NJ Commission Recommends Enactment of Marriage Equality

via Garden State Equality

IN A UNANIMOUS VOTE, A BLUE-RIBBON STATE GOVERNMENT COMMISSION ISSUES ITS FINAL REPORT TO GOVERNOR CORZINE AND THE LEGISLATURE, RECOMMENDING THEY ENACT A MARRIAGE EQUALITY LAW

The report will be posted at 10:00 am ET on Wednesday, December 10, 2008 at
http://www.nj.gov/oag/dcr/curc.html

The New Jersey Civil Union Review Commission says the civil union law "invites and encourages" harm to same-sex couples and their children

The commission cites "overwhelming evidence" the civil union law will never provide equality with the passage of time

The 13 Commissioners include not only LGBT leaders, but also a right-to-life Republican, plus two clergy, plus six government officials representing an Administration that had opposed marriage equality in the courts

To watch video of same-sex couples testifying before the Commission, visit
http://www.civilunionsdontwork.com/

Wednesday, December 10, 2008 – A New Jersey state government commission today unanimously recommended to Governor Corzine and the New Jersey legislature that they enact a law to allow same-sex couples to marry "expeditiously because any delay in marriage equality will harm all the people of New Jersey."

The recommendation is part of the 79-page final report of the New Jersey Civil Union Review Commission, a 13-member body created by the civil union law enacted in December 2006. The 13 Commissioners include not only LGBT leaders, but also a right-to-life Republican, plus two clergy, plus six government officials representing an Administration that had opposed marriage equality in the courts. Their report, passed on a 13 to 0 vote with no abstentions, is based on testimony from more than 150 witnesses over 26 hours spanning 18 public meetings in 2007 and 2008.

The civil union law "invites and encourages unequal treatment of same-sex couples and their children," concludes the final report, titled The Economic, Legal, Medical and Social Consequences of New Jersey's Civil Union Act. "In a number of cases, the negative effect of the Civil Union Act on the physical and mental health of same-sex couples and their children is striking, largely because a number of employers and hospitals do not recognize the rights and benefits of marriage for civil union couples."

"The Commission is compelled to issue its final report now because of the overwhelming evidence that civil unions will not be recognized by the general public as the equivalent of marriage in New Jersey with the passage of time. Nearly a decade later, civil union couples in Vermont report the same obstacles to equality that New Jersey civil union couples face today," the report states, citing the recent study of a panel in Vermont.

Besides assessing the civil union law's impact on same-sex couples, today's final report describes how the absence of a marriage equality statute deprives New Jersey's entire economy of considerable revenue. "Spending on weddings and tourism could boost the New Jersey economy by approximately $248 million over three years," the report states. One expert testifying before the Commission estimates the figure could be $500 million or more.

But the heart of today's report is its delineation of the harm that New Jersey's civil union law has pro-actively inflicted upon same-sex couples.

"I'm a pro-life Republican and past Director of Gloucester County Right-to-Life," said Commission member AnnLynne Benson on the release of today's report, “so I know the diversity of this Commission. Our report demonstrates in exquisite detail why amending New Jersey's law to extend marriage to same-sex couples is a necessity. The New Jersey Supreme Court ruled that 'denying rights and benefits to committed same-sex couples violates the equal protection guarantee and can no longer be tolerated under our State constitution.'

Implementation of that ruling by the invention of a parallel status failed to deliver equality. It was like planting a toothpick and hoping a tree would grow."

According to the final report, civil union law's harm to same-sex couples includes:
▪ The inability of a number of same-sex partners to visit one another in the hospital, and to make medical decisions for one another, because hospitals don't accept civil unions as equal to marriage. The Commission's final report begins with the story of Naomi and Gina, a couple in Montclair, New Jersey who had a humiliating and life-threatening experience at a hospital.

Gina was admitted to the emergency room with cardiac arrhythmia, unable to give consent for treatment. When Naomi arrived and said she was Gina's partner, the doctor interrogated Naomi about the nature of the relationship and initially kept Naomi away from Gina and refused to let her give consent for Gina. The report has other stories like this.

▪ "Significant psychological damage" to the children raised same-sex couples because their families are given the stigmatizing label of civil union; and to LGBT youth who view themselves as inferior because they cannot marry. "Their heartbreaking testimony," the report states, "brings to life their struggle in a way that no numbers – whether complaints filed with government agencies or advocacy organizations – can encapsulate on their own." Dr. Marshall Forstein, a Harvard Medical School professor, testified: "Second-class citizenship, now institutionalized in some states in the form of civil unions, contributes to increased rates of anxiety, depression and substance use disorders in marginalized populations."

▪ The denial of health insurance by employers to same-sex partners, especially harmful during the current economic crisis. Today's final report underscores what the Commission's interim report of February 2008 found, that the federal Employment Retirement Insurance Security Act (ERISA) preempts the New Jersey Civil Union law for approximately 50 percent of all employers in the state. For that 50 percent, providing equal rights and benefits for same-sex couples under the civil union law is an option rather than a requirement.

The Commission's final report refutes the notion – as the interim report did – that a change in state law from civil unions to marriage equality would have minimal impact because Federal law does not recognize same-sex relationships. The final report provides ample evidence to the contrary, based on the dramatically lower invocation of ERISA by companies in Massachusetts, which has a marriage equality law. "The term 'marriage,' the report concludes, "would make a significant difference in providing equality even with no change in federal law."

▪ Compounded harm to women, African-Americans and Latino-Americans, all of whom face discrimination because of their gender, race or ethnicity, and who now suffer double discrimination when denied equal rights and benefits under the civil union law. The state Public Advocate told the Commission about "the particular difficulty for lower-income same-sex couples who encounter discrimination because they have fewer resources with which to seek legal counsel and redress, and who have difficulty meeting expenses if faced with reduced healthcare benefits."

