By Duane Motley

Friday, June 24, 2011, was extremely disappointing for Christian advocates of authentic marriage.  They watched New York State Senate Republicans, who control that house, cave under the pressure of a newly-elected Democratic governor and support same-sex “marriage” legislation.

The New York State Senate voting record can be viewed here.

The New York State Assembly voting record can be viewed here. 

The ten days leading up to the final vote were extremely intense, with more lobbying on both sides than I have seen on any issue in my twenty-nine years at the State Capitol.  Day after day, conservative-leaning Christians came to the Capitol, lined the hallways, sang hymns and prayed.  

Gay-rights activists were also at the Capitol, shouting and chanting in an attempt to disrupt the Christians.  There was a small contingent of activists from President Obama’s former church in Chicago lobbying for gay “marriage”.  One of these men made it clear that “Rev. Jeremiah Wright supports marriage equality.”

I praise God for faithful Christians who spent their days and evenings standing for traditional marriage despite strong and sometimes intense opposition. On Wednesday night of the final week of the legislative session, two churches held their church services in the hallways of the State Capitol, rather than at their church buildings.  I praise God for pastors and churches that take that kind of stand. 

The battle really began back some months ago when Steve Cohen and other top staff members from Governor Andrew Cuomo’s administration met with wealthy Republican financial contributors in New York City.  The governor’s staff proposed that they should work with the governor to see that homosexual “marriage” legislation was passed into law. It didn’t take long for those liberal-leaning Republican Wall Street financiers to get on board with the governor. Billionaire Paul Singer (whose son is living in a gay-lifestyle), and hedge fund managers Cliff Asness and Daniel Loeb were influential in passing same-sex “marriage” legislation. They wrote six-figure checks, totaling over one million dollars, to fund the public relations campaign for gay “marriage”. This level of support did not go unnoticed by Republicans who normally sought campaign funding from these same sources. 

Starting in early April, the governor called together leaders of gay-rights organizations in New York State and from across the nation to meet with the anticipated sponsors of the bill.  This team met regularly in the governor’s office to strategize and work their plan for passage.  The governor was the chief strategist.  He stated that this would be a top-down operation with him at the helm, and that he would use all the resources at his disposal to see that this legislation became law. 

The governor started calling senators who had voted against gay “marriage” in the past for one-on-one conversations in his second floor office at the Capitol.  Cuomo used this time to persuade senators to change their position on the issue. In a private conversation, one senator indicated that the governor had made it very clear that he could be either very good to this senator’s legislative district or very bad.  The choice was up to the senator. During one weekend in June, the governor persuaded three Democrats (Addabbo, Kruger and Huntley) and one Republican (Alesi), who had opposed same-sex “marriage” in the past, to change their position and vote for same-sex “marriage” this time around. Just forty-eight hours earlier, New Yorkers for Constitutional Freedoms had spoken with Senator Huntley’s (D-Queens) chief-of-staff, and he indicated that Huntley’s position had not changed. Yet between Saturday morning and Monday afternoon something happened that caused Senator Huntley to flip on this issue.

  That brought the public vote tally on the issue to a 31-31 tie, where it stayed for about three weeks.  This tie increased the intensity of the strong-arm lobbying and back-room deals.  Each side feverishly sought one more vote which was necessary for passage or defeat of the legislation on the Senate floor. 

On Tuesday afternoon, June 14, with four legislative days left in the 2011 session, the governor finally introduced his bill in the Assembly.  The Assembly voted on it the next day.  To get a vote this quickly, the governor had to send a letter of necessity to the Assembly, declaring that this legislation was critical to the state, and necessary, such that there was no time for it to go through the normal legislative process.  

The normal process requires a three-day aging period once the bill is on the legislators’ desks.  This three-day aging period gives legislators time to read the legislation, evaluate it, and seek input.  The letter of necessity waives that three-day waiting period and allows the bill to be operated on immediately, which is what happened in the Assembly.  

The Assembly passed the legislation by a vote of 80 to 63, which is only four votes more than the minimum necessary to pass the legislation. This was down nine votes from the highest vote the Assembly had seen in a previous roll call, showing that the trend is going against the bill.  In the Assembly, three Republicans who voted for homosexual marriages in the past, voted for it again in 2011.  These legislators are Assemblypersons Joel Miller, Theresa Sayward, and Janet Duprey. 

On Friday, June 24, the final day of the legislative session, all lobbyists and the public were locked out of the senate lobby and had limited or no access to senators.  The lockdown was because the Republican senate leadership was fearful of the demonstrations taking place in the Capitol hallways.  The Republican senators even turned off their cell phones so no one could communicate with them.  Republican senators were in total isolation.  For a large part of the day even their staff could not communicate with them.  This prevented the lobbyists from doing their jobs.  Even though there was no access to Republican senators, Democratic senators were still available. It was apparent this was an effort to deny marriage advocates the ability to effectively sway Republican votes in the final hours before the official vote.

I made a request to receive a copy of the religious freedoms exemption that had been drafted behind closed doors, and I was told that I would not see it until it came to the floor for a vote.  The people who were going to be the most impacted by this amendment, the religious communities, were not allowed to review the amendment or make any comment before the vote took place. 

