Maine House Passes Marriage Equality Bill 89-58

Maine_smallThe Maine House has passed the marriage equality bill by a vote of 89-58. 

Bangor Daily News: "The vote of 89 in favor to 58 opposed sends the LD 1020 back to the Senate for its final approval. The House, in a 85 to 62 vote also rejected a try to send the matter to referendum. The proposal would make Maine the fifth state to allow gay marriage. But it's unclear whether Gov. John Baldacci would sign the bill. Baldacci remains undecided."

An earlier NECN report with some of the debate, AFTER THE JUMP...

Feed This post's comment feed


  1. Yay!!

    Posted by: John | May 5, 2009 1:37:05 PM

  2. Great news.

    Hope theres no referendum.

    Posted by: Wes | May 5, 2009 1:37:22 PM

  3. Woo-hoo!

    Posted by: tjc | May 5, 2009 1:41:28 PM

  4. Quite an impressive margin of victory for equality, too!

    Posted by: CitizenGeek | May 5, 2009 1:42:51 PM

  5. Congratulations Maine! Another important victory for equality!

    Now the governor just needs to sign it.

    Posted by: samwise | May 5, 2009 1:49:32 PM

  6. Congratulations to the Great State of Maine !

    Posted by: hephaistion | May 5, 2009 2:01:35 PM

  7. anyone know how long the governor has to either sign or veto it?

    Posted by: matt | May 5, 2009 2:02:00 PM

  8. Expected, but great news nonetheless. Almost 2/3rds.

    @Wes: I can't see any other possibility than a referendum. With the backing of organizations like NOM, who would LOVE to see another "will of the people" expression, they'll get the signatures required for the People's Veto. But I have a sneaky feeling if that happens, the vote may not go as Maggie wants.

    Posted by: Bruno | May 5, 2009 2:04:53 PM

  9. Ahhh! Yay! Listen to your representatives and do the right thing, Baldacci!

    Posted by: K | May 5, 2009 2:10:50 PM

  10. :-)

    Posted by: liz templin | May 5, 2009 2:12:23 PM

  11. Correction:

    LD 1020 is already in concurrence with the Senate. It has been passed and signed by the Speaker and is being sent to the Senate for signature before going to the Governor. There isn't another vote. It's done!

    Posted by: homogeniushomogenius | May 5, 2009 2:14:35 PM

  12. omg
    this is so awesome!

    Posted by: Rufus | May 5, 2009 2:24:40 PM

  13. Why is this going back to the Senate? I thought it already passed the Senate.

    Posted by: DaveO | May 5, 2009 2:53:42 PM

  14. Beautiful. Now contact the Governor and encourage him to sign marriage equality into law.

    Posted by: Bill | May 5, 2009 2:56:23 PM

  15. Daveo: I think just for a signature that the 2 houses are in concurrence? There won't be a vote in the Senate as far as I know.

    Posted by: Bruno | May 5, 2009 3:06:46 PM

  16. I love the way these other American states are whacking the asses of California and New York. (No more superiority-complexes for the gays in NY/CA).

    Posted by: JT | May 5, 2009 3:21:27 PM


    Maine has a "People's Veto" Ballot system where a petition can be filed to put any bill up to public vote. Even if the Gov. signs it there's still that problem to go through.

    Posted by: occono | May 5, 2009 3:32:41 PM

  18. I'm a little confused by the shadenfreude evident in JT's reaction. As a New York gay, I'm thrilled to see marriage equality come to Vermont, Iowa, etc., and more than a little ashamed that my state has fallen so behind.

    Posted by: Adam | May 5, 2009 4:11:49 PM

  19. Come November the Nation will be in a different place. We don't have to fear a possible referendum. Even the worse case scenario would empower our movement and serve to decry social injustice.

    Posted by: Rafael | May 5, 2009 4:25:53 PM

  20. Maybe JT should remember exactly where this revolution started. I certainly do every time I walk past the Stonewall Inn. We are all doing our part.

    Posted by: MT | May 5, 2009 5:11:59 PM

  21. Maybe JT should also remember that without Gavin Newsom and us gays in California the rest of the US(and the world) wouldn't even be having the conversation about marriage equality. We are ALL striving for equality.

    Posted by: SFshawn | May 5, 2009 5:58:46 PM

  22. SFSHAWN, you just put the "gays in California" before "we are all." That is what JT is talking about. It's not about which areas of the country are better or more progressive.

    California has had little part in the conversation here in Maine. In the words of Prejean, no offense but I doubt even a small part of Maine would like to take steps towards becoming like California.

    And that's not even the point. You are right, we are all striving for equality, but what I think what JT was saying is that you don't have to go to NYC or California to find it. Instead, you can stick around in your home state and find it just the same, this bill proves that.

    Posted by: B. Wash | May 5, 2009 6:31:57 PM

  23. Shawn,

    "Enlightened" Californians voted to ban same-sex marriage in 2000. And they did it again in 2008. When Gavin Newsom started issuing same-sex marriage licenses in 2004, the Netherlands, the Canadian provinces of Ontario and British Columbia, and Belgium had already legalized same-sex marriage.

    California and New York aren't always first in everything. We only think we are because, frankly, we live in the land of self-centered smugness. I think a little humility is in order. The good people of Maine don't need any advice from us on how to secure their rights. After all, we're the losers who blew it. Not once, but twice.

    Posted by: John in CA | May 5, 2009 7:23:15 PM

  24. Its very intresting information

    Posted by: Piter | May 8, 2009 5:32:08 AM

Post a comment


« «D.C. Council Votes 12-1 to Recognize Same-Sex Unions« «