Slog

News & Arts

The Stranger Suggests

Critics' Best Bets
Music Arts & Food


Line Out

Music & the City
at Night

Wednesday, January 18, 2012

Kastama to Announce Position on Marriage Bill

Posted by on Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 7:18 PM

Place your non-monetary, totally legal bets:

Sen. Jim Kastama of Puyallup has scheduled a press conference for Thursday to declare his position. Supporters of the bill are just two votes shy in the Senate, and Kastama is 1 of a half-dozen lawmakers who remain uncommitted.

Here's the tricky part:

Kastama is a conservative Democrat who voted in 1998 to define marriage as between one man and one woman. He supported a 2009 expansion of the state's domestic partnership laws.

 

Comments (12) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
BLUE 1
Do pols really hold press conferences to announce status quo? I guess they do but...
Posted by BLUE on January 18, 2012 at 7:21 PM
MacCrocodile 2
This is going to drive me crazy seeing that list of Undecideds. I assume you'll be telling us how each of them voted when this is all over, right?
Posted by MacCrocodile on January 18, 2012 at 7:22 PM
Baconcat 3
He's running for the Dem nomination for Secretary of State. I think he'd only be holding a presser if he's announcing his intention to vote "YES".

In other news that seems in line with Dunn's announcement and, hopefully, Kastama's, Lieutenant Governor candidate GOP Representative Glenn Anderson is voting YES in the House: http://houserepublicans.wa.gov/news/stat…

Note that the announcement is on the OFFICIAL website for the House Republicans.

It looks like everyone running to represent EVERYONE at the state level is lining up to do exactly that and extend civil marriage to all Washington citizens.
Posted by Baconcat on January 18, 2012 at 7:25 PM
Purocuyu 4
I'm with Baconcat. If he was going to vote no, he would just hold out till the last day and avoid as much negative press as possible. Washington is a progressive state, and the Dem party is heading toward the marriage-equality side of the argument. If he has any ambitions within the Dem party, he will know where his party is headed and where he should be heading.
Posted by Purocuyu http://littlevictorygarden.tumblr.com on January 18, 2012 at 8:12 PM
balderdash 5
"Conservative Democrat" = wat

I mean you have to be seriously reactionary to earn the label "conservative" in this country. "Centrists" and "moderates" are still pretty commonly allowed to hold opinions like "Affirmative action is racist" and "Religion should inform judicial and legislative decisions" and "We should teach special creation alongside evolutionary biology in schools" in America. You have to be a real backwards dickhead to be considered actually conservative. I am at a loss to explain how someone like that could also wish to be, or actually widely in fact be, called a Democrat.

Dude better check his shit and announce that his position is "Holy shit yes, I love gay marriages so much that I am buying two" or else fuck him forever.
Posted by balderdash http://introverse.blogspot.com on January 18, 2012 at 8:15 PM
Reverse Polarity 6
I wouldn't put too much stock in his 1998 vote. A lot of moderate democrats supported that for purely strategic reasons. The thought back then was that if they voted for straight marriage only it would accomplish 2 positive things: (1) it would head off a state constitutional amendment vote (which turned out to be right), and (2) it would be overruled by the state supreme court as obviously unconstitutional so it wouldn't do any harm anyway (which turned out to be wrong).

If you go back an look at the votes, you'll see that a lot of democrats voted that way.
Posted by Reverse Polarity on January 18, 2012 at 8:25 PM
7
@3, thanks for pointing out Rep. Glenn Anderson's support. Note the irony of a previously unsupportive Republican--Anderson--supporting marriage equality and running for Lt. Governor while the incumbent Democrat Lt. Governor (and Senate President) has not stated any support for marriage equality.
Posted by Seattlevoter206 on January 18, 2012 at 9:53 PM
8
So, sounds like we need convince just one more senator and this thing will pass. But then the real work of convincing the people not to overturn it begins. That's going to be much tougher than getting it through the legislature.

And for what it's worth (which probably ain't much) while Dan Savage has been a great advocate for equality, I think he should keep his head down once we move into the referendum stage. He scares anyone who doesn't live within sight of the Space Needle.
Posted by Mason on January 18, 2012 at 10:48 PM
Chef Thunder 9
@mason two more senators are still needed. Contact anyone you know in lynnwood, Edmonds, mukeltio and ask them to contact senator shin
Posted by Chef Thunder on January 18, 2012 at 11:09 PM
10
Just to be contrarian (and I hope I'm wrong), I can imagine he may be like Haugen and say "I support it if allow the people of Washington to vote on it." It seems to me that's the in-between chicken **** option.
Posted by BelievesInNuances on January 18, 2012 at 11:33 PM
11
Is there any update on what time this press conference is today? Will it be aired live on TVW? Thanks!
Posted by Whodunit? on January 19, 2012 at 8:02 AM
Donolectic 12
@Mason - I fail to see how a family man with a kid wanting to get married to protect his family does a disservice to the marriage cause.
Posted by Donolectic on January 19, 2012 at 12:58 PM

Add a comment

Advertisement
 

All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Contact Info | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Takedown Policy