New York State Senators Hedge on Gay Marriage as Lobbying Intensifies - NYTimes.com

New York State Senators Hedge on Gay Marriage as Lobbying Intensifies - NYTimes.com

By JEREMY W. PETERS

ALBANY — Pose the question “Would you vote to make same-sex marriage legal?” within the gilded State Senate chamber, and you’ll hear a lot of hedging.

Senator Vincent L. Leibell, a Republican who represents parts of Westchester, Putnam and Dutchess Counties, prefers civil unions to marriage. Still, he acknowledged that “society changes over time,” and said that he might not make up his mind until the last minute.

Senator James S. Alesi, a Republican from Rochester who is considered to be another potential swing vote, has issued only vague statements hinting that he is open to voting yes. But he also said, “My public opinion has not been stated yet, and it probably won’t be for a while.”

With six weeks left before the Legislature adjourns for the year, uncertainty surrounds the fate of Gov. David A. Paterson’s bill to legalize same-sex marriage, and lobbying is intensifying.

The measure is expected to easily pass the State Assembly, which approved a similar bill in 2007 and has scheduled its vote for Tuesday.

That means the fate of the legislation will most likely be decided in the closely divided 62-member State Senate.

There, proponents believe they have about two dozen of the 32 votes needed for approval, including those of 19 Democrats who have signed on as sponsors of the measure.

Four of the Senate’s 32 Democrats have said they will vote against the legislation, and so far not a single Republican has publicly committed to supporting it.

Faced with these odds, gay rights groups like the Empire State Pride Agenda, the Log Cabin Republicans and the Human Rights Campaign have undertaken a highly methodical and personal campaign focusing on those senators from the North Country to Long Island who they believe may be open to backing the bill.

They have sent field operatives to those senators’ districts to identify constituents — straight or gay, religious or not, married or single — who are willing to make direct, personal appeals.

They have researched senators’ backgrounds, looking for inroads through any connections senators might have to gay people or to allies of the gay community. (They learned, for example, that Mr. Leibell’s law practice does estate planning for gay couples and that Mr. Alesi attends a church that blesses same-sex unions.)

Supporters of same-sex marriage have commissioned polls in more than a dozen Senate districts and have hired one of the state’s most influential lobbyists, Patricia Lynch, who has helped develop a strategy and has been meeting with undecided senators.

Those involved in the effort believe that they will have to win over about four Republican senators — a considerable challenge given the cohesion of the Senate Republican Conference.

But in a rare move for Albany, where much is decided by legislative leaders, the Senate minority leader, Dean G. Skelos, has told Republicans they should not feel bound by the party line on this issue.

Advocates of gay rights say this gives them an opening. “Republican legislators will be free to vote their conscience on this issue, without pressure,” said Jeff Cook, a legislative adviser for the Log Cabin Republicans. “And we know if people vote their hearts on this issue, we will win.”

As gay rights groups try to seize momentum from recent decisions to legalize same-sex marriage in Vermont, Iowa and Maine, opponents on the issue are working to be heard.

In New York, opponents of same-sex marriage are planning legislative outreach of their own and a rally next Sunday in front of Mr. Paterson’s office in New York City.

“There’s a fight in New York,” said Brian S. Brown, executive director of the National Organization for Marriage, which opposes such measures. “But right now they don’t have the votes in the Senate to pass same-sex marriage. And as long as we’re able to connect with voters and have them connect with their senators, then marriage will remain the union of a man and a woman in New York.”

The personal appeals undertaken by advocates of gay rights are bringing mixed results.

Senator George Onorato, a Democrat from Queens, said in an interview last week that he was unlikely to support the bill, regardless of how many people try to persuade him. “They can have all the other privileges, but not marriage,” he said.

Proponents of same-sex marriage who visited Mr. Onorato in his office in Long Island City acknowledge they have not made much progress.

“He said right off the bat that marriage is between a man and a woman, and that this is a religious issue,” said Jeremiah Frei-Pearson, 31, a child advocacy lawyer who went to the senator’s office two weeks ago accompanied by a gay man and a straight official from one of the state’s most powerful labor unions.

“I explained to him that I go to church every week and that religion teaches us not to discriminate,” Mr. Frei-Pearson said, “and that ultimately your faith should be kept separate from this decision-making process.”

He said he also tried to appeal to Mr. Onorato by explaining that he was engaged to a black woman, and that an interracial relationship like his (Mr. Frei-Pearson is white) would have been frowned upon years ago, just as many gay relationships are today.

“None of that seemed to resonate,” Mr. Frei-Pearson said.

But advocates say they have made some headway with other senators who until recently opposed same-sex marriage.

Senator John L. Sampson, a Brooklyn Democrat, said last week that he had recently gone from no to undecided on the issue. “I do see it differently,” he said. “I can’t impose my own religious beliefs in a situation like this.”

Senator Ruth Hassell-Thompson, a Democrat who represents parts of Westchester and the Bronx, also said she was reserving judgment on the issue.

“I always try to believe that I’m an open-minded person,” she said, adding that as a person with strong religious convictions — her father was a deacon, and her mother and sister are ministers — she found same-sex marriage to be a true test of her faith.

“This is an issue that challenges the fundamental beliefs that people have,” she said. “And it’s not easy.”

Gay rights groups are trying to ease concerns among senators who have religious objections to the legislation. They have begun referring to same-sex marriage as “same-sex civil marriage” to emphasize that the bill would not affect how religions choose to define marriage, and note that the bill contains a provision that says religious institutions cannot be forced to recognize same-sex unions.

Still, many senators remain uncomfortable. Patty Bentley, a librarian at the SUNY College at Plattsburgh, visited Senator Elizabeth Little, a Republican, with a group of students at the senator’s office in Albany last month. Ms. Bentley, a lesbian, told Ms. Little that she believed civil unions were inadequate.

When the hourlong meeting was over, Ms. Bentley said she did not know if Ms. Little could be persuaded to vote for same-sex marriage.

“I’m not sure she will,” Ms. Bentley said, “but I know she’s been willing to listen.”