Home / General / Marriage Equality in Washington

Marriage Equality in Washington

/
/
/
875 Views

After the tragic about-face that killed it at the last minute in Maryland, it’s hard to be optimistic. Still, chances are now looking respectable. That the votes are there in the House seems clear; the Senate is where the challenge lies. As of now there are 23 Y and 20 N along with 6 undecided, so we only need two. Here’s a profile of the six people currently standing in the way of my home state becoming the 8th state (er, I mean 7th, I was counting DC) to join the right side of history.

There’s certainly a fair amount of potential here. I’ve been led to believe that Fain has state-wide ambition at age 31; a no vote will tarnish his emerging reputation as a moderate Republican. Hill could probably use a gentle push from the corporate bohemoth in his district (and his former employer), Microsoft’s open support for both civil unions and anti-discrimination certainly played a positive role in both those recent battles (and lead to a local deranged lunatic who fancies himself a player in the religious right to hilariously attempt to spearhead a boycott of Microsoft). But beyond that, a yes vote would certainly contribute to Hill’s chances of keeping his job; his district is increasingly liberal, particularly on social issues such as this. (Liberal Democrats represent this district in the house; they both got more votes than he did in 2010, a year that saw him retain (win) his seat with a slim margin, despite the favorable conditions for Republicans.)

I’m more optimistic about the two Republicans than I am about the four Democrats, all of whom are members of the so-called “roadkill caucus” that played a major role in squandering the State Democratic party’s 4 year window of supermajorities from 2006-2010. Haugen may be the best bet; she voted for civil unions (after waivering publicly) in 2009. As Eli Sanders notes, her current stated position isn’t a coherent reason to vote against the bill, as the issue is very likely to be on the 2012 ballot should it pass the legislature this year. I’ve heard her interviewed a few times, on this and other issues, and I’m not quite sure how to put this diplomatically–let’s just say often struggles to make sense in her public statements and explanations of her own position. She seems to vacillate between claiming she always votes for what she thinks is right, and she always votes for the position of 50% +1 of her constituents, and not seeming to recognize any possible contradiction. Still, she speaks compassionately and emotionally about gay rights, and seems potentially persuadable. She’s choking up a bit here as some of the good people of the 10th district press her on the issue. Whether her view that her district opposes marriage equality is sound is not entirely clear to me; it’s a R-leaning swing district, but the most current polling I’m aware of shows 55% planning to vote yes on a hypothetical referendum on marriage equality, with only 38 planning to vote no. If that holds, I’d wager the tally in her district would be very close to 50-50.

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Linkedin
This div height required for enabling the sticky sidebar
Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views :