Sign Up to Receive Email Action Alerts From Issa Exposed
×

Washington Senate to vote on marriage equality today

Marriage equality

By Jacob Combs

As we reported earlier this week, the full Washington Senate will vote on a proposed marriage equality bill today.  The measure is expected to pass the chamber, since the 25 votes needed for passage have already been pledged.  Several legislators have yet to announce which way they will vote, so it’s possible the vote with pass with a more comfortable margin.

The Senate will convene from 10:00 am-12:00 pm.  TVW will have a live stream of the vote on its website.

Update (12 pm PST): As many have noted in the comments, the Senate has recessed until 6 pm, when the marriage equality bill, SB 6239, will be up for debate and a vote.

64 Comments

  • 1. Gregory in SLC  |  February 1, 2012 at 10:18 am

    thx for link! Here we go! HAPPY BIRTHDAY Mark Mead-Brewer!

  • 2. Mark M. (Seattle)  |  February 1, 2012 at 10:58 am

    Thanks Greg!!
    I really couldn't have asked for a better birthday present :-)

  • 3. Gregory in SLC  |  February 1, 2012 at 11:22 am

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/02/01/us-gay-

    Democratic Senator Ed Murray, its chief sponsor, said last week proponents had secured the 25 votes needed for a simple majority in the 49-seat chamber. Murray has said he hoped to end up with 27 or more votes, though the controversial issue was likely to result in a lengthy floor debate that could last well into the night.

  • 4. Straight Dave  |  February 1, 2012 at 11:23 am

    I just joined the live stream, but the senate seems to be on a break right now. Does anyone know if the vote has been completed yet or if it comes after the break?

  • 5. Gregory in SLC  |  February 1, 2012 at 11:39 am

    recessing now until 6p then will discuss SB 6239 (concerning civil unions and marriage)

  • 6. 415kathleenk  |  February 1, 2012 at 11:39 am

    they adjourned till 6PM. Is that when they will take up the marriage equality bill? Number was mentioned but i don't know if that is the one we are interested in. ANyone more clued in?

  • 7. Scott Kricho  |  February 1, 2012 at 11:39 am

    The senate just recessed until 6 PM.

  • 8. Mark M. (Seattle)  |  February 1, 2012 at 11:39 am

    Adjourned until 6:00 pm Damn it!!! :-(

  • 9. Andy M  |  February 1, 2012 at 11:39 am

    They just moved to recess until 6pm this evening.

  • 10. Carpool Cookie  |  February 1, 2012 at 11:40 am

    The actress Frances Farmer was from Washington. She was way ahead of her time, and would have liked to see today's events, I'm sure : )

  • 11. Gregory in SLC  |  February 1, 2012 at 11:48 am

    sb 6239:
    http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary.aspx?bill

  • 12. Seth from Maryland  |  February 1, 2012 at 11:51 am

    looks like we are headed into another long wait into the night

  • 13. Ann S.  |  February 1, 2012 at 12:00 pm

    §

  • 14. Sagesse  |  February 1, 2012 at 12:02 pm

    @

  • 15. Kate  |  February 1, 2012 at 12:42 pm

    ALERT to Cookie — email Kathleen. She has been trying to reach you.

  • 16. cr8nguy  |  February 1, 2012 at 2:45 pm

    a question for those of you knowing about such things:

    there is talk of Gov G waiting as long as she can to sign it so as to make the time shorter for NOM peeps to gather signatures. Does this sound right? isn't there a specified number of days? or is there a hard date deadline regardless of when bill is passed?

    educate me please :)

  • 17. rocketeer500  |  February 1, 2012 at 3:13 pm

    It will be up to the both respective houses to provide a timeline. The legislature can delay as much as it wants too, up until June 6th, I believe.

    However, when both houses have voted, and is brought to the govenors desk, the governor must sign or veto legislation within 5 days of transmittal (excepting Sundays), or it becomes law without signature. Bills transmitted within the last 5 days of the session must be acted upon by the governor within 20 days of adjournment (excepting Sundays).

