Today, after many votes and many revisions, New Hampshire will become the sixth state in the Union to offer marriage equality to all couples. After many rounds of votes, including full passage in both Houses of the Legislature May 6, then a vote on Governor Lynch’s required language that passed the Senate but failed to pass the House May 20, the revised bill passed today.
No explanation has ever come to light for the May 6 to May 14 period that the bill had passed both Houses but had not been delivered to the Governor. The Governor on May 14 issued a statement that demanded increased protections for religious institutions, and threatened to veto the bill if the General Court (the New Hampshire Legislature) did not include his language. While gay rights groups and Legislative leaders in both Houses were amenable to the Governor’s changes, and it appeared the bill would easily pass, a May 20 vote succeeded in the Senate but failed by two votes in the House.
Right wing groups took this additional time to slander the Governor, claiming he broke his campaign promises when he stated his personal position against marriage equality. The National Organization For Marriage admitted they had infiltrated New Hampshire. Reports of robocalls, linking conservative voters directly to lawmakers, gave an impression opposition to the bill was greater than it actually was. Since 2003, the majority of New Hampshire voters have supported same-sex marriage.
Previous votes in the House were 178-167 on May 7, and 186-188 on May 20.
The language in the bill provides even stronger protections for religious institutions than the Governor had called for. During the debate in the House, there was considerable debate on the specifics of religious exemptions. Some were concerned that the language was unclear and not certain it would allow religious institutions that wanted to provide services to same-sex couples. There are already existing laws in New Hampshire that provide for persons who object to same-sex marriage to allow them to refuse to participate in gay marriage ceremonies.
Questions about the current bill included concerns that a religion that prohibited inter-racial marriage or polygamy would be allowed to continue that practice. Concerns were raised that the bill was not written to address issues of unintended consequences. Some were concerned that the bill went too far, others were concerned it didn’t go far enough.
Rep. Steve Vaillencourt, who is openly gay and had voted against the last bill because he felt the language was too restrictive, said the new language was even more restrictive but he voted ‘yes’ because it was the bill’s last chance and although the bill was flawed, like great men in history who were flawed, it deserved support.