New Hampshire House - Civil unions OK'd
New Hampshire House - Civil unions OK'd
By TOM FAHEY
Copyright by The State House Bureau Chief
Friday, Apr. 27, 2007
CONCORD – The New Hampshire Senate yesterday passed a civil unions bill that will grant same-sex couples many of the same rights enjoyed by couples in traditional marriage.
Gov. John Lynch said last week he will sign the bill as "a matter of conscience, fairness and preventing discrimination." The Senate's 14 to 10 vote on HB 437 went along party lines, with the Democratic majority winning passage. With the outcome all but sealed before the session began, debate on the bill lasted less than an hour.
The Senate vote came just 22 days after the House passed the bill by a two-to-one margin, 243-129. It had support there from 30 Republicans.
When the law takes effect Jan. 1, 2008, New Hampshire will be the fourth state with a civil unions law, behind Vermont, Connecticut and New Jersey.
Massachusetts has legalized same-sex marriage.
HB 437 states its purpose is to "delineate the rights, obligations and responsibilities of parties entering a civil union." It points to marriage and divorce laws for the legal details and allows, but does not require clergy to perform civil unions. The law also says any civil union or marriage legal in another state will be recognized as a civil union here.
Rep. James Splaine, D-Portsmouth, prime sponsor of the bill, said after the vote the bill is about civil rights.
"I am very proud that New Hampshire is once again saying that we do not discriminate against our residents," he said.
Security around the State House was tight yesterday, with extra New Hampshire State Police troopers on hand after some messages in the flood of e-mails to the Senate raised safety concerns. Senate President Sylvia Larsen, D-Concord, announced to the crowded gallery at the start of the session that she intended to enforce proper decorum.
During debate, Sen. Joseph Foster, D-Nashua, urged passage of the bill.
"This legislation is a credit to our state. We are making this move not because some court some place is telling us we must. We do so today because we believe it is the right thing to do," he said.
Critics say the bill is a back-door approach to legalizing same-sex marriage.
"Please don't tell me otherwise," Sen. Robert Letourneau, R-Derry said.
He said calls, letters and e-mails on the bill ran two-to-one against passage.
"I am their voice ... Let's recognize this for what it is. No sugar coating, no B.S. This is same-sex marriage," he said. "We need to protect the rights of gay people in New Hampshire but this is not the bill to do it. This is a sad day for me, a sad day for us, and a sad day for New Hampshire,"
Sen. Joseph Kenney, R-Wakefield voted against the bill. "I don't believe this is a pro-family value piece of legislation," he said, describing it as "a social experiment."
Sen. John Barnes, R-Raymond, said the bill moved through the legislative process too quickly and needs more work to be a clear and effective law.
"Lawyers are getting all excited because when we pass this, I am predicting, we will have one heck of a mess," he said.
Defenders of the bill said it will afford gay and lesbian couples rights that have long been denied them.
"Individuals in long-term, loving, intimate relationships are currently denied access to certain significant rights," Sen. Martha Fuller Clark, D-Portsmouth, said. "It's about love, commitment, family, fairness and responsibility. It's not about marriage."
Sen. Harold Janeway, D-Webster, who has two gay children, said, "History has shown that discrimination has a long shelf life but this one, I trust, is on the wane."
Lynch's spokesman, Colin Manning, said after the Senate vote that Lynch is ready to sign the bill, which he said, "is in keeping with New Hampshire's proud tradition of preventing discrimination."
Rep. Bette Lasky, D-Nashua, said the vote showed an interesting turn in a long-running debate..
"Most of bills we've considered in the past were a denial of rights," she said.
Proposed constitutional amendments would have defined marriage as between a man and a woman. One bill stated that New Hampshire would not grant marriage rights to gay couples married in Massachusetts, she said.
After Lynch signs the bill, Maine and Rhode Island will become the only two New England states without a law allowing either same-sex marriage or civil unions.
Courts in those states have ruled that gay couples can legally marry in Massachusetts. New York Gov. Elliot Spitzer has said he will advance a gay marriage bill in his state legislature.
Rep. Ed Butler, D-Hart's Location, said he plans a civil ceremony with his partner on their 30th anniversary next April. Rep. Gail Morrison, D-Sanbornton, said she plans a ceremony as soon as possible.
Butler, a staunch advocate of gay marriage rather than civil unions, said he does not plan to push for a marriage bill.
"I have no plans to introduce anything further relative to relationships for gays and lesbians," he said.
"Civil unions is not equality but we have taken a long time to get to this point."
