So, was I the only one that watched it live? It was the first time I watched anything on PNC. Well, other than to tour a factory in a town I have never heard of, that makes things I really didn't even know we needed. Sort of like this bill, something that we didn't need or want. I'm just glad to know that we were heard, whether or not our senators liked what we had to say!

Such good news! The fact they tabled a bill that could have EASILY passed in senate is great! For a first they decided not to waste tax-payers money pursuing a bill that had a good chance of NOT passing the house.... I think Senator Fumo deserves some MAD props! The divorce amendment was a great way to attack the bill (and was just really funny to think about how UNHAPPY people would be if presented with that restriction).

I am so proud of our community I can't quit smilin'. Never doubt that what might seem like a small effort really does add up to make a difference. There was some really smart and creative lobbying going on behind the scenes but the calls, e-mails, visits and rally presence from all of us in this region and across the state became a blanket to cover the backs of the people doing the lobbying......and the legislators started to squirm. You, each one of you, that did something were part of making this happen so do enjoy the feeling of pride in being a part of it. People often wonder what the point of being involved in the political process is. Do they really listen? Well, they're starting to listen to us! And yes, there's work left to do but believe me, we are just getting started!

I'm relieved that it didn't pass "But".
I need to make some more phone calls to understand exactly what the process is for a "laid on the table" SB.

How long can it lay there?

Would it be better for us in the long run if we could force an immediate vote, have it fail? Then, in the future when anyone wanted to try again they would have to start from the beginning. ?

I'm angry that the thing got hustled through 2 committees now it's being stalled until if/when they think they have enough support to pass Senate & House.

Maybe they should vote now so that they fail? I'm not sufficiently educated re: this process to say for sure. I just know that I would hate for this SB to hang around long enough to return and haunt us.

BTW, on Tues morning, when we expected it to be put before the General Senate, I called both of mine: Pippy and Mustio (both are homo-haters) and I also called the Governor's office to find out more about the process: would the Governor sign this thing if it made it to his desk?

(Rendell has great staff.)

Good news: "they couldn't imagine him signing such a thing"
Bad news: his signature wouldn't be necessary on a constitutional amendment.

SO, if anyone can explain the different potential outcomes of sb1250 "laying around on the table", please do. Otherwise, once I find out, I'll post.

Thanks everyone!!! rock on!!!!

Since PGH Lesbian Correspondents is my home page(Yey PGH Les C!!!), I posted before checking my email. To answer my own question, here is what Equality Advocates sent in their most recent email alert:

"Last night, the Pennsylvania Senate voted to "Table" the proposed constitutional amendment that would have banned marriages for same-sex couples, civil unions and possibly more for all unmarried couples.

SB 1250 is now off the voting calendar and can not be considered unless there is another vote to move it back on the calendar.

The prime sponsor of the legislation, Sen. Michael Brubaker (R-Lancaster), stated that he was proposing the legislation be tabled because the Speaker of the House, Dennis O'Brien (R-Philadelphia), was going to assign the legislation to the House State Government Committee if it passed the Senate. The House State Government Committee is chaired by Rep. Babette Josephs (D-Philadelphia), a strong supporter of the LGBT community, who is opposed to the legislation. Rep. Josephs has stated that she would not move the legislation out of committee.

It is important for everyone to understand that the bill is STALLED, not DEAD. Sen. Brubaker said that if the House indicates that the bill will go to another committee or that it is interested in voting on the bill, the Senate will bring it to the floor for a vote.

So we need you to call or email your state Representative now and tell them to oppose SB1250. Visit our Legislator Locater to find the name and phone number of your state Representative -- please click on the "state" tab above the legislators pictures for your state elected officials.

Your calls and emails also had an impact. Many Senators were losing their enthusiasm for the legislation due to strong constituent opposition. We need to deliver the same message to the House.

Equality Advocates Pennsylvania was working hard in the Capitol to defeat this legislation last night and we will be there until this legislation is defeated. I would like to thank all of the members of the Value All Families Coalition and other allies for their hard work and dedication."

