And Now It Is Law

January 27, 2004

On Monday, January 12, my partner, Richard, and I stood among a crowd of a hundred or so outside the office of the New Jersey Governor, Jim McGreevey. We were waiting to go into the governor's conference room for an historic event - the signing into law of the New Jersey Domestic Partnership Act.

Shortly after 1 p.m., the governor's aides opened the doors and we all crowded into the conference room. As a boy, I had been in this room many times when my father was acting governor, and I pointed out the desk where I'd sat when I was 6, and showed Richard the portraits of the governors whom I'd met at one time or another. Needless to say, we were overwhelmed not so much by the grandeur of the room but by the gravity of the occasion and the events of the prior week. My home state was about to convey legal recognition on our relationship. How far we have come, I thought, and at the same time, how much farther we have to go.

A week before, the call went out on a list for New Jersey gay and lesbian lawyers - the New Jersey Senate was going to consider the Domestic Partnership Act on Thursday, January 8, and the vote in the evenly-divided Senate was going to be close. There were only 18 yes votes committed and 21 were needed for passage. For the remainder of the session, the 40-seat Senate was evenly divided between Republicans and Democrats and so we needed to get at least a few Republicans on board. Would any of us be able to go to the State House on Thursday and lobby those Senators who were undecided? Would we be willing to write and/or call various Senators to express our support for the bill?

That day, I called my Senator, a Republican who was opposed to the bill, and told the staffer who answered the telephone that I lived in the Senator's district and I supported the Domestic Partnership Act. Looking over the Senator's biography on-line, I also realized that his father and mine had been leaders of the New Jersey legislature in 1958. I wrote the Senator an email, not knowing whether he would even read it, reminding him that our fathers had often cooperated on legislation that was good for New Jersey, despite differing on party affiliations. I expressed my father's support for the bill and I closed with a personal appeal,

New Jersey has often led the rest of the US in its recognition and support of human rights. I ask you to consider supporting this bill, as a constituent, and as one who is in a committed relationship of over 15 years.

I also sent an email to my partner, asking him to call or email our Senator in support of the bill, which he did right away. Another email went out to extended family, asking for them to call or write in their Senators in support of the bill. Many of them, in turn, emailed their friends to ask for support for the bill.

Thursday morning, in full lawyer drag (suit, white shirt & power tie), I met up with a group of lobbyists from Lambda Legal, Stonewall Democrats, and the NJ GLB Coalition at the State Capital. These wonderful people are the real heroes in all of this for they have been working on compromises, rewriting the bill, lobbying the Governor and the legislature for many months. As a result of their hard work, the bill had passed the Assembly in December and had been sent over to the Senate over the Christmas break. Now, it was the Senate's turn.

The bill was to be voted on at 2 that afternoon, if it made it out of the finance committee. Several Republicans on the committee, including my Senator, had strong reservations about the bill and were on the record as opposing passage. Another Senator, a Democrat from my old town of Camden, refused to commit to the bill. Our job was to attempt to speak with those Senators as they came in and out of their meetings, and to try to convince them to either vote in favor or, at least, to abstain.

The first Senator to come out the door was Senator Thomas Kean, son of the former governor. We cornered him and he listened politely but continued to express his opposition, not to domestic partnership laws in general, which he claimed to support, but to the procedural maneuvering that had rammed the bill through the Assembly and now the Senate during a lame duck session. Unfortunately, we were unable to sway him, but I was impressed that he took a substantial amount of time to listen to us. I could not imagine a Texas Republican even deigning to speak with a group of queers, let alone expressing respect for our position.

Next up was my own Senator, Republican Leonard Lance who would become the Senate Minority Leader when the 2004-2005 legislative session began in a few days. When I introduced myself, he immediately remembered the email I'd sent him. We talked about the bill for quite some time, during which he expressed his reservations about the impact the bill would have on the state's budget. I told him I thought the costs would be well offset by the increase in revenue that would come from the many same-sex couples living in the New York or Philadelphia area who would now have an incentive to move to New Jersey. Senator Lance would not agree to vote for the bill, be he promised that he would not speak out against the bill on the floor and would most likely abstain rather than vote against it.