▪ Harm to the marriages of couples where one partner is transgender. The final report reaffirms the finding in the Commission's interim report that the classification of civil union places marital status in question for these couples, who had gotten married legally when they were opposite-sex couples.

Click here to take action on this issue.

BREAKING NEWS

The Connecticut Supreme Court has just ruled 4 to 3 that same-sex couples must have the freedom to marry. Connecticut is now the third U.S. state, after Massachusetts and California, to institute marriage equality.

Statement of Garden State Equality chair Steven Goldstein on the historic decision:

"Today's decision will have an effect on the entire tri-state region of Connecticut, New Jersey and New York, all in the same media market. For the first time, marriage equality is now coming to our very own metropolitan region. Now millions of people all across the tri-state area will see devoted, loving same-sex couples get married, partaking in all the joys and challenges of marriage, with no impact whatsoever on the marriages of opposite-sex couples.

"Today's decision in Connecticut has particular relevance to us in New Jersey. Connecticut has had a civil union statute exactly like New Jersey's. Today, the Connecticut Supreme Court said civil unions do not and cannot provide the equality of real marriage -- that civil unions don't work in the real world and that they don't provide the dignity and respect of marriage either. These are exactly the points we've been making in New Jersey. Today, Connecticut said, civil unions, with all their myriad of problems, are not enough.

"This decision can't help but have enormous persuasive impact on New Jersey, not only because both states have had civil union statutes, but because both states are neighbors in the tri-state region.

"Garden State Equality salutes all the organizations involved in bring marriage equality to Connecticut, including Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders (GLAD), the legal organization serving New England's LGBT communities; and our sister marriage equality organization in Connecticut, Love Makes a Family.

"All of us at Garden State Equality extend to GLAD and Love Makes a Family, and all the other organizations involved, our love and deepest appreciation. They are among the all-time heroes for LGBT America."

Please consider making a contribution to Garden State Equality. For every online contribution you make to Garden State Equality's political committee between now and Election Day, Garden State Equality will contribute half your contribution to the campaign of our sister organization Equality California, to help defeat the Proposition 8 ballot initiative that would eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry in California.

Contribute now to the Garden State/Golden State Campaign for Marriage Equality by clicking on https://secure.ga4.org/01/gardenstate_goldenstate.

Thank you from all of us at Garden State Equality.

ZOGBY POLL: NEW JERSEY WANTS TO DUMP CIVIL UNIONS

By 59 to 36 percent, New Jerseyans say okay to public officials'
changing the civil union law to marriage equality

An astounding 69 percent of New Jerseyans say marriage equality
is inevitable in the state

Though Governor Corzine’s favorables are up and he’d beat Chris Christie,
New Jersey wants Corzine to take Obama Administration job if offered

Surprisingly, voters don’t care if Corzine picks a woman or minority
as running mate for Lieutenant Governor

You can see the complete poll at http://www.gardenstateequality.org/

**********************************************************

Tuesday, August 19, 2008 -- A majority of New Jersey favors marriage for same-sex couples over civil unions – and an even bigger majority is fine with public officials’ changing the civil union law to marriage equality, according to a new statewide Zogby Poll commissioned by Garden State Equality.

By 59 to 36 percent, New Jerseyans say they would be "fine with" public officials’ changing the civil union law to marriage equality. Indeed, when the poll goes out of its way to remind voters that New Jersey already has a civil union law, a majority of New Jersey still supports marriage for same-sex couples – 50.1 to 42.3 percent. And an astounding 69 percent of New Jerseyans say marriage equality is inevitable in the state.

Coming on the eve of the Democratic National Convention, the poll also asks a number of political questions. By 47 to 33 percent, New Jerseyans want Governor Corzine to say yes if a prospective President Barack Obama offers Corzine a job in the new Administration. But the poll puts Corzine’s approval ratings at 55 to 42 percent favorable-unfavorable, and he would beat Chris Christie 45 to 36 percent in a 2009 gubernatorial matchup. The numbers indicate that New Jerseyans may be giving Corzine permission to go to Washington not because they disapprove his job performance in Trenton.

Assuming Corzine runs for reelection in 2009, New Jerseyans by an overwhelming margin – 64 to 31 percent – don’t care if he picks a woman or minority as his running mate for Lieutenant Governor.

Zogby took the poll of 803 likely New Jersey voters from August 7 through August 11, 2008. The margin of error is +/- 3.5 percent. Though Garden State Equality commissioned the poll, Zogby collected the data independently.

According to the poll, U.S. Senator Frank Lautenberg’s favorable to unfavorable rating is 52 to 35 percent. He would defeat former Congressman Dick Zimmer 50 to 32 percent if the 2008 U.S. Senate election were held today. U.S. Senator Bob Menendez’s favorable to unfavorable rating is 43 to 33 percent.

Senate President and former Governor Dick Codey continues to be the state’s most popular official, with a favorable to unfavorable rating of 66 to 17 percent.

In response to the question: Currently, New Jersey lets same-sex couples enter only into civil unions, while California and Massachusetts give same-sex couples the freedom to marry. Do you support or oppose same-sex couples in New Jersey also getting the freedom to marry? 50.1 percent said, support. 42.3 percent said, oppose.

In response to the question: If public officials conclude that the civil union law has not worked to provide same-sex couples the legal protections that marriage would, and that New Jersey should fix the problem by giving same-sex couples the freedom to marry, would you be fine with that or upset by that? 59 percent said, fine with that. 36 percent said, upset by that.

“No one should doubt the meaning of these numbers,” said Steven Goldstein, chair of Garden State Equality. “New Jersey wants to end discrimination in marriage, and is ready for our public officials to do it right now. The civil union law is one the greatest civil rights failures of our time. New Jersey sees that, and understands that justice delayed is justice denied.”

New Jersey also wants Governor Corzine to follow the lead of New York Governor David Paterson, who has recognized legal out-of-state marriages of same-sex couples in his own state. In response to the question: Same-sex couples can already be legally married in places outside New Jersey, including California and Massachusetts. Do you think New Jersey should recognize those marriages as marriages in New Jersey? 57 percent said yes and 37 percent said no.

