Congratulations, Vermont, in legalizing same-sex marriages, in spite of a senseless veto from Governor Jim Douglas. During the campaign to legalize “civil unions” back in 2000, those opposed to the new law ran the “Take Back Vermont” campaign, which inspired those in favor to proclaim, “Take Vermont Forward.” Forward indeed! Vermont has become the first state to legalize same-sex marriage through an act of legislation, instead of a judicial mandate.
A colleague joked at lunch today:
I was totally against it [same-sex marriage] until I heard it was optional.
But seriously, folks. The Boston Globe ran an Associated Press story on the matter today, quoting Governor Douglas on why he vetoed the bill:
“What really disappoints me is that we have spent some time on an issue during which another thousand Vermonters have lost their jobs,” the governor said Tuesday. “We need to turn out attention to balancing a budget without raising taxes, growing the economy, putting more people to work.”
First, wouldn’t the legislature have resumed its economy-related activities faster if you hadn’t made them first override your useless veto (by 23 votes to 5)?
More importantly, the United States spends billions of dollars on weddings every year, averaging $20,000 for a single ceremony and upwards of $80 billion nationwide. That money goes into wildly diverse markets and often to local businesses. Services (florists, caterers, musicians, photographers), jewelers (for rings), real estate owners (for both the ceremony and reception spaces), other property renters (for furniture, tents, dishes), printers (for announcements, invitations, place cards, et cetera), and even the travel industry (for both honeymoon travel and for out-of-town family attending the ceremony) — not to mention the wedding industry’s own internal services like gown designers and formalwear renters — get enormous payouts every time two people get married.
Maybe some governors would rather Massachusetts get all that economy-boosting glory, eh?
And yet Governor Douglas himself found time to redesign the Vermont’s quarter coin.
http://governor.vermont.gov/tools/index.php?topic=GovPressReleases&id=3380&v=Article
Politicians frequently spend time on things that make me say “well, thank goodness all those other problems are finally solved”. Like the Terry Schiavo law, or Toby Keith Appreciation Day.
One of the more substantive issues around gay marriage is how gay couples are excluded from Federal income tax benefits. Married taxpayers pay substantially lower taxes than singles filing separately. Gay couples cannot access that benefit and consequently pay higher taxes than comparable married couples.
Surprisingly, the Republican party (proudly) leads the opposition to gay marriage. Therefore, the Republican party supports higher taxes. I guess want to spread some of that DINK (dual income, no kids) wealth around.
A friend of mine once made an interesting suggestion. The government should stop recognizing any marriage, declaring it purely a religious or spiritual institution that couples can explore through their church, through a private ceremony, or not at all.
To preserve the tax benefits, then, allow any two people to file jointly who wish to: spouses, siblings, roommates, even a parent and child. Of course, there’s a disincentive to file jointly with someone you do not completely trust, since you’d then share the burden of any financial misdeeds your “tax partner” had committed.
Of course, this scheme completely ignores other important issues, like who’s allowed to visit their spouse in an emergency room, who has custody of children, et cetera. It’s no less an interesting idea.