According to the Kansas City Star, data shows that approximately half of the same-sex couples getting married in Iowa since it became legal last April are coming from out of state. Of the 676 same-sex couples married in Iowa, 312 were from neighboring states including Illinois, Nebraska, Missouri, and Minnesota. Not many people think of IOWA as a destination spot for a vacation, but tourism seems to be increasing due to the legalization of same-sex marriage.
These facts seem to support the Federal court case against Proposition 8 where attorneys Theodore Olson and David Boies will be arguing that the amendment violates the U.S. constitutional guarantee of equal protection and due process. The city of San Francisco was given permission to intervene in the case to argue a unique perspective regarding government concerns. District Attorney Dennis Herrera will bring up financial concerns on the negative impact Proposition 8 has on tourism income, public health care costs, and small business revenue.
None of California’s neighboring states (Arizona, Nevada, or Oregon) currently allow same-sex marriages. According to the United States 2000 Census information, the numbers of same-sex couples in neighboring states were 12,332 in Arizona, 4,973 in Nevada, and 8,932 in Oregon. That’s a total of 26,237 same-sex couples. If each one of those couples came to California to get married, there would be a total of 52,474 people traveling into the state, not including family and relatives that would also come to witness the ceremonies. California would probably see an even bigger increase in tourism since it would be the only state on the West Coast that would allow same-sex marriage. It's possible that the state could see residents from Washington, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Utah, Colorado, and New Mexico coming in to take their vows. Imagine the tourism revenue that could be generated in California by legalizing same-sex marriage, and the financial benefits would be extremely helpful during this recession time. The visitors would eat at our restaurants, stay at our hotels, rent our cars and buy our gas. They would also support local small businesses as they purchase their wedding supplies such as cakes, flowers, live music, reception hall space, catered food, etc. The income revenue should be making the ears of every republican perk up right about now.
Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger recently approved large budget cuts including more than $83 million in funding for HIV/AIDS programs in California. Maybe the answer to the state’s financial woes doesn’t involve increasing taxes or cutting life saving programs. Maybe the answer is to just give people a little equality.
Comments
This is probably one of the most ridiculous arguments for gay marriage that I have ever heard. "Lets throw our children and the future of our society to the dogs so that we can have a miniscule, temporary uptick in revenue." What nonsense. Thank Goodness Americans don't but into this "gay marriage" joke.
Like I said SSM was a great opportunity for divorce lawyers, the economic impact had been mentioned it was never used fully by the opponents of prop8, (by opponents I mean the "leadership").
Hetero or not I believe the "one man, one woman" arguments lacks logic and cannot stand a rational mind, hence my belief Olson and Boies will win in January 2010. More reason to not chose 2012. The argument for 2012 is very wise in the sense that a battle not fought is a battle not lost.
Oh really Steven? You mean like the same way they didn't buy into the whole interracial marriage thing when it was made legal too? 70% of the people disagreed with it at the time. I think you probably could have found a similar majority for slavery at one time as well. The real ridiculous argument in this conversation is YOURS. The assertion that children and the future of society are in danger over two people who love each other getting hitched is absolutely ludicrous. Perhaps you are forgetting that children of same sex couples are in fact children too?
Same-sex marriage is good for the economy, good for our communities and (shock of shocks) VERY good for children. And not just for an "uptick", but forever. When same sex couples have the rights and protections afforded to heterosexual couples, our society becomes stronger, safer and more available to take on other issues that are important to all of us.
jeffrey's got a good point. tourist revenue is great, but making sure all kids have stable, financially secure families is even better. imagine if all couples with kids got the same tax benefits, and if the kids of same-sex couples knew they were supported by their communities and didn't have to deal with bullying and teasing. families headed by same-sex couples are here to stay. the more recognition we give them, the more their kids will thrive and the stronger our communities will be.
I love Steven's slip here: "Thank Goodness Americans don't BUT into this "gay marriage" joke." (Capitalization for emphasis mine.)
You are an idiot and there's no reasoning with you if you truly believe allowing two people who love each other somehow will jeopardize "our children".
Off you go.
Children need a mother and father. To deny one of them is NOT good for children. Marriage is between a man and women. It is for the best environment for children and that is good for society. Quit yelling about "MY RIGHTS" and do what is best for children.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!