IDC Report Shows Marriage Equality Would Earn NY $391 Million

The State Senate's Independent Democratic Conference has released a report showing that marriage equality in New York state would generate $391 million in economic activity, revenue, and savings during the three years after it is made into law.

Using what the group deems as 'conservative estimates', their report, titled "For Love or Money?: The Economic Impact of Marriage Equality in New York", finds that 21,309 gay and lesbian couples living in New York would get married within the first three years of marriage equality. The report predicts 3,308 couples from surrounding states, that do not have marriage equality laws, would choose to be wed in New York, and that 41,907 other out-of-state gay and lesbian couples would travel to New York for a “destination wedding.”

The IDC estimates this influx in marriages would earn the state $283,810,725 in wedding revenue and tourism, $3,792,400 in marriage license fees, $22,704,858 in sales taxes, and $259,669 in NYC hotel occupancy taxes for a total of $310,567,652 in new state revenue and economic activity.

Many same-sex couples, by virtue of getting married, would also become ineligible for state public assistance programs, creating an additional $80,848,457 in state budget savings.

Combined, the "positive impact of marriage equality" in New York is $391 million.

The IDC used methodology established in “Love Counts”, a 2007 report from the New York City Comptroller's Office, and later The Williams Institute of the UCLA School of Law, which has released similar studies for 14 other states and the District of Columbia.

The report also cites an open letter to New York state legislators , released on April 29th, 2011, from a group of top executives, including the CEOs of Goldman Sachs, Con Edison and Thompson Reuters, among 23 others, stating that marriage equality in New York would "not only be fair, but also make good business sense."

The IDC is a breakaway Democratic caucus in the New York state senate comprised of senators Jeff Klein, Diane Savino, David Valesky and David Carlucci.

A marriage equality bill was defeated in the New York state senate in 2009.

Governor Cuomo is pushing for another marriage equality bill soon.

Comments

[corwin]

01:53 PM on 05/14/2011

This is as reliable as supposing Superman will fly in and fill Yankee Stadium with gold.

[MIKEinNYC]

01:19 PM on 05/12/2011

And did they take into consideration that such couples would be filing joint income tax returns which results in lower taxes to the taxing authorities?

[tinygiraffe]

09:04 AM on 05/12/2011

When I wrote to my uber-conservative Congressman, Jim Sensenbrenner, about repealing DOMA, he responded that gay marriage would bankrupt each and every state.

Then again, he also said "As you may know, repealing the Defense Of Marriage Act would remove government protections on marriage being limited to a man and a woman." As though I wrote about it without knowing what DOMA was. Just chucking darts at a "Controversial Issues" dartboard. He's a professional mor0n.

[EmmaDarian]

09:42 AM on 05/12/2011

Yes, studies like these sadly are necessary because the economic effect is, disgustingly, something that opponents of marriage equality. It's an argument that has no place in a country that promises equality, but sadly, it's one that is made. Fortunately, it's easily shown to be a nonissue, and in fact, that marriage equality benefits the economy.

[corwin]

01:58 PM on 05/14/2011

Oh?
Please list a bit about your economics background.Coursework as a start.Then,employment-whether you're self employed and a bit about your income level. I should specify that at HP statements-no matter how pompous-need not be backed with information.and ,personally,some of my best friends were liberal Arts majors,so I can hardly be labelled elitiist
SIncerely,Corwin.
A Really Smart Guy,who's trying to help you

[ifyouseekay]

08:55 AM on 05/12/2011

if this is about money then why not try these simpler things:

1. sell pot
2. sell cocaine
3. rent prostitutes out

[jmyoung666]

11:13 AM on 05/12/2011

One thing at a time. Wec all want those legalized, but politicians are still afraid of them.

[oldmole1861]

08:48 AM on 05/12/2011

The price of everything and the value of nothing . . . that's capitalism, folks!

[TROOPER-X]

08:41 AM on 05/12/2011

omg
This thread takes the cake for peddling the same-sex argument.
"If it cannot pass the moral smell test, let's spin it on the revenue merit"
 
Fail!

[Hugh-Gee]

02:28 PM on 05/12/2011

Why are you obsessed with the smell of ga.ys? Afraid that the pheromones will stir some cravings that you don't want to admit to yourself?

[pita143]

08:27 AM on 05/12/2011

The idea of an increase in sales is nothing more than a reason to get some people off the fence on this idea. This is really not a monitory issue, it is a Rights issue.

"In giving rights to others which belongs to them, we give rights to ourselves and to our country"
John F. Kennedy

"I am the inferior of any Man whose rights I trample under foot"
Robert Ingersol 1892

If you do not like Gay Marriage, than don't marry a Gay Person, problem solved.

[warhol451]

08:18 AM on 05/12/2011

dollar signs usually get peoples attention. we are in a recession, so, if we have to use that to our advantage, so be it.

[RCRod83]

07:48 AM on 05/12/2011

So we are suppose to support same sex marriage because it can be profitable to the state?

How about we support same sex marriage, because IT IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO.

I'm tired of seeing people treated as second class citizens!!!

[Hugh-Gee]

10:29 AM on 05/12/2011

It doesn't hurt to bolster a "right thing to do" argument with an economic incentive.

[North2011]

07:47 AM on 05/12/2011

Is it ALWAYS about money???