On the day same-sex “marriage” legislation was passed, the Republicans were locked in conference for approximately nine hours.  When they emerged, they announced that the same-sex “marriage” bill would be brought to the floor after a vote on the property tax cap, rent control regulations, and mandate relief (otherwise known around Albany as the “Big Ugly”).  Still, Republican Senators were not accessible to lobbyists or the public. 

The gay “marriage” legislation and the religious freedoms amendment were not introduced into the Senate, so there were no senate bills.  The Assembly had previously passed the two pieces of legislation by holding a Judiciary and a Rules Committee meeting before moving it to the floor for a vote.  Both pieces of this legislation were then sent to the Senate and put directly on the floor without any senate version of the bill, or without holding any committee meetings on the bill or the amendment.  The Senate voted on both the bill and the amendment without any committee meetings or hearings.    

In my twenty-nine years as a lobbyist, I have never seen this procedure used on an issue of interest to me. Normal procedure is that the bill would have to be introduced into the Senate.  If the Assembly had already passed the bill, the Senate would substitute the assembly bill for the senate bill. They would vote on it after the assembly bill version had gone through the senate committee process. 

The normal procedure for dealing with legislation on the Senate floor is that after the bill is called up, any senator can lay the bill aside for debate, discussion or questioning.  A roll call is taken on major controversial issues, like this legislation.  The roll call would be a slow roll call, requiring each member's name to be called and they verbally respond as to how they will vote.  Each member would have two minutes to explain his vote, if he so chose. 

The Senate leadership and the governor’s staff made an agreement not to permit the same-sex “marriage” legislation to be laid aside or discussed.  This blocked any debate and expedited the process.  The governor wanted to have the vote pass in a manner that would allow for maximum coverage in that evening’s 11:00 PM newscasts. His staff was in full force on the Senate floor, working with various leaders, expediting the process to make the 11:00 o’clock deadline.  It is highly unethical for the executive branch of government to be involved in the operation of the legislative branch.

Senator Diaz, a Democrat from the South Bronx, and the most outspoken proponent of traditional marriage, called to lay the bill aside so he could speak about it. With Lt. Gov. Robert Duffy presiding over the Legislature that evening, Diaz’s request was ignored. The vote immediately went to a fast roll call and would not allow senators two minutes to explain their vote.  Senate leadership only allowed four senators, two Democrats and two Republicans, to explain their votes. 

One Democrat and the two Republicans who spoke were in support of the bill, and the second Democrat speaker was the sponsor of the bill.  No one opposing the bill was allowed to speak.  Several senators were very upset with the expedited process.  One, Senator Kevin Parker (D-Brooklyn), tried to leave the chamber and found that the doors were locked, with police at the doors.  Senators were locked in the chamber so they could not disappear for the vote and be marked absent – or in Albany lingo ‘take a walk’. This is the first time I have seen senators locked in the chamber, forcing them to vote. Again, this seemed to be part of a broader effort to lock down the needed votes, and not let any peel away from taking a difficult vote.

When the religious freedoms amendment was brought up for a vote, Senator Stephen Saland (R-Poughkeepsie) was allowed to explain the exemption.  Senator Diaz asked if Senator Saland would take a question, but Saland refused to take any questions from his colleagues.  This is a great discourtesy; members have always allowed their colleagues to ask questions about presentations.  There was no discussion or comment concerning the religious exemption, and the vote was rushed through with no comment.

The legislation legalizing homosexual “marriages” and the religious freedoms amendment attached to it were not properly vetted.  The Legislature did not follow normal legislative operating procedures, rules were constantly being twisted, changed and by-passed; all to make the late news. No public hearings were held on this important legislation, and an end-run around committee meetings occurred in the New York State Senate.  There was absolutely no reason that such important legislation should be rammed through in this manner.

The passage of same-sex “marriage” legislation is very discouraging. In the past, under Democratic leadership of the Senate, the gay “marriage” bill was soundly defeated.  Under Republican leadership, the bill passed.

The Republican Party controls the state senate, giving them the authority to determine what to do with the legislation.  They did not have to bring the legislation to the floor.  The Senate Republican Conference could have stopped same-sex “marriage” in New York State, but they failed to do so. Twenty-nine Republicans voted against the bill on the floor, but it is not clear that they did all they could to keep it from coming to the floor in conference. It only takes seventeen senators in conference to hold a bill. 

On June 24, there was much discussion in the Republican Conference to propose a referendum where the people would vote on the issue, but that proposal never made it to the floor for a vote. 

Republican Senate Majority Leader, Dean Skelos (R-Rockville Centre), had the authority to hold the bill and not let it go to the floor, but he did not.  The Senate did not vote in conference to bring the bill to the floor for a vote; Majority Leader Skelos, made the decision, knowing that if it came to the floor, the bill would pass, even though he personally would vote against the bill.  He had stated that he would lead by consensus of the conference, but it does not appear that he did. 

The forces for traditional marriage fought a good fight even though we were out-financed and out-numbered.  We may have lost this battle, but we are convinced we have not lost the war.