As I’ve said before, even in the NYS legislature, the idea that a bill only comes to the floor of a chamber of the legislature when a majority of the majority party’s membership would support it if it came to the floor, is nonsense.
Sometimes, a majority would support a bill if it came to the floor, and doesn’t want to let it on the floor for that very reason. Other times, the majority does not have the votes within its conference to pass a bill, but agrees to let it pass with the minority providing some of the votes.
But what liberals, editorial boards, and the forces of “good government" seem to be saying is that every bill which could potentially pass should be allowed to come to a floor vote.
This is an interesting proposition, and, I don’t necessarily disagree.
But I’m wondering where the mass media has been. Allowing for the short and sorry break when they allegedly controlled the Senate, for over two decades, the State Senate Democrats have been trying to allow their bills, and sometimes even Republican bills, to come to the floor, knowing that, if there ever was an open vote, those bills would pass. The Republican response has been to throw up procedural impediments to their ability to do this.
Can anyone ever remember a news story about this in a New York City daily?
On those occasions when Senate Democrats have made such attempts, every last Republican has voted against the motions to discharge these bills from committee and bring them to the floor, EVEN THOSE REPUBLICANS WHO CLAIM TO SUPPORT THE UNDERLYING LEGISLATION.
Their excuse was always the same, that the discharge votes are "purely procedural" and therefore don’t count.
Other than on Congestion Pricing, where the votes weren’t there, can anyone remember a New York City Daily ever running a news story or editorial casting doubt upon such abject nonsense? No, not even when the underlying bill is a "good government reform" supported by those dailies.
So, perhaps Silver and Skelos should let every piece of legislation come to the floor if it could pass, even if dependent on the Minority’s votes.
So let's apply this principal in the real world.
There are many bills which would pass the legislature if only they were brought to a vote. Some even carry the names of a majority of the legislative membership and still never see the light of day.
However, I’m not sure the editorial boards had such bills in mind before they finally found the inspiration to complain about legislation not being brought for a vote which would (unlike congestion pricing) pass if only given the chance to do so.
Frankly, I think if they actually read these bills they might be thankful for the absence of legislative action. All those public employee union perk/pork bills would be budget busters.
Likewise, “progressives”, even if not repulsed by assistance to the working man, might also think twice. For them, my favorite example is another bill which, like Congestion Pricing, Silver ostensibly favors personally, and which, though not supported by his conference, would probably pass if only it were allowed to come to the floor; yet Silver shamefully stands in the way of Democracy once again, claiming his hands are tied.
Using the logic deployed by editorial boards, liberals and “good government” types one might say that Silver must let this bill come to a vote, so it can pass!
It's the DEATH PENALTY!
But in reality, very few in Silver’s conference actually want to vote on it, because they either personally oppose and don’t want to be recorded voting “no” or they personally oppose it and don’t want be recorded voting “yes.”
Which bring us to Same Sex Marriage.
The votes are probably there, and the issue is not going away.
As every one up there knows, in the long run, the fight to stop same-sex marriage is probably doomed. The foundations of this sort of cultural conservatism are crumbling as we speak. My eight year old son already believes that gay couples can get married, because he’s seen two-mommy and two-daddy families in his religious-based nursery school, as well as at the public school he now attends.
In Brownstone Brooklyn, children have even seen same-sex parent families in the Orthodox Jewish nursery schools. As a leading Evangelical, Richard Cizik, has noted, about four in ten Evangelical Christians have an LGTB friend or family member. Another generation and what so many fear so much will amount to oh so little.
Most legislators don’t fear it at all.
What they fear is a vote.
But there should be a worse fear.
The fear that this will not go away.
It won’t. Every year, this is going to come back and haunt Albany, sucking (perhaps not the best choice of words) all the energy out of the room, so that no one even pays attention to “The Big Ugly” (actually some may see that as an advantage of sorts).
As long as Albany keeps Same Sex Marriage on the table by not passing it, too many people will be watching; people who don't normally pay attention.
As a result, all these people, on both sides, and those who don't have a side, but who are finally getting some Albany coverage because of the controversey, are getting a bird's eye view of how the legislature really operates.
I submit that for legisltors of all parties seeking a zone of comfort, this is a very bad thing
Same Sex Marriage will remain Albany’s Real Big Ugly until it passes, and then it will be practically forgotten.
Come to your senses guys and pass the damned thing already!