69 percent believe New Jersey will allow same-sex couples to marry, while only 21 percent believe New Jersey would not. 71 percent said, nothing will happen to legislators if they vote for marriage equality “because New Jersey voters care more about other issues.” Only 21 percent said supportive legislators would not be reelected.

In one of the poll’s most interesting questions – probably the first time the question has appeared in any poll – a clear majority of New Jerseyans believe insurance companies unfairly discriminate against transgender people by not covering the medical treatments that doctors deem vital to gender transition. 53 percent said this denial by insurance companies is unfair, while only 36 percent said it is fair.

In fact, even though New Jersey is a worldwide leader in banning discrimination against transgender people – the state’s Law Against Discrimination, hate crimes and anti-school bullying laws all encompass gender identity or expression – a number of insurance companies still refuse to cover vital medical treatment. The American Medical Association has said such denials are discriminatory.

“It is outrageous that some insurance companies deny vital health coverage to transgender citizens even though our state outlaws it,” said Barbra Casbar Siperstein, vice-chair of Garden State Equality and political director of the Gender Rights Advocacy Association of New Jersey. “Our state must act to ensure that all insurance companies follow the law.”
Finally, few New Jerseyans care whether Governor Corzine picks a woman or minority as his running mate in 2009, when New Jersey will be electing a Lieutenant Governor for the first time.

64 percent said it is unimportant to them whether Corzine picks a woman or minority as his running mate, with 45 percent saying it is “very unimportant.” Even a majority of Democrats said it is unimportant, though by a narrow 50 to 45 percent.

Women in the general electorate said it is unimportant, 58 to 37 percent. Latino voters said it is unimportant, 69 to 31 percent. Only African-American voters said it is important to them that Corzine pick a woman or minority as his running mate, 66 to 28 percent.

To see rest of the August 2008 Zogby-Garden State Equality Poll and the demographic breakdowns for all questions, please visit http://www.gardenstateequality.org/.

The California Supreme Court has just ruled in favor of marriage equality for same-sex couples, a decision with huge national impact!

Statement of Garden State Equality chair Steven Goldstein, on the decision's impact on other states, including New Jersey:

"Today the California Supreme Court produced an earthquake for equality. From the Redwood Forest to the Gulfstream Waters to our own Jersey Shore, millions of Americans now rise in jubilation over today’s historic advancement for freedom.

California is so big and so impactful on the rest of the nation, what happens in California won’t stay in California, and that’s great for equality. The California decision will have a particular impact on New Jersey, where we are closer than ever to becoming the first state in American history to enact marriage equality through legislation.

Today, California becomes America’s freeway to equality. Next, New Jersey will be America’s turnpike to equality. So full speed ahead! Our dream is in sight.

All of us at Garden State Equality salute our incredible colleagues at Equality California and at the legal organizations which made today's historic decision possible: The National Center for Lesbian Rights, the American Civil Liberties Union, Lambda Legal, Heller Ehrman and the Law Office of David C. Codell."

Since Garden State Equality’s founding in 2004, New Jersey has enacted 200 LGBT civil rights laws at the state, county and local levels – more LGBT civil rights laws enacted in less time than in any other U.S. state, ever. Visit Garden State Equality's two websites at www.GardenStateEquality.org and www.CivilUnionsDontWork.com

Former Vice President Al Gore Endorses Marriage Equality for same-sex couples

Wednesday, January 23, 2008 - Former Vice President Al Gore, winner of the 2008 Nobel Peace Prize, today became the highest-ranking public figure in to endorse marriage equality for same sex couples.

Watch the video here:
http://current.com/items/88817757_

gay_men_and_women_should_have_the_same_rights

In the video, Gore says: "Gay men and women ought to have the right to join together in marriage. I don't see why it's considered by some people to be a threat to heterosexual marriage to allow it by gays and lesbians. Shouldn't we be promoting the kind of faithfulness and loyalty to one's partner regardless of sexual orientation?"

Gore's position goes beyond support for civil unions, which have failed to provide anything close to consistent equality for same-sex couples in New Jersey, expressed by the leading Democratic candidates running for President, including Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and John Edwards. Dennis Kucinich supports marriage equality.

"Al Gore gets it in a way that the others don't," said Steven Goldstein, chair of Garden State Equality. "In the real world, civil unions don't give same-sex couples the rights and benefits of marriage, because employers view civil unions as inferior. In New Jersey, the failure of employers to recognize civil unions like marriage has resulted in a failure rate of our civil union law of at least 1 in every 5."

Garden State Equality has received complaints from 512 couples since New Jersey's civil union law took effect on February 19, 2007 -- 512 couples who report that employers are not respecting their civil unions because civil unions are not marriage. Nearly 100 civil-unioned couples and other witnesses recently testified about the failure of the civil union law over eight hours of hearings of the New Jersey Civil Union Review Commission, which will release its first interim report on Tuesday, February 19, 2008, the one-year anniversary of the law.

"Anyone who says that civil unions are like marriage simply without the name should be indicted for civil rights fraud," Goldstein said. "Civil unions are to marriage what artificial sweetner is to sugar. It's not the same thing and it leaves a bitter aftertaste."

Contact: Steven Goldstein, Garden State Equality chair

ASSEMBLY AND SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEES UNANIMOUSLY APPROVE BILL TO OVERHAUL NEW JERSEY'S HATE CRIMES AND SCHOOL BULLYING LAWS

The full Senate will vote on the bill later today, Thursday, January 3rd; the full Assembly, on Monday. The bill is expected to win overwhelmingly in both houses.

The bill adds "gender identity or expression" to the state's hate crimes law and strengthens the state's hate crimes law for all minority groups. The bill also requires schools to post on the web, and widely distribute, their anti-school bullying policies, and creates a Commission on Bullying in Schools to further strengthen the state's anti-bullying law.