    So, for the sake of risking a referendum, the House could wait until sometime near June 6th to take a floor vote. If the session is within the last 5 days, the governor would have an additional 20 days to sign.

    If that scenario played out, it would be late June before the opposition of file for a referendum, making their task of collecting 127,000 signatures almost impossible.

  • 18. cr8nguy  |  February 1, 2012 at 3:36 pm

    ok, that helps a bit, but it seems like they think the house will vote by Friday. so, does it automatically transmit at that point, or can they wait to transmit it until june?

    and if it goes til june….why does that make it almost impossible? don't they get X-number of days to collect?

  • 19. Bryce  |  February 1, 2012 at 3:53 pm

    My expertise is on state level LGBT activism, so I don't know about Washington's laws per se. But I do know that the signatures have to be DATED after passage of the bill, but not necessarily COLLECTED after passage of the bill. Theoretically, NOM could have the signatures all already and fill in the dates the day after the bill is signed into law. As far as I know, there would be no way to tell if it was perjury, meaning that it wouldn't necessarily be illegal… just unethical. And NOM is nothing if not unethical.

  • 20. Bryce  |  February 1, 2012 at 4:09 pm

    Also, to answer your question, the opponents have to find 120,557 signatures to refer an initiative to the people. This must take place within 90 days of the close of the legislature. This comes out to about 1340 signatures a day.
    (http://www.sos.wa.gov/elections/initiatives/faq.aspx)

  • 21. Bryce  |  February 1, 2012 at 4:18 pm

    I realize that what I typed above left something out: signatures can be dated any time after the passage of the act. Ergo, if it is passed on the last day of the legislative meeting, it has to be signed after the legislative action. If the bill were passed and signed into law on Monday (for example), then the opponents could have any signatures between then and 90 days after the close of the legislature.

  • 22. cr8nguy  |  February 1, 2012 at 5:05 pm

    ok, thanks!

  • 23. Lesbians Love Boies  |  February 1, 2012 at 5:55 pm

    Live feed is starting!

  • 24. Lesbians Love Boies  |  February 1, 2012 at 6:04 pm

    well that was short.

  • 25. Bryce  |  February 1, 2012 at 6:07 pm

    I just commented on another post that it would be nice if there was a place that we could go for just comments on the Senate Debate/Vote.

  • 26. Bryce  |  February 1, 2012 at 6:13 pm

    I wonder how long a caucus takes.

  • 27. allen  |  February 1, 2012 at 6:14 pm

    Did they mention when they will reconvene? Not sure if I should sit at the stand by screen or keep trying periodically ¬_¬ maybe I'll do both.

  • 28. Lesbians Love Boies  |  February 1, 2012 at 6:18 pm

    Yes, right after the caucus.

  • 29. Sam_Handwich  |  February 1, 2012 at 6:33 pm

    30-40 minutes at 350 F. be sure to baste occasionally.

  • 30. Lesbians Love Boies  |  February 1, 2012 at 6:37 pm

    just started

  • 31. Lesbians Love Boies  |  February 1, 2012 at 6:40 pm

    Substitute Senate bill SB 6239 with SB 6239?

  • 32. Bryce  |  February 1, 2012 at 6:41 pm

    On mine it says "Live Event Status: Live", but it also says it can't find it. Anyone else?

  • 33. Gregory in SLC  |  February 1, 2012 at 6:42 pm

    same here in Utah…."server not found" error

  • 34. Alex  |  February 1, 2012 at 6:44 pm

    http://www.tvw.org/index.php?option=com_tvwlivepl

  • 35. Sam_Handwich  |  February 1, 2012 at 6:45 pm

    http://tvw.org/index.php?option=com_tvwliveplayer

  • 36. Bryce  |  February 1, 2012 at 6:46 pm

    Frustrating!!!

  • 37. Lesbians Love Boies  |  February 1, 2012 at 6:47 pm

    I want a gavel!