By TOM FAHEY
Copyright by The State House Bureau Chief
Friday, Apr. 27, 2007
CONCORD – The New Hampshire Senate yesterday passed a civil unions bill that will grant same-sex couples many of the same rights enjoyed by couples in traditional marriage.
Gov. John Lynch said last week he will sign the bill as "a matter of conscience, fairness and preventing discrimination." The Senate's 14 to 10 vote on HB 437 went along party lines, with the Democratic majority winning passage. With the outcome all but sealed before the session began, debate on the bill lasted less than an hour.
The Senate vote came just 22 days after the House passed the bill by a two-to-one margin, 243-129. It had support there from 30 Republicans.
When the law takes effect Jan. 1, 2008, New Hampshire will be the fourth state with a civil unions law, behind Vermont, Connecticut and New Jersey.
Massachusetts has legalized same-sex marriage.
HB 437 states its purpose is to "delineate the rights, obligations and responsibilities of parties entering a civil union." It points to marriage and divorce laws for the legal details and allows, but does not require clergy to perform civil unions. The law also says any civil union or marriage legal in another state will be recognized as a civil union here.
Rep. James Splaine, D-Portsmouth, prime sponsor of the bill, said after the vote the bill is about civil rights.
"I am very proud that New Hampshire is once again saying that we do not discriminate against our residents," he said.
Security around the State House was tight yesterday, with extra New Hampshire State Police troopers on hand after some messages in the flood of e-mails to the Senate raised safety concerns. Senate President Sylvia Larsen, D-Concord, announced to the crowded gallery at the start of the session that she intended to enforce proper decorum.
During debate, Sen. Joseph Foster, D-Nashua, urged passage of the bill.
"This legislation is a credit to our state. We are making this move not because some court some place is telling us we must. We do so today because we believe it is the right thing to do," he said.
Critics say the bill is a back-door approach to legalizing same-sex marriage.
"Please don't tell me otherwise," Sen. Robert Letourneau, R-Derry said.
He said calls, letters and e-mails on the bill ran two-to-one against passage.
"I am their voice ... Let's recognize this for what it is. No sugar coating, no B.S. This is same-sex marriage," he said. "We need to protect the rights of gay people in New Hampshire but this is not the bill to do it. This is a sad day for me, a sad day for us, and a sad day for New Hampshire,"
Sen. Joseph Kenney, R-Wakefield voted against the bill. "I don't believe this is a pro-family value piece of legislation," he said, describing it as "a social experiment."
Sen. John Barnes, R-Raymond, said the bill moved through the legislative process too quickly and needs more work to be a clear and effective law.
"Lawyers are getting all excited because when we pass this, I am predicting, we will have one heck of a mess," he said.
Defenders of the bill said it will afford gay and lesbian couples rights that have long been denied them.
"Individuals in long-term, loving, intimate relationships are currently denied access to certain significant rights," Sen. Martha Fuller Clark, D-Portsmouth, said. "It's about love, commitment, family, fairness and responsibility. It's not about marriage."
Sen. Harold Janeway, D-Webster, who has two gay children, said, "History has shown that discrimination has a long shelf life but this one, I trust, is on the wane."
Lynch's spokesman, Colin Manning, said after the Senate vote that Lynch is ready to sign the bill, which he said, "is in keeping with New Hampshire's proud tradition of preventing discrimination."
Rep. Bette Lasky, D-Nashua, said the vote showed an interesting turn in a long-running debate..
"Most of bills we've considered in the past were a denial of rights," she said.
Proposed constitutional amendments would have defined marriage as between a man and a woman. One bill stated that New Hampshire would not grant marriage rights to gay couples married in Massachusetts, she said.
After Lynch signs the bill, Maine and Rhode Island will become the only two New England states without a law allowing either same-sex marriage or civil unions.
Courts in those states have ruled that gay couples can legally marry in Massachusetts. New York Gov. Elliot Spitzer has said he will advance a gay marriage bill in his state legislature.
Rep. Ed Butler, D-Hart's Location, said he plans a civil ceremony with his partner on their 30th anniversary next April. Rep. Gail Morrison, D-Sanbornton, said she plans a ceremony as soon as possible.
Butler, a staunch advocate of gay marriage rather than civil unions, said he does not plan to push for a marriage bill.
"I have no plans to introduce anything further relative to relationships for gays and lesbians," he said.
"Civil unions is not equality but we have taken a long time to get to this point."
posted by Carlos T Mock at 10:10 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home