New Jersey

The Senate vote also was the latest setback for gay rights supporters nationally. In November, Maine voters overturned a law that would have allowed gay marriage in that state. The law never went into effect. And last month, the state Senate in New York defeated a similar law. In California, a federal trial will begin next week on that state's gay marriage ban.

Only five states -- Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Vermont -- recognize gay marriage.

Gay rights advocates had pushed hard to get the New Jersey measure passed before Jan. 19, when Republican Chris Christie becomes governor. Democratic Gov. Jon Corzine had promised to sign the bill if approved by the Legislature, but Christie said he would veto it.

On Tuesday, Sen. President Richard Codey agreed to put the bill to a vote, leaving little mystery about its fate. Only one Republican, Sen. Bill Baroni, of Hamilton, was among the 14 senators who voted for the bill. The measure needed 21 votes to pass.

"We should not be telling one couple you can be married and another couple you can be civil unionized," Baroni said. "We are better than that. History is watching us now. She is asking us whether we'll side with equality and right -- or for discrimination."

Those on the other side said changing the centuries-old definition of marriage was too drastic a move for lawmakers to make. Opponents want to put the measure to a popular vote.

"Suddenly, today, there's implications that you're discriminating against folks when you want to maintain that definition," said Sen. Michael Doherty, a Republican from Washington Township in Warren County.

As vigorous as the debate became, most senators who were thought to be on the fence in the preceding weeks did not chime in. Five senators did not cast votes.

Among the abstainers was Stephen Sweeney, a Democrat from Gloucester County's Washington Township who is expected to become Senate president when the Legislature reorganizes Tuesday. Sweeney did not return calls for comment.

Gay couples say civil unions don't work largely because employees at hospitals, insurance companies and elsewhere don't understand the concept. Gay rights groups said Thursday they would use statements made by senators to support their arguments in their lawsuit.

Steven Goldstein, chairman of the gay rights group Garden State Equality, said acknowledgment that civil unions haven't worked should be enough to persuade the court to mandate gay marriage.

------

Associated Press writers Angela Delli Santi and Beth DeFalco contributed to this report.

For the record, the idea that Dobbs could mount a successful campaign for Senate is almost as far-fetched as the idea that he could become president. (Then again, stranger things have happened.) But the real problem with his making a run for the Senate, if he does indeed harbor White House dreams, is that Menendez isn't up for re-election until 2012. That means Dobbs couldn't run for president until 2016 at the earliest. By then he'd be 71.

In his press conference today, Steele was happy to talk about how yesterday’s elections ratified 10 months of GOP opposition to the president.

As recently as a couple of months ago, Republicans were written off. Many of you were writing our epitaph and reminiscing of the good old days, whatever they happen to have been. But the real heroes last night, the real heroes who brought home the victory are the Republicans and independents and, yes, even Democrats who spoke up against an incredibly arrogant government in Washington that has put our country, our freedoms and our economy at risk with unprecedented spending.

So, we know what Steele thinks: New Jersey and Virginia went for Chris Christie and Bob McDonnell, respectively, because the Obama administration is spending too much money. This is pretty much the standard GOP establishment line on the Tea Parties and Glenn Beck, rewritten to apply to yesterday’s elections. The basic idea is that the outrage of the right-wing fringe represents a broad popular reaction against the president’s policies -- if not, as Steele specifies, the president himself.

As Mike Madden wrote last night, off-year elections sometimes tell us a lot more about whose base is amped up and angry than about what the country as a whole actually thinks. But it seems pretty clear that, despite Steele, not a lot of folks voted for Christie, or even Doug Hoffman -- the third-party candidate in the race for a congressional seat in upstate New York -- as a way of endorsing House Minority Leader John Boehner and Senate counterpart Mitch McConnell over President Obama. Steele may think there's just one Republican Party and he's in charge, but voters are perfectly capable of voting for their local GOP candidate without signing on for the whole hog.

Of course, it’s part of a party leader’s job to pretend that everyone’s getting along just fine. But it’s worth remembering that Steele is pretending. That’s why he brushed off the debate over what the big Democratic bright spot of the night -- the win in New York's 23rd Congressional district -- means for the GOP.

In doing so, though, he did say one thing that's contrary to the message emerging from his erstwhile allies to the right: "I don't see a victory in losing seats." That's not the way they see it, and that may cause Steele some headaches as he and his party gear up for next year's midterm elections.

The headline on the e-mail that the DGA sent out to reporters after Democrats Jon Corzine and Creigh Deeds conceded their races in New Jersey and Virginia, respectively: "DGA looks ahead to 2010 election cycle."

Ouch.

Things didn't get much better from there, as the release went on to read:

Washington, D.C. – After a disappointing election night tonight, Democrats are now looking ahead to the critical 2010 election cycle.

“We knew both these races would be tough, and although we’re disappointed in the results, we’re not discouraged in our greater mission,” said Nathan Daschle, executive director of the DGA. “Tomorrow marks the first day of the 2010 election cycle, when four out of five Americans will choose a governor. While we wish tonight's results in two states would’ve been different, we’re preparing for the fight ahead in 37 states. A fight to restore prosperity, build the middle class, and elect strong democratic governors.”

The results, while disappointing, are in line with historic trends. The last time the party in the White House won the New Jersey governorship was 1985. In Virginia, the streak goes back to 1973.

“The question on everyone’s mind will be: ‘What does this mean?’ The answer is simple,” said Nathan Daschle, executive director of the DGA. “Nothing. The party in the White House has lost these races for 24 straight years, and this election merely continued that streak. New Jersey and Virginia are independent-minded states, and tonight they reminded us of that.”

“We’re looking ahead to 2010, with 37 races for governors who will oversee the Congressional redistricting process that will reshape our political landscape for a generation to come,” Daschle said. “These races are the most important election in a generation and we’re committed to protecting our incumbent governors and expanding our ranks. The DGA is better positioned than ever before to win in 2010, with record-setting fundraising, strong candidate recruitment and early strategic investments in key states.”