Who cares we ALL have equal protection under the law, we ALL should get married to whomever we choose...

[rlellis711]

08:16 AM on 05/12/2011

or "how" many we choose?

[leftybass]

07:34 AM on 05/12/2011

Oh yeah, does it outweigh the value of YOUR IMMORTAL SOUL ??? Just kiddin'...

[Amalek]

07:33 AM on 05/12/2011

What these studies fail to consider is the economic impact that allowing gay marriage would have on opposite marriage.

How hard is it going to become to get a good caterer or a place for a reception?   These things are going to soar in price.  Are there nearly enough wedding planners, lounge singers or cake bakers to support this increase.  Or are we just going to price lots of opposite couples completely out of the market, forcing them to live in sin, or move to a red state?  

People, have some consideration for others before you propose allowing gays to get married.

[warhol451]

08:15 AM on 05/12/2011

I can't tell if you're being serious or not. It's hard to read sarcasm.

[joyforjump1984]

05:59 AM on 05/12/2011

When are we going to make polygamy legal? This monogamy thing is so christiany and outdated. I was born with a natural inclination to have mutiple wives, therefore, I should be allowed this freedom.

[Freddie27]

07:12 AM on 05/12/2011

Don't be so absurd. I want society to judge my relationship and decide if I'm immoral by their religious standards. I want to be kept away from my partner when they're dying in the hospital. The government should interfere more in my decisions and private life ideally.

[Flip75]

07:29 AM on 05/12/2011

Then fight for it....but I suspect you don't really want that; you're probably just trying the tired old slippery slope argument against marriage equality.

[rlellis711]

08:17 AM on 05/12/2011

Flip75

"marriage equality" means just that "equality". So that means if adults decided to have mulitpy "spouces" that so be it

[Bob Kellerman]

04:26 AM on 05/12/2011

HAS EVERYONE CALLED YOUR CONGRESSPEOPLE AND SENATORS
TO REPEAL DOMA?

Believe me, the mormon and catholic machines, as well as the Koch brothers, and other right wingers are pushing against repeal

ARE ALL THE GAYS SITTING BACK WAITING FOR FOLKS TO BE NICE,
OR ARE THEY INSISTING ON THEIR RIGHTS?

[SteveDenver]

06:10 AM on 05/12/2011

After six years of overseas courtship, my American friend Sharon married her British darling Glynnis in Iowa. The U.S. government doesn't recognize their marriage, so Glynnis couldn't get a visa extension. Interestingly enough, Great Britain recognizes their marriage and granted partner status on everything, even offering Sharon a position teaching acupuncture in their homeopathic hospital system.

I still fault Obama for changing his "unequivocal support for our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters to marry" into some wishy-washy uncertainty based on his need to exhibit Christian religiosity.

[Bob Kellerman]

02:35 PM on 05/12/2011

Steve -- Obama was NOT slowed by Christian anything. He is a politician, he did not have the votes in Congress for faster changes of laws. If he had grandstanded on what we want, he would have looked better to you, but not have gotten the changes, just HUGE BLOWBACK, setting things back farther.
If the opportunities are there, it is BETTER FOR HIM to push through the changes, as he would keep Gay support better. He tested the waters, and did what he did when it was ready to be accepted by Congress.
DADT repeal was risky, but he pushed it through.
DOMA passed by enormous margins, so anyone trying to repeal it has to watch for the votes. If you push it before the votes are ready, it sets it back until the next Congress, at least
IT'S POLITICS, NOT THE GOOD GUY DOING THE RIGHT THINGS FOR THE GOOD PEOPLE --- THAT IS THE REALITY

[Bob Kellerman]

02:39 PM on 05/12/2011

PS -- DID YOU CONTACT YOUR MEMBERS OF CONGRESS AND TELL ALL YOUR FRIENDS TO DO SO AT ONCE?
--- and you forgot to give Obama credit on stopping the enforcement of DOMA, which created a lot of trouble for him in Congress.

One reason there is so much trouble passing pro-Gay stuff is that fussy Gays and Liberals were pissed he did not do more, and did not
MAKE SURE DEMOCRATS GET ELECTED
INSTEAD OF PLAYING THE VICTIM

[Bob Kellerman]

04:19 AM on 05/12/2011

I REALLY TRY NOT TO REPLY TO THIS PERSON,

BUT -- straight people grew up their entire lives knowing that they could marry
--- Gay people may take another generation to marry in larger numbers because they grew up not only with homophobia all around, but with the idea that they would never marry

AND IF NOT SO MANY ARE MARRYING, WHY DOES IT BOTHER HIM?
--- just trying to be noticed, not really caring if he is hurtful

[SteveDenver]

06:11 AM on 05/12/2011

I'm wondering how many divorces there were among same-gender couples and how many among heterosexual couples.

[EmmaDarian]

04:26 AM on 05/12/2011

You just disproved your own lie. In two years, 8000 same sex couples married. That is a lot of couples. And a year later, there were another 2000 couples married. That's 10,000 couples in three years. Given that gays and lesbians are a minority compared to heterosexuals, it follows that there will be fewer marriages.

Not that it matters. All that matters is that same-sex couples have the right to marry.

And you really need to put up links when you're going to quote information and state your source or you're plagiarizing.