Finally, I met with Senator Martha Bark, a Republican woman who represents the district where my parent's had recently moved and who knew my parents well. She had some interesting objections to the bill, primarily that the bill did not extend domestic partnership to straight couples under the age of 62. I told her that there were parts of the bill that I was not satisfied with, either, but that these bugs in the bill could be worked out later, after the bill had passed. I must have said the right things to her because she later voted in favor of the bill.

After a quick lunch, our group headed up to the gallery overlooking the Senate floor to stake out some seats, and to do a little last-minute lobbying as the Senators came out of their party caucuses. The gallery began filling up with supporters of the bill - mostly gay or lesbian couples. There was a festive air to the group, coupled with an edge of concern as we all discussed the current vote count and wondered whether one Senator or another had changed their mind.

At 2 p.m., the Senate Co-President, a Republican, called the Senate to order and soon a quorum (two-thirds majority) was announced. First up were a series of bills that were uncontested. The bill was announced, the vote was quickly tallied on the electronic board, and the results were announced. Next up were the contested bills-those on which there was some controversy and on which the vote might be close. Several Senators got up to speak either for or against the particular bill that was under consideration, and the session began slowing down.

Finally, the bill number was called, and all of us sat up straight in our chairs. Would Senator Cardinale launch into a tirade against homosexuals? Who else would rain invective on us, when it came their time to speak? Did we have the 21 votes needed after all? The Co-President cautioned the packed gallery to keep quiet while the Senate considered the bill.

The Democratic Co-President, Senator Codey, rose to speak. He reminded the Senate that he'd agreed to sponsor this bill because it was the right thing to do. New Jersey, he said, had long been a leader in recognizing the civil rights of its citizens and he was proud to be voting for the bill and proud of the many people who'd expressed their support.

Then another Senator rose, a Republican, who said he'd originally planned to vote against the bill but had changed his mind. He urged his fellow Republican's to also support the bill. A third Senator spoke next, a Democrat. He said he was a life-long Catholic, but he rejected a letter from the Catholic Bishops calling on the Senators to vote against the bill. I love my Church, he said, but on secular matters, on legal matters, relationships between people it is not infallible. One more Senator rose and spoke glowingly in support of the bill and then it came time for the vote. Amazingly, only four Senators spoke about the bill and all did so in favor. Dorothy, I thought, we're not in Texas anymore.

At last, the Co-President called for the vote. As the green and red lights flashed on the board, I watched to see what the Senators I had lobbied would do. Senator Lance abstained. Senator Kean voted against the bill. And Senator Bark voted for the bill. The gallery broke into applause when the yes votes hit the 21 mark, and by the end of the vote, 23 Senators had voted in favor of the bill, including a number of Republicans. 9 Senators voted no, and 8 abstained. All of us in the balcony hugged each other, many in tears. TV cameras and lights swept over the crowd as reporters asked questions.

So now there we were, four days later, standing with a crowd of supporters, news cameras turning, as various members of the legislature gathered around the podium. Then the Governor entered the room and he smiled and spoke briefly about this historic occasion and New Jersey's commitment to all of its citizens. He called on several gay activists to join him at the desk, then with a flourish, signed the bill, saying, Now it is law.

Afterwards, Richard and I walked around the State Capital, admiring the marble and the paintings hanging on the wall, glowing in the pride of being valued in our own state. We walked upstairs to the gallery overlooking the Assembly, and I showed him my father's photograph on the wall with other past Speakers of the Assembly. So much has changed in our lifetimes and there is so much left to do. I remarked to Richard how impressed I was at the lack of rancor in the discussions about the bill.

The bill isn't perfect and it doesn't go nearly as far as the Vermont civil union bill. But it's a good start and one which will help straight people see that recognizing gay couples will not destroy their marriages. The challenge to the marriage laws in New Jersey continues, as it should, with an appeal to the New Jersey Supreme Court. We wait to see what the Massachusetts legislature will do in the the 5 months they have remaining on their court deadline. We will all need to be on our guard against the passage of an amendment to state and federal constitutions prohibiting our marriages. But for the moment, it's OK to bask in the glow.