The bill will become the 154th LGBT civil rights law enacted at the state, county and local levels since Garden State Equality's founding in 2004 -- an all-time national LGBT civil rights record.

Thursday, January 3, 2008
Contact: Steven Goldstein

By a 5-0 vote, the Assembly Judiciary Committee just approved A4591, sweeping legislation to strengthen New Jersey's hate crimes and anti-school bullying laws. The Senate Judiciary Committee approved an identical version of the bill, S2975, by an 8-0 vote on December 13th. The full Senate will vote on the bill, conceived by Garden State Equality and the New Jersey Anti-Defamation League, later today. The full Assembly will vote on Monday. The bill is expected to sail to victory in both houses.

The bill comes on the heels of a just-released FBI report that ranks New Jersey #2 in hate crimes nationally, behind only California. The prime Assembly sponsors are Wilfredo Caraballo, Valerie Vainieri Huttle, Upendra Chivukula and John McKeon. The prime Senate sponsors are Barbara Buono and Loretta Weinberg.

The bill does the following:

1. Adds "gender identity or expression" as a protected class to the state hate crimes law. Combined with the 2006 expansion of the state's Law Against Discimination to include gender identity or expression, the strengthened hate crimes law will make New Jersey's laws for the transgender community unsurpassed in all America.

2. It updates other parts of the hate crimes law by adding "national origin" as a protected category, which thus far has been included in the law by interpreting "ethnicity" to include such; and substitutes the more sensitive term "disability" for "handicap."

3. It specifies that a "mistake of fact" by a defendant committing a hate crime is not a defense.

4. It requires two hours of hate-crimes sensitivity training for all new police officers.

5. It specifies suggested sentencing options to which judges can sentence defendants, such as anti-hate sensitivity training.

6. It creates a study Commission on Bullying in Schools, which has nine months to investigate the problem and make recommendations to the Governor and legislature for further legislation.

7. It requires schools post their anti-bullying policies on their websites, and to distribute their anti-bullying policies, within 120 days after enactment of the law.

"As Washington stumbles through one of the most disappointing years ever for the LGBT community, including Congress' refusal to pass a hate crimes law and the cruel elimination of the transgender community from an Employment Non-Discrimination Act that President Bush still won't sign," said Steven Goldstein, chair of Garden State Equality, "New Jersey continues to be a national beacon for civil rights."

"The enactment of this bill will be the start of another amazing year in New Jersey," said Goldstein, "and we look forward to culminating 2008 with the enactment of a marriage equality statute."

The passage of the hate crimes/school bullying bill will mark the 154th LGBT law enacted in New Jersey at the state, county and municipal levels since Garden State Equality's founding in 2004. That's more LGBT civil rights laws in less time than in any other U.S. state, ever in American history.

LEGISLATION TO OVERHAUL NEW JERSEY'S HATE CRIMES AND SCHOOL BULLYING LAWS

The bill, approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee 8-0 yesterday, adds "gender identity or expression" to the state's hate crimes law and strengthens the state's hate crimes law for all minority groups.

The bill also requires schools to post on the web, and widely distribute, their anti-school bullying policies, and creates a Commission on Bullying in Schools to further strengthen the state's anti-bullying law.

The bill will become the 154th LGBT civil rights law enacted at the state, county and local levels since Garden State Equality's founding in 2004 -- a civil rights record.

Friday, December 14, 2007

Contact: Steven Goldstein, Garden State Equality

By a unanimous 8-0 vote, the Senate Judiciary Committee yesterday approved S2975, chief-sponsored by Senators Barbara Buono and Loretta Weinberg, to strengthen New Jersey's hate crimes and anti-school bullying laws. Presenting testimony in favor of the bill were Garden State Equality and the New Jersey Anti-Defamation League -- both of which conceived the bill -- as well as New Jersey Educational Association, the Gender Rights Advocacy Association, and the Attorney General's office on behalf of the Corzine Administration.

There was no opposition testimony. Among those voting "yes" yesterday was Senator Gerald Cardinale, perhaps the most conservative member of the New Jersey legislature. The Assembly Judiciary Committee, and full Assembly and Senate, are expected to pass the bill in January. The bill is A4591 in the Assembly, chief-sponsored by Wilfredo Caraballo, Valerie Vainieri Huttle, Upendra Chivukula and John McKeon.

The bill comes on the heels of a just-released FBI report that ranks New Jersey #2 in hate crimes nationally, behind only California. The bill does the following:

1. Adds "gender identity or expression" as a protected class to the state hate crimes law. Combined with the 2006 expansion of the state's Law Against Discrimination to include gender identity or expression, the strengthened hate crimes law will make New Jersey's laws for the transgender community unsurpassed in all America.

2. Provides two hours of training on hate crimes for all new police officers.

3. Offers innovative sentencing options to judges, such as anti-hate sensitivity training for convicted defendants.

4. Requires schools to post their anti-bullying policies on their websites, and to distribute those policies to parents and guardians of students annually.

5. Creates a Commission on Bullying in Schools that would be charged with making recommendations to the legislature within nine months on how to further strengthen New Jersey's existing anti-school bullying law.

"As Washington stumbles through one of the most disappointing years ever for the LGBT community, including Congress' refusal to pass a hate crimes law and the cruel elimination of the transgender community from an Employment Non-Discrimination Act that President Bush still won't sign," said Steven Goldstein, chair of Garden State Equality, "New Jersey continues to be a national beacon for civil rights."

"The enactment of this bill will be the start of another amazing year in New Jersey," said Goldstein, "and we look forward to culminating 2008 with the enactment of a marriage equality statute."

