HRC Back Story

NOTE FROM CHRIS: This great post on the economic benefits of gay marriage by our state legislative director Chris Edelson was originally crossposted on Anderson Cooper's AC360blog at CNN:

********************************************************

Chris Edelson
State Legislative Director
Human Rights Campaign 

There were plenty of good reasons for Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick to sign legislation Thursday repealing a nearly 100 year old law that prevented many out-of-state gay and lesbian couples from marrying in the Bay State: a fundamental belief in equality for all couples and all families, rejection of discrimination, simple fairness. But there’s one, perhaps unexpected, factor entering the discussion: equality makes good economic sense.

Five years ago this November, Massachusetts became the first state to recognize marriage equality, the equal right for gay and lesbian couples to marry, under state law (the federal Defense of Marriage Act denies married gay and lesbian couples federal rights and benefits).

California recently joined Massachusetts in providing gay and lesbian couples the freedom to marry (although California voters will decide this November whether to turn back the clock and take away marriage equality for gay and lesbian couples).  But there was one important difference: California would let gay and lesbian couples from out of state marry, while Massachusetts, in most cases, would not.  This was (no) thanks to the so-called 1913 law, named for the year it was enacted, that prohibited out-of-state couples from marrying in Massachusetts if their marriage would not be legally recognized in their home state. The law, which was apparently enacted in order to prevent interracial couples from out of state from marrying in Massachusetts, had not been applied for decades, until it was revived in 2004 by then-Gov. Mitt Romney, an opponent of marriage equality.  Since nearly every state expressly prohibits marriage by gay or lesbian couples, most gay and lesbian couples who lived outside Massachusetts could not come to the Bay State to marry.

Legislators in Massachusetts, who are overwhelmingly supportive of equality, took notice of what was happening: out-of-state couples were heading to California to get married, and bringing their wedding guests with them.  The state commissioned a study by the UCLA School of Law’s Williams Institute, which predicted that repealing the 1913 law would bring over $100 million in revenue into Massachusetts.

This is a win-win situation.  The Massachusetts legislature and the governor already supported marriage equality.  Seeing that expanding equality to out-of-state residents would help the state’s economy made the decision to repeal the antiquated 1913 law a pretty easy one: repeal legislation sailed through the State Senate and House before the Governor signed it.

The big question of course, is which states are next?  Pam Spaulding notes that Nevada may be starting to see the light.  Of course, not every state realizes the economic upside of equality: South Carolina recently halted a gay-friendly tourist campaign marketing the state in London. When the state apparently wouldn’t pick up the tab for the ad campaign, the South Carolina Pride Movement, a pro-equality group, stepped in to pay the costs.

One more instance of equality and fiscal responsibility coming together.