Coincidence... or conspiracy!?

Note: If you don't care about Nevada politics, you can probably skip this one. But if you're a marriage equality advocate, you may want to read on.

That domestic partnership bill passed the Assembly last week. No word if Gibbons will sign it. (Although I can see him taking that bait...)

I commented on the bill's torturous path through the Senate and, at the time, paid little attention to the two Republicans who voted for it, Randolph Townsend and Mike McGinness.

Townsend really didn't shock me. He's a known moderate who represents Incline Village, the most affluent place in Nevada. That's not a recipe for social conservatism.

McGinness, meanwhile, represents a decidedly rural and conservative district. Like most of Nevada's conservatives, he's not outspoken on social issues, but I had no reason to think he'd support domestic partnerships when the rest of his caucus opposed them.

In the Assembly, the bill passed with the support of one Republican, Ed Goedhart. He, too, is a solid Nevada conservative and, before Friday, I would not have pegged him as a supporter of domestic partnerships.

What's the connection? I have no idea. Senator McGinness's and Assemblyman Goedhart's districts are, however, nearly identical.


⇐ Goedhart's Assembly district

McGinness's Senate district ⇒

Is there some grassroots clamoring for domestic partnerships in Hawthorne or Pahrump? Perhaps the old ranching dynasties need a better legal tool to keep their property in the family - or, more likely, to consolidate their water rights. I'm just stumped.

So if you have some special insight, please drop a comment below. Help a brotha out.