NEW JERSEY FAVORS MARRIAGE EQUALITY 48 to 45 PERCENT

via Garden State Equality

RIGHT-WING ADS IN 2007 CAMPAIGN GO BUST: NEW JERSEY FAVORS MARRIAGE EQUALITY 48 to 45 PERCENT,

ESSENTIALLY UNCHANGED
FROM A YEAR AGO

Eagleton Poll does not test intensity of feelings on marriage equality -- by 63 to 31 percent in Summer 2007 Zogby poll, New Jerseyans say they'd be fine with legislature's changing civil unions to marriage equality. By 72 to 21 percent in that poll, New Jerseyans say "nothing would happen" to legislators who vote for marriage equality

Wednesday, October 31, 2007 -- Today the Eagleton Institute of Politics at Rutgers released an independent statewide poll that shows New Jerseyans favor marriage equality 48 to 45 percent, essentially unchanged from the last Eagleton Poll a year ago. 1,002 adults were surveyed in the new poll, which has a margin of error of 3.1 percent.

"That more New Jerseyans favor marriage equality than oppose it, said Steven Goldstein, chair of Garden State Equality, "is fantastic news it in the heat of this election campaign. The right-wing has spent significant resources to make marriage equality a wedge issue in several legislative races. Today's Eagleton Poll makes clear that the right-wing's effort has fallen flat on its face.

"Today's numbers show New Jersey is ready for marriage equality and it's coming to New Jersey, whether right-wing extremists out of touch with New Jersey like it or not."

The Eagleton Poll did not ask New Jerseyans about their intensity of feelings on marriage equality. In August 2007, a statewide Zogby Poll asked:

“If public officials in New Jersey come to the conclusion that civil unions for gay couples have not worked to provide equality under the law, and that the way to fix the law is to give gay couples the same right to marry as heterosexual couples, would you be fine with that or would you be upset by that?”

63% responded “fine with that,” while only 31% responded “upset by that.”

The same Zogby Poll also asked:

“Which of the following do you think is most likely to happen to legislators if they were to allow gay couples to marry? Those legislators would not be reelected, or nothing because people care about other issues more.”

72% said nothing would happen to legislators, while only 21% said legislators would not be reelected.

The complete Zogby Poll is online at www.GardenStateEquality.org

The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection today denied the Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association's request for continued tax breaks

Monday, September 17, 2007 -- The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection today denied the Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association's request for continued tax breaks for the public boardwalk pavilion area on which the Association has banned gay civil unions.

On September 6, Garden State Equality and Ocean Grove United wrote a three-page legal letter to DEP Commissioner Lisa Jackson requesting that the Department deny the Camp Meeting Association's request.

As Garden State Equality and Ocean Grove United wrote, state environmental regulations and the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination specify that land receiving tax breaks must have open, nondiscriminatory access to the public. The ACLU of New Jersey wrote a subsequent letter to DEP underscoring these arguments.

"Though we're not home free yet, today's decision by the Corzine Administration is a significant victory for liberty and justice for all in Ocean Grove," said Steven Goldstein, chair of Garden State Equality. "The Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association has only itself to blame for what will now be the loss of hundreds of thousands of dollars. The question is, how much more hell will the Camp Meeting Association, and its national right-wing extremist backers, put the good people of Ocean Grove through?"

[If you'd like to support Garden State Equality's pathbreaking work, consider buying a ticket to their upcoming BLUE JEAN BALL and Barbecue Bonanza! on Sunday afternoon, October 14th. You may buy tickets online now at http://eqfed.org/gse/events/bluejeanball/details.tcl.]

In response to the Camp Meeting Association's ban, two couples seeking to get civil-unioned on the boardwalk have filed complaints with the New Jersey Division on Civil Rights. The Camp Meeting Association has filed a lawsuit to allow it to continue the ban.

"We all know how this saga is going to wind up," Goldstein said. "The boardwalk will eventually be open once again to civil unions. Our side is going to win hands down because the law is overwhelmingly on our side. The boardwalk is public property by virtue of its use for decades by the public. It's time for the Camp Meeting Association to see the handwriting on the pavilion, and end its discriminatory ban now."

Zogby Poll: Six months into civil unions, New Jerseyans say change the law to real marriage equality

The New Jersey civil unions law is now failing at a rate of 1 in every 6.2 cases. 1514 couples have gotten civil unioned. Garden State Equality has received 242 complaints of employers not recognizing civil unions. Where does New Jersey stand on changing the law?

Zogby Poll: Six months into civil unions,

New Jerseyans say change the law

to real marriage equality

To see the complete poll results, visit

http://www.gardenstateequality.org/poll.htm

By 63% to 31%, New Jersey voters say they’d be fine with the state legislature upgrading civil unions to marriage equality.

By 72% to 21%, New Jersey voters say state legislators would be in no electoral danger if they enacted marriage equality.

By 61% to 29%, New Jersey voters say they expect the state to enact marriage equality within just a couple of years.

Zogby asked the baseline question – do you favor marriage equality versus civil unions – in two ways. Results are 48% to 45% for marriage equality in one question, 48% to 30% in another.

And a significant 35% of respondents said they would be less likely to do business with a company that denies equal benefits to gay employees. 20% said “much less likely.”

As New Jersey marks the six-month anniversary of the civil unions law this Sunday, August 19, a new statewide Zogby Poll shows majorities of voters favoring changing the law to full marriage equality for same-sex couples. The poll of 803 New Jersey voters was taken from August 8th through 10, 2007, with a margin of error of +/- 3.5%. Though Garden State Equality commissioned the poll, Zogby collected the data independently.

The poll asked:

“If public officials in New Jersey come to the conclusion that civil unions for gay couples have not worked to provide equality under the law, and that the way to fix the law is to give gay couples the same right to marry as heterosexual couples, would you be fine with that or would you be upset by that?” 63% responded “fine with that,” while only 31% responded “upset by that.”

The poll also provides key political information to legislators for when they consider changing civil unions to marriage equality. The poll asked:

“Which of the following do you think is most likely to happen to legislators if they were to allow gay couples to marry? Those legislators would not be reelected, or nothing because people care about other issues more.” 72% said nothing would happen to legislators, while only 21% said legislators would not be reelected.

