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/.

Gay marriage debate intensifies as conservatives get organized

Associated Press - December 15, 2007 12:15 PM ET

MOUNT LAUREL, N.J. (AP) - The battle over gay marriage in New Jersey has a new player.

The National Organization for Marriage, a group opposed to gay marriage, was established earlier this year in Princeton. Lately it has made its presence known with radio advertisements urging people to call their lawmakers.

The group set up in New Jersey because it is 1 of a few states where there's a realistic chance in the next few years that lawmakers will vote to allow gay marriage.

New Jersey currently recognizes civil unions.

Governor Jon Corzine has said he would sign a gay marriage bill into law, but that he did not want to deal with the issue before the 2008 presidential election.

Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

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."

Corzine Urges UPS to Provide Civil Union Benefits

by: Juan Melli; Blue Jersey

Governor Corzine today wrote a letter to UPS Chairman and CEO Michael Eskew urging the company to reconsider it's denial of benefits to civil union couples in New Jersey. Corzine argues that New Jersey law considers civil union couples as spouses, even though we can't actually call them that. So, civil union couples are exactly like married couples and partners are just like spouses, but we can't actually use those words because...who the (***) (Expletive deleted by savvyplanners.com) knows? The need for this letter is further evidence that this law simply doesn't work. Eliot Spitzer took a lead on marriage equality and the New York Assembly subsequently passed marriage equality legislation. Corzine is armed with evidence that this law is a failure. He should step up and lead the state out of this mess and bring true equality for all our residents. Below is the governor's letter: Dear Mr. Eskew: On February 19, 2007, New Jersey's civil union law took effect. The purpose of the statute is to ensure the equal treatment of committed, same-sex couples in New Jersey by providing those couples who enter into a civil union with all of the benefits, protections and obligations of marriage. An important component of the equality envisioned by the law is the provision of health and other benefits to civil union partners of employees on the same terms as are provided to employee spouses. To accomplish this goal, the New Jersey law mandates that employers operating in the State provide benefits on equal terms to civil union partners and spouses. It has recently come to my attention that employers who self-fund employee benefits, such your company -- that is, companies who do not provide employee benefits through a contract of insurance -- may assert that federal law, namely the Employee Retirement Income Security Act ("ERISA") and the Defense of Marriage Act ("DOMA"), prevent enforcement against them of the mandatory provisions of New Jersey's civil union statute with respect to employee benefits for civil union partners. While these statutes arguably provide that State anti-discrimination laws relating to employee benefits cannot be enforced against self-funded employers through legal action, nothing in federal law prevents self-funded employers from providing the civil union partners of employees with benefits on terms equal to those provided to spouses. It is my understanding that UPS has demonstrated this fact by going beyond the minimum requirements of federal law and providing benefits to the civil union partners of non-unionized employees. I applaud you for this decision, which represents a significant step toward eliminating inequality for committed, same-sex couples in New Jersey. Equal benefits have not, however, been provided by UPS to the civil union partners of employees represented by collective bargaining agents. It is my understanding that a clause in the applicable collective bargaining agreement(s) providing benefits to employee "spouses" has been interpreted by UPS as not applying to civil union partners from New Jersey. This interpretation of the contract(s) leaves a subset of your employees, including employees who work in New Jersey, without benefits for their civil union partners, creating inequity at the workplace and furthering the inequitable treatment of committed, same-sex couples that the New Jersey law is intended to eradicate. To the extent that the interpretation of "spouse" in the collective bargaining agreement(s) is based on the status of civil union partners under New Jersey law, I call to your attention a provision of the New Jersey civil union statute, N.J.S.A. 37:1-33, that provides that "[w]henever in any law, rule, regulation, judicial or administrative proceeding or otherwise, reference is made to . . . `spouse' . . . or another word which in a specific context denotes a marital or spousal relationship, the same shall include a civil union pursuant to the provisions of this act." The quoted provision makes plain that New Jersey law intends that civil union partners be viewed as spouses under all facets of New Jersey law and that a reference to "spouse" in a legal context, including in a contract, embraces civil union partners. This interpretation of "spouse" as it appears in the collective bargaining agreement(s) applicable to UPS employees who are in a New Jersey civil union would be consistent with New Jersey law and the intended purpose of the civil union statute. I urge you to reconsider your company's reading of its collective bargaining agreement(s) on this point to facilitate implementation of the goals of the civil union law. Apart from any purely legal considerations, the provision of employee benefits to civil union partners on the same terms as spouses would be more than a symbolic gesture of your company's commitment to eliminating discrimination. Spousal benefits are a key element of the financial and physical well-being of working couples and their children. The provision of those benefits can, in some cases, mean the difference between the security of having health insurance, the financial strain of acquiring coverage at significant expense, or the risk of financial ruin by remaining uninsured. Surely, as a company with a longstanding commitment to its employees and the community, UPS would not want to make its employees and their families face these difficult choices based on the subtleties of the interaction of federal and State law, the happenstance that an employee is in a collective bargaining unit rather than an unrepresented position, and an unnecessarily restrictive interpretation of a phrase in a collective bargaining agreement(s). Thank you in advance for your consideration of this matter. Sincerely yours, Jon S. Corzine Governor

Juan Melli :: Corzine Urges UPS to Provide Civil Union Benefits

Tags: marriage equality, Civil Unions, UPS, Jon Corzine, (All Tags) :: Add/Edit Tags on this Post

Print Friendly View Send As Email