RECENT  POSTS:  » NOM spends six figures on North Carolina's Hagan/Tillis US Senate race » Idaho wedding venue can be discriminatory so long as it sticks to new business model » Sunday in Houston: Activists mad that churches were noted for their politicization head to a church—to politicize » Lisa Kudrow thinks my website title is modest, at best » Do you take this man to be your lawfully wedded mission of destruction? » MassResistance's hilarious fourteen-point plan for reinstating marriage discrimination: Get really, really nasty » Concerned Women For America finally learns to call out anti-gay rhetoric » 'Rivka Edelman' responds to me via one of the most bizarre comments I've ever read » Just going to another vendor isn't always easy, isn't good basis for sound policy » Pat Robertson: People who believe in fair nondiscrimination law are 'terrorists, radicals, and extremists'  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

03/23/2009

26-4!

by Jeremy Hooper

6A00D8341C503453Ef011168C652B3970C.Jpg-1How's same-sex marriage advancing in Vermont? Well, pretty smoothly if you judge by the nice veto-proof majority of state senators that just sided with equality:

Late this afternoon, the Senate voted 26-4 to advance the same-sex marriage equality bill on to the House of Representatives. The House will begin its consideration of the bill tomorrow.
Gay marriage bill passes Vermont Senate [NECN]

A good showing! Now here's hoping that a massive majority in the House will side with the valid minority that only wants to protect their own.

**Our complete VT archive

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

Well, California's Legislature did that twice! But the Governor refused to sign, both times. I understand Vermont's isn't likely to either.

Posted by: LOrionL | Mar 24, 2009 12:10:31 AM

Jeremy, do you know when the vote is in the VT house, and what it would take to get a veto-proof number?

Posted by: Phil in Colorado | Mar 24, 2009 11:22:00 AM

Hearing begins today, vote could come this week. And a veto-proof majority would be 100+ members, which is quite possible with the democratic/progressive makeup.

That's the big difference between calfornia, lorion -- the possibilty of a veto override.

Posted by: G-A-YY | Mar 24, 2009 11:38:08 AM

101+, I shouldve said

Posted by: G-A-Y | Mar 24, 2009 11:56:57 AM

Wow... what is there, 150 members in the Vermont house?

Posted by: Phil in Colorado | Mar 24, 2009 12:12:53 PM

Yea, 150. According to Wiki, this is the current breakdown:

Democratic - 96

Republican - 47

VT Progressive Party - 5

Independent - 2

Posted by: G-A-Y | Mar 24, 2009 12:23:38 PM

Thanks!

Posted by: Phil in Colorado | Mar 24, 2009 5:08:50 PM

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails