Five GOP Senators Who Could Decide Same-Sex Marriage Vote

Tuesday, June 14, 2011

As momentum builds for a vote on gay marriage in the final week of the legislative session, five GOP state Senators are considering a yes vote. Twenty-nine of 30 Democrats now lined up to support the bill. Two more votes from the Republican side of the aisle are needed for gay marriages to become legal in New York.

Four formerly undecided senators — three Democrats and one Republican — said on Monday that they would support the bill, bringing the total number of yes votes to 30 out of the 32 needed. Governor Andrew Cuomo said he plans to introduce the bill by the end of the week, once he has the votes he needs.

1. Greg Ball

Greg Ball of Putnam County told the Capitol Confidential blog late Monday that his vote depends on the language of the bill, which is expected to be introduced soon. 

2. Andrew Lanza

Andrew Lanza of Staten Island told WNYC's Ailsa Chang on Tuesday that he is being lobbied 24/7. He told the Staten Island Advance in May that he's behind the idea of civil unions but is unsure about all-out same-sex marriage. "While I have been a 'no,' I continue to listen and keep an open mind. I truly wish we could go with civil unions and see what would happen in a couple of years. Those who advocate for same-sex marriage talk about the economic issues and rights associated with marriage. I know we can accomplish that with civil unions. But it seems we have gotten beyond that."

3. Roy McDonald

Roy McDonald of Rensselaer was personally lobbied by Governor Andrew Cuomo on Thursday, according to the the Albany Times Union. "Right now, I'm somewhat undecided," he told the newspaper. "I'm sensitive to all people."

4. Betty Little

Betty Little of Glens Falls told the Adirondack Daily Enterprise two weeks ago that same-sex marriage has its best chance yet of passing, but she did not say exactly where she stood on the issue. "Certainly it's more of a possibility this year than it ever has been," she said. The paper continued to report that Little would not vote for the measure.

5. Stephen Saland

Stephen Saland of Poughkeepsie told the Journal News two weeks ago that he was still undecided. "I've heard from any number of people on both sides of the issue," Saland said. "And certainly I'm trying to take into account, in a deliberative fashion, the issues that have been raised by the proponents, issues which hadn't necessarily been raised with me when I cast a vote previously."


More in:

News, weather, Radiolab, Brian Lehrer and more.
Get the best of WNYC in your inbox, every morning.

Comments [3]

Linda C Doery

A civil union, yes.
A marriage, NO!

Jun. 14 2011 05:48 PM
sarah2 from Brooklyn

And senators: please take note of the arguments made in the letters of your constituents. Which arguments are rooted in Constitutional principles and which ones are rooted in religious principles? And which text were you elected to defend?

Jun. 14 2011 05:34 PM
Wayne from WI

I recommend that the GOP Senators consider the plight of the children of gay families. Certainly, they are entitled to the security and stability of married parents and the recognition that comes with it. To deny them this consideration would be terrible. Consider also that Mass and Iowa, both having gay marriage, have the nation's lowest divorce rates. Nevada and Arkansas, where same sex marriage is banned, have the highest. If the Mass/Iowa experience is called "redefining marrage", LETS'S HAVE MORE OF IT!!!!!

Jun. 14 2011 02:05 PM

Leave a Comment

Register for your own account so you can vote on comments, save your favorites, and more. Learn more.
Please stay on topic, be civil, and be brief.
Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments. Names are displayed with all comments. We reserve the right to edit any comments posted on this site. Please read the Comment Guidelines before posting. By leaving a comment, you agree to New York Public Radio's Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use.


Latest Newscast




WNYC is supported by the Charles H. Revson Foundation: Because a great city needs an informed and engaged public


Supported by