no’s) w/Bunting the swing. Miscreant is right. George Howard usually votes his conscience. And he represents some of the most progressive constituents in eastern Sussex.
‘Bulo doesn’t think he’s screwed at all…unless he votes ‘yes’. His Sussex County constituents should really be flooding his office with calls.
Of course, he might just ‘pull a Carper’. Vote the bill out of committee, then vote ‘no’ on the floor. Better to kill this abomination right now!
It certainly doesn’t make sense for it to be in the Small Business Committee. I certainly hope it doesn’t get out of committee, but if it does we’ll have to make the bill is killed on the floor.
It affects small businesses not the most to have to pay for non married couples.
It is a great bill which has no effect one way or the other on civil unions. It is about protecting marriage.
I am fascinated with the inability to argue the point. You jump to extortion. Threaten a man’s business if he doesn’t vote according to your dictates instead of that of his district. That seems very undemocratic.
Funny you should mention Vermont. Their state senate yesterday passed a bill allowing same-sex marriage by a 26-4 vote. The usual suspects are crying foul up there, saying how this will be the end of the world if the house follows suit.
Vermont sent its bill to the Senate Judiciary Committee, not the Small Business Committee. The house is scheduled to vote on it Thursday or Friday.
The legislation gives religious organizations and officials the right to refuse to perform such ceremonies.
“It is a great bill which has no effect one way or the other on civil unions. It is about protecting marriage.”
from…….
Don’t also forget Schwartzkopf’s hand-picked little ultra-reformed buddy Atkins is sitting on this as a co-sponsor, as well. Kinda contra to part of Pete’s platform.
Good point, Smitty, but look at Atkin’s constituency compared to Pete’s. It would appear that it’s all about getting in, and remaining in office. I think Schwartzkopf may have his sites set higher than his current office.
I spoke to Senator Peterson tonight. The answer is YES, PLEASE, CALL SENATOR ENNIS. And the followup is ALSO CALL SENATOR KATZ. Treat all three – Bunting, Ennis, and Katz, as swing votes. Someone seems to have convinced these men that they are only voting against Gay Marriage, not Civil Unions. FALSE! The language explicitly bans ALL LEGAL UNIONS for same-sex couples.
David Anderson can say it ain’t so, but that’s flat-out bullsh**. CIVIL UNIONS WILL BE BANNED BY THIS BILL. Did I mention that it’s a constitution amendment, and the Governor can’t veto it?