Wow. Home page is good stuff. :-)

One of the most important things to be aware of is that O'Brian is Speaker of the House & Babette Josephs is chair of her Committee only due to Democrats controlling the PA House by LITERALLY only a single vote. Both O'Brian & Josephs will lose their postions IF PA House Dems lose LITERALLY a single House seat in the 08 elections

Below I'm posting an article explaining the complicated process that caused Democrats to make O'Brian the Speaker of the House for the Democratic majority in the PA House:

Democrats Salvage Majority Control of Pennsylvania House By Electing Social Services Leader Speaker
by State Rep Mark Cohen Dem PA
Tue Jan 02, 2007 at 09:56:22 PM PST
(From dailykos.com)

In a dramatic come from behind victory, the Pennsylvania House Democrats salvaged majority control of the legislative calendar, committee make-up, and legislation by electing House Judiciary Chairman Dennis O'Brien-- a Republican long a leader in efforts to increase funding for autism victims, the mentally retarded, and the physically disabled--as Speaker of the House.

O'Brien defeated incumbent two-term Speaker John Perzel, whose 18 years as a Republican House leader have been full of intrigue, Machiavellian maneuvers, patronage power grabs, guerilla warfare both against Democrats and against House traditions of responsible party government, the naked display of ruthless political power, and a series of dumb statements.

State Rep Mark Cohen Dem PA's diary :: ::
It is not that Perzel's methods never produced anything good. As Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell noted, Perzel was ultimately a key player in increased educational funding, improved environmental protections, expanded property tax relief for senior citizens, and increasing the Pennsylvania minimum wage. But the tortuous maneuvering that was often required to gain Perzel's support, coupled with all his negatives, led Rendell to help recruit O'Brien to be the Democratic nominee for Speaker.

The process of recruiting O'Brien began New Year's Eve, after Democrat Tom Caltagirone had infamously publicly pledged to support Republican John Perzel. With the Democratic lead of 102 to 101, the Caltagirone defection would have been decisive were it not for Republican disillusionment with Perzel.

We had hoped, from public and private statements, that angry Republicans would have supported Democratic leader Bill DeWeese for Speaker. Failing that, we hoped we and they could have agreed on another Democrat. But those talks did not pan out,and supporting O'Brien became our only option to regain the power of the majority that Tom Caltagirone had taken away from us.

The main bait for O'Brien was that he would suddenly be in a powerful position to achieve goals in improving social services safety nets for the disabled, the retarded, and those with autism, as well as continuing his lifelong work to improve law enforcement.

He did not agree to switch his registration to the Democratic Party, but he did not refuse to do so either. He expressed concern about his longstanding relationships with Republicans, and he obviously wants time to consider what to do next. "I'll take it one step at a time," he told what was probably the best attended press conference he ever had.

O'Brien represents parts of the northern part (the Bucks County border area) of the same part of the city of Philadelphia that I represent--Northeast Philadelphia. His area, although it has a Democratic registration majority, is more Republican than mine. But many of the Republicans in the district are Republicans largely because they like the constituent service and personality of Dennis O'Brien.

As one who has occasionally been on the receiving end or his persistent persuasive efforts, I can testify to his relentlessness. Once, he asked me to support one of his efforts because "I always support you." I gave him a large number of cases where that was not true. "Alright, I don't always support you," he said with exasperation and fear that my list of differences would go on for a long time,"but you ought to to support my bill because it's the right thing to do for the public."

As best as I can remember, I supported, and spoke in favor, of his bill.

Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell, long a passionate believer in encouraging Northeast Philadelphia Republicans to join the Democratic Party, was helpful in encouraging O'Brien to accept our Speaker nomination. He publicly praised O'Brien for having "a passion for change....a passion for trying to help people....(and) fundamental fairness."

In placing O'Brien into nomination, Majority Leader DeWeese, himself the choice of House Democrats for Speaker, called O'Brien "a fine-hearted idealistic Republican." He said his election would lead to "a rennaisance for this chamber."

The O'Brien nomination took House Republicans totally by surprise. I am told on good authority that a House Republican caucus that ended less than an hour before the Speaker's election began did not even consider the possibility of an O'Brien candidacy. Those who watched Perzel's facial expressions saw him in a state of utter shock when O'Brien was placed in nomination by DeWeese.

In the first speakership election I participated in, in 1975, the Democrats had 114 seats out of 203, and the Republicans nominated an anti-abortion Democrat against the pro-choice Democrat who was the choice of the Democratic caucus. The choice of the Democratic caucus got enough Republicans on his side to prevail.

It is a sign of where Pennsylvania politics has been that 32 years later our choice was between two Republicans. But hopefully it is a sign of the future that the winning Republican was the candidate of the Democratic Party.