In response to the question, “Regardless of where you stand on the issue of allowing gay couples to marry, do you agree or disagree that gay couples will be allowed to get married in New Jersey in a couple of years anyway?”, 61% agreed, while only 29% disagreed.

The poll also asked the baseline question testing support for marriage equality versus civil unions in two different ways. When voters were asked: “ New Jersey allows gay couples to enter into civil unions but not marry. Do you agree or disagree that New Jersey should give gay couples the same freedom to marry as heterosexual couples?” 48% supported marriage equality, while 45% opposed it.

But when voters were asked: “Which of the following comes closest to your own point of view: (A) If gay couples want to marry, let them. It will ensure equality and will not affect marriages of heterosexual couples anyway. (B) Allow gay couples to enter into civil unions, but not marriage. Allowing gay couples to marry will hurt the institution of marriage. (C) Do not allow gay couples to marry or enter into civil unions,” 48% of voters supported marriage equality, 30% supported civil unions but no more, and 20% supported neither marriage nor civil unions for same-sex couples.

The difference between the two questions may have been the concept of marriage for gay couples hurting the institution of marriage, the primary argument of marriage-equality opponents that New Jersey voters clearly reject.

“Regardless of whether any public official supports marriage equality or wants to maintain the state’s failed civil unions law,” said Steven Goldstein, chair of Garden State Equality, “no official in New Jersey can credibly say that marriage for gay couples is a divisive issue in the state. Even voters who oppose marriage equality are ready to accept an upgrade of the state’s civil unions law to real marriage equality.”

The poll also asked questions unrelated to civil unions or marriage equality. The poll asked: “I am going to read to you a list of public figures. Regardless of whether or not you agree with them on the issues or how well they have performed their job while in office, please tell me for each if you personally like them. For example, would he or she be the kind of person you think you would like to have a cup of coffee with?”

Here’s how voters responded:

Like - Dislike - Not Sure

Governor Jon Corzine 64 - 27 - 9%

Senate President Dick Codey 65 - 20 - 15%

Assembly Speaker Joe Roberts 17 - 20 - 63%

U.S. Senator Frank Lautenberg 56 - 30 - 14%

U.S. Senator Bob Menendez 45 - 35 - 20%

President George W. Bush 40 - 58 - 2%

Former President Bill Clinton 67 - 28 - 5%

Former Vice President Al Gore 64 - 33 - 3%

U.S. Senator Hillary Clinton 56 - 40 - 3%

NYC Mayor Mike Bloomberg 71 - 18 - 11%

Former NYC Mayor Rudy Giuliani 64 - 31 - 5%

Prosecutor Chris Christie 26 - 13 - 61%

State Senator Tom Kean, Jr. 45 - 30 - 25%

United Parcel Service caved in and announced that it would give benefits to employees in New Jersey civil unions.

Monday, July 30, 2007 -

Moments ago, United Parcel Service caved in and announced that it would give benefits to employees in New Jersey civil unions on the same basis as the company gives benefits to married straight employees. Yet as of today, Garden State Equality has 211 cases of couples complaning (sic) to the organization that their employers are not recognizing their New Jersey civil unions. Among the companies flaunting the civil unions law, according to two of the complaints, are two competitors of UPS: Fed Ex and DHL.

"Equal protection under the law is not supposed to wind through a tunnel of hell, where gay couples have to threaten companies with lawsuits and where Governors have to write letters to shame the companies into doing the right thing," Goldstein said. "But that's what gay couples have been reduced to under New Jersey's civil unions law. This law is one of the biggest civil-rights failures of this or any other generation.

"Because of the New Jersey civil unions law, which isn't consistently respected in the real world, many gay couples have been reduced to begging. It's worthy of a cinematic tragedy, like when Oliver had to beg for more porridge. 'Please sir, may I have my civil union benefits?'

"The torture that UPS put this one couple through, before the company finally relented and gave the couple benefits, shows how pathetic the law is," said Steven Goldstein, chair of Garden State Equality. "Many companies don't understand the civil unions law, and many other companies understand the law but don't respect it. Either way, the law is an abject failure in consistently providing same-sex couples equal protection.

"What will happen to the employees who work for the many other companies, like Fed Ex and DHL, that won't cave in? How many of these couples and their children will have to suffer before the New Jersey legislature corrects the epidemic of inequality that the civil unions law has created?"

"Marriage is the only currency of commitment the real world universally accepts. Marriage is the only way same-sex couples in New Jersey will ever receive equality."

NEWS: Failure rate of New Jersey Civil Union Law GETS WORSE

Wednesday, July 18, 2007 -- As of today, five months after New Jersey's Civil Union Law took effect, at least 1 in every 7 civil-unioned couples in New Jersey is being denied equal protection under the law.

In today's meeting of the New Jersey Civil Unions Review Commission, the state registrar reported that 1,359 couples have gotten civil-unioned in New Jersey since the law took affect on February 19, 2007.

During the same five-month period, 191 civil-unioned couples have reported to Garden State Equality that their employers refuse to recognize their civil unions. That is a 14 percent, or 1 in 7, failure rate, at least.

During the first four months of the law, the failure rate had been at least 1 in 8, demonstrating that employers have not increased their acceptance of the law as they've become more familiar with it. Employers are actually becoming more resistant.

"What society would tolerate a law's failing 1 in 7 times?" said Steven Goldstein, chair of Garden State Equality. "If New Jersey's Civil Unions Law were a person, it would be arrested for committing fraud."

In fact, the law's failure rate is likely way higher than 1 in 7 because the 191 couples encompass only those who have come to Garden State Equality. The New Jersey Division on Civil Rights reports it is hearing from 90 couples a month inquiring about problems with civil union implementation -- which would be potentially 450 couples.