  • 38. Gregory in SLC  |  February 1, 2012 at 6:48 pm

    since can't connect to TV, can follow tweets:
    https://twitter.com/wa4marriage

    or facebook:
    http://www.facebook.com/WashingtonUnited

  • 39. Sam_Handwich  |  February 1, 2012 at 6:48 pm

    6:48PM they're still adding stupid amendments to "protect" jesus or whatever

  • 40. Alex  |  February 1, 2012 at 6:50 pm

    They need to put an exemption to exclude faith based organizations or churches that receive tax payer dollars. They shouldn't have a right to discriminate while taking in tax payer dollars.

  • 41. Lesbians Love Boies  |  February 1, 2012 at 6:50 pm

    Time to take away these faith based organizations protection of non-profit status! Or let my Spaghetti Monster Faith based organization have NON-PROFIT status!

  • 42. Lesbians Love Boies  |  February 1, 2012 at 6:53 pm

    Exactly – getting freedom from taxation for discrimination.

  • 43. Raniee  |  February 1, 2012 at 6:54 pm

    Why are they accepting those amendments? The senate already have the votes!

  • 44. Gregory in SLC  |  February 1, 2012 at 6:54 pm

    Its up!!!!!!!!

  • 45. Lesbians Love Boies  |  February 1, 2012 at 6:55 pm

    There are many judicial officers willing to marry these people? Better be EVERY judicial officer!

  • 46. allen  |  February 1, 2012 at 6:57 pm

    Not for me, I can't even get to the page anymore :( Trying through GoogleChrome and InternetExp

  • 47. Gregory in SLC  |  February 1, 2012 at 7:02 pm

    YAY! amendment not adopted

  • 48. Bryce  |  February 1, 2012 at 7:03 pm

    This is ridiculous! I was on the site since 4 this afternoon (my time) and yet I get kicked off because too many people are on it! Sadness!

  • 49. EricKoszyk  |  February 1, 2012 at 7:08 pm

    Good blogging is coming from Seattle's weekly paper, "The Stranger". One of their reporters is blogging from the Senate chambers:
    http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2012/02

  • 50. Gregory in SLC  |  February 1, 2012 at 7:13 pm

    Great! thx!

  • 51. JacobRD  |  February 1, 2012 at 7:17 pm

    Right now a referendum amendment is being discussed

  • 52. JacobRD  |  February 1, 2012 at 7:25 pm

    Not adopted!

  • 53. Alex  |  February 1, 2012 at 7:32 pm

    Swecker is such an idiot. We are "intolerant" because we are tired of the state and or federal governments sanctioning bigotry? He has his head up his arse.

  • 54. Alex  |  February 1, 2012 at 7:40 pm

    Ranker PLEASE! GIVE ME BREAK! Ugh ignorance.

  • 55. allen  |  February 1, 2012 at 7:45 pm

    I got in through this link.
    http://www.king5.com/live-stream/pop-up-ads/Watch

  • 56. DaveP  |  February 1, 2012 at 7:48 pm

    Bah! I got no audio on this computer, but I'm following the live blogging (thanks for that link!). Good to see y'all here.

  • 57. Straight Dave  |  February 1, 2012 at 7:55 pm

    Me too. awesome, thanks.
    the senators want to vote now.

  • 58. Nyx  |  February 1, 2012 at 7:56 pm

    The vote has begun.

  • 59. Straight Dave  |  February 1, 2012 at 7:59 pm

    passed 28-21

  • 60. JacobRD  |  February 1, 2012 at 7:59 pm

    28 Yea 21 Nay

  • 61. EricKoszyk  |  February 1, 2012 at 7:59 pm

    28 yays, 21 nays

    awesome!

  • 62. Seth from Maryland  |  February 1, 2012 at 8:02 pm

    congrats washington , Lucky number 7

  • 63. DaveP  |  February 1, 2012 at 8:06 pm

    Awesome!! Well done, Washington!!!!!

  • 64. Another day. « wild&hellip  |  February 3, 2012 at 1:54 pm

    [...] my right to marry – a state here, a state there. New Hampshire. Yesterday, Maryland. Today, Washington. It feels like they do this every day. Imagine what it feels like – to read about people voting [...]

Having technical problems? E-mail equalityontrial AT couragecampaign DOT org for assistance!