The Star-Ledger recently ran a front-page story, picked up by news organizations across the country, on how one company, United Parcel Service, refuses to provide equal benefits to civil-unioned employees in New Jersey even though UPS provides equal benefits to its employees in Massachusetts who are married to same-sex spouses there.

Today's new numbers demonstrate that the failure of New Jersey's civil unions law goes way beyond UPS. The 191 cases that have come to Garden State Equality involve almost 191 companies.

Many of these companies point to a provision in Federal law that allows them to ignore the laws of various states that recognize same-sex relationships. This begs the question: If Federal law is the problem, what difference would it make to call same-sex relationships "marriage" rather than "civil union"?

A big difference. The Washington Post recently did an investigation in which it reported that companies in Massachusetts are hardly ever using federal law as an excuse to deny equal benefits to same-sex couples married in that state. Even with the problem of federal law, same-sex couples married in Massachusetts, as that state’s law allows are getting equality. Civil-unioned couples in New Jersey are not.

"Month after month, as new statistics of the Civil Unions Law's failure are released, there's tragically no improvement in acceptance of the law," said Goldstein. "Civil unions just don't work in the real world. Marriage is the only currency of commitment the real world consistently accepts. And the only way to New Jersey will ever see equality is to give same-sex and opposite sex couples the same freedom to marry."

If you have gotten civil-unioned in New Jersey and your employer is not recognizing your civil union, please contact Garden State Equality as soon as possible. E-mail us your story, including your name and phone number, to Contact@GardenStateEquality.org. We will keep all information confidential. Garden State Equality chair Steven Goldstein is at cell (917) 449-8918. Garden State Equality deputy director David Smith is at cell (908) 917-0654. Thanks so much.

Civil union isn't enough

Civil union isn't enough

NJ Star-Ledger EditorialTuesday, July 10, 2007

"During the debate in the New Jersey Legislature last fall over granting gay and lesbian couples the same benefits as heterosexual couples, much was made about what to call a partnership of two men or two women. Should it be labeled a marriage, a civil union or something else?

Lawmakers, hoping to avoid controversy, took the easy way out by concluding that the language really didn't matter. In sum, they decided to vote for gay marriage but call it by some other name. But it turns out that this other name, civil union, is a problem -- and will continue to be.

In a society of laws, definitions matter, and New Jersey's civil union law -- on the books for five months -- does not define those involved in a domestic partnership or civil union as spouses...

United Parcel Service has denied health benefits to some same-sex couples in New Jersey

Health care coverage woes show limitations of civil union law

Email this story Printer friendly format

July 8, 2007, 6:13 PM EDT
AP New Jersey/Newsday

TRENTON, N.J. -- United Parcel Service has denied health benefits to some same-sex couples in New Jersey, a decision gay rights advocates say starkly illustrates the limitations of the state's civil unions legislation.

The company provides health benefits to its employees' spouses, including married gay couples in Massachusetts. However, it said the Garden State's decision to recognize same-sex relationships as civil unions, rather than marriages, has tied its hands.

In a letter to Gabriael "Nickie" Brazier, a driver for UPS, and her civil union partner, Heather Aurand, the company concluded that "New Jersey law does not treat civil unions the same as marriages." It said if the state had done that, Aurand could have been included in the health coverage plan as a spouse.

"This is a problem the Legislature created," Steven Goldstein, chairman of the gay rights group Garden State Equality, told The Star-Ledger of Newark for Sunday's editions. "Civil unions are never in our lifetime going to be respected by employers like marriage."

...

Gay pair's photo blacked out of yearbook---Gay Students Picture Defaced by Administrative Order

By Kasi Addison, NJ.com/Newark Star-Ledger


This photograph of an East Side High School student Andre Jackson kissing his boyfriend David Escobales was blacked out of every copy of the school's yearbook by Newark school officials who decided it was inappropriate.

A photograph of an East Side High School student kissing his boyfriend was blacked out of every copy of the school's yearbook by Newark school officials who decided it was inappropriate.

Andre Jackson said he never thought he would offend anyone when he bought a page in the yearbook and filled it with several photographs, including one of him kissing his boyfriend.

But Newark Superintendent of Schools Marion Bolden called the photograph "illicit" and ordered it blacked out of the $85 yearbook before it was distributed to students at a banquet for graduating seniors Thursday.

"It looked provocative," she said. "If it was either heterosexual or gay, it should have been blacked out. It's how they posed for the picture."

Russell Garris, the assistant superintendent who oversees the city's high schools, brought the photograph to Bolden's attention Thursday afternoon. He was concerned the picture would be controversial and upsetting to parents, Bolden said.

There are several photos of heterosexual couples kissing in the yearbook, but the superintendent said she didn't review the entire yearbook and was presented only with Jackson's page.

Ripping the page out entirely was considered but, Bolden said, it was decided blacking it out with a marker would lessen the damage to the yearbooks.

Jackson said he showed up at the banquet, excited to collect his yearbook. He'd paid an additional $150 for the special tribute page filled with shots of boyfriend David Escobales, 19, of Allentown, Pa., and others. Jackson learned what happened to his page moments before the books were distributed.

While the students waited, staff members in another room blacked out the 4½-by-5-inch picture from approximately 230 books.

"I don't understand," said Jackson, 18. "There is no rule about no gay pictures, no guys kissing. Guys and girls kissing made it in."

East Side's is like most high school yearbooks. About 80 pages in the roughly 100-page tome is dedicated to class photos, formal shots of seniors, candids and spreads dedicated to a variety of sports teams and academic clubs.

The back of the book is a collection of tributes where students designed pages filled with pictures depicting them with their families, girlfriends and boyfriends, and friends.

Rules for publication of the pages prohibited shots of gang signs, rude gestures and graphic photos, said Benilde Barroqueiro, an East Side senior graduating with Jackson.

"You know, it couldn't be too provocative. No making out, no tongue," she said.

Students were surprised when they opened their books and found Jackson's picture had been covered with marker, Barroqueiro said.

"He purchased the page and fell under the rules," she said. "If they want to kiss, that's their page. If you don't like it, don't look at it."

Read more in Saturday's Star-Ledger

Opinion:
by CEO, MW Savant

I'm sad today. This story reminds me of just how far we have to go, as members of the GLBTI community, to be treated as equal citizens in the great state of New Jersey. Equal. Period.
I am baffled that some of our fellow citizens don't seem to grasp the concept.

Now I know that there are folks that will immediately say "it's inappropriate to depict a kiss in a yearbook". Which immediately begs the question, in my mind: "Is ANY couple shown kissing in the book?" If it was not deemed "inappropriate" to show other student-couples kissing and ALL those images were not removed, something isn't right here. You should know--- kissing opposite sex couples were allowed, without incident. Unacceptable.

What has, for decades, been considered "cute" when seen as heterosexual public displays of affection (PDA) has now challenged the cute factor in this new century. So much so that an administrator felt the need to order the homosexual version to be defaced? I guess it wasn't simply cute PDA for their purposes. It seems, though, the school happily accepted the $150.00 special page fee in order to manage publication costs. Hmmmm. Once the bill was paid, then the image was blacked out?

Where was the dutiful administrator when the yearbook advisor was collecting the images for 'dedication pages'? Why was this image not removed then and there? Why was the student's money accepted if the image was established as unwelcome and inappropriate by standing yearbook protocol?

This echoes, sadly, the biases against so many other GLBTI couples in this state. It is particularly resonant with the same disregard and humiliation that has befallen our couples who have entered civil unions in the state. Where is the compassionate compliance with the law. The civil union ruling in New Jersey was intended to level the playing field for all couples in love. As we have seen, it is failing markedly in too many situations.

The yearbook incident magnifies that lack of equality and makes me want to see the book myself to see what other 'types' of PDA were permissible therein. Were the Prom King and Queen, the Captain of the team and the Head Cheerleader allowed to be 'cute' within the pages?

There is no gray area in equality! I have said it time and time again. Yet I struggle to see that this insanely simple concept fails to grow in the minds and hearts of my fellow New Jerseyans.

Is this case discrimination or admirable administrative policing? Did a school administrator panic with the thought of the "imminent backlash" resulting from the printing and distribution of the photograph? Was the administrator's choice based on protecting the welfare of her students (the normal ones) or was her own personal position the key to her actions?

I received an alert from Garden State Equality this morning and, as a member of this organization, added my voice to the others of GSE in demanding an apology to the student, his boyfriend and all the other GLBTI students at East Side who have been humiliated and publicly reminded of just how reviled they are. I think an apology is due to every student there for being taught this lesson of fear, bigotry, paranoia and ignorance. GSE is also demanding the reprinting and redistribution of the yearbook: unedited and immediate.

You can support the effort to modify the standing of this situation by signing the petition and adding your voice to this call for fairness and equality.

We're making progress for equality in New Jersey and should be proud of that fact. With the efforts of the members of Garden State Equality and Steven Goldstein, in conjunction with the Civil Unions evaluation committee, we'll get there.

It is my opinion that this action amplifies, clearly, how much more work there is to be done.

Editor's Note: The preceding opinion is a statement by CEO MW Savant. It is his opinion and does not necessarily reflect the position of savvyplanners.com, its principals, staff or affiliates.

Garden State Equality has received 102 cases of employers and insurers not respecting the New Jersey civil unions law

As just announced by New Jersey Department of Health and Senior Services, there have been 852 civil unions in New Jersey since the law took effect on February 19, 2007. During the same 90 days, Garden State Equality has received 102 cases of employers and insurers not respecting the New Jersey civil unions law. That's nearly 1 in 8, a shocking 12 percent record of failure. And those are just the cases Garden State Equality has received.

Monday, May 21, 2007 -- Moments ago, the New Jersey Department of Health and Senior Services announced that 852 couples have gotten civil-unioned in New Jersey in the first ninety days of the civil unions law. During the same 90 days, Garden State Equality received 102 complaints of a civil union not being recognized by an employer or insurer in New Jersey. Today, in fact, Garden State Equality received its 103rd complaint. The failure rate is nearly 1 in 8, or 12 percent.

Asked Steven Goldstein, chair of Garden State Equality: "What society would ever tolerate a law that fails 12 percent of the time? If New Jersey's civil unions law were a person, it would be arrested for committing fraud."

Among the cases that have come to Garden State Equality: When a woman told her employer she got civil-unioned, the company said, We're not going to provide benefits. We still need the word "marriage" and you two aren't married. The human resources department even said: "Nothing has changed."

The two women, together 16 years, have adopted three special needs children. New Jersey should be celebrating such couples. Instead, civil-unioned couples across New Jersey are still being denied equal protection of the law.

New Jersey is proving that the common definition of civil unions -- that they provide all the state rights of marriage simply without the word marriage -- is a ruse. In fact, everyday civil unions threaten gay couples with the risk of none of the rights of marriage.

"For those who ask, 'So long as same-sex couples get the rights, who cares what it's called?' the New Jersey experience has answered the question once and for all," Goldstein said. "Unless a couple's relationship is given the imprimatur of marriage, that couple may never see the rights. Marriage is the only admissions ticket to equality universally recognized in the real world. It's the only currency of commitment the real world always accepts."

If you're a same-sex couple whose New Jersey civil union is not being recognized, please contact Garden State Equality's hotline at (973) GSE-LGBT or email us at Contact@GardenStateEquality.org with your name and phone number.

If you'd like to support Garden State Equality's campaign for marriage equality, join us at SUMMERTIME: RIO 2007! on Monday, June 25 at 6:30 pm at Moonstruck in Asbury Park. Tickets are on sale now at

http://eqfed.org/gse/events/summertime07/details.tcl