Gain for Same-Sex
Marriage in Massachusetts
 |
|
Jodi Hilton for The New York Times
Rachel Rubin, carrying sign, joined supporters of
same-sex marriage Thursday as they sang at a rally at the
Massachusetts Statehouse. |
By PAM BELLUCK,
NYTimes on the Web, November 10, 2006
BOSTON, Nov. 9 — Lawmakers in
Massachusetts, the only state where same-sex marriage is legal, dealt what
appeared to be a fatal blow Thursday to a proposed constitutional amendment to
ban it.
In a flurry of strategic maneuvering, supporters of same-sex marriage managed to
persuade enough legislators to vote to recess a constitutional convention until
the afternoon of Jan. 2, the last day of the legislative session.
On that day, lawmakers and advocates on both sides said, it appeared likely that
the legislature would adjourn without voting on the measure, killing it.
“For all intents and purposes, the debate has ended,” said Representative Byron
Rushing, a Boston Democrat and the assistant majority leader. “What
members are expecting is that the majority of constituents are going to say,
‘Thank you, we’re glad it’s over, we think it has been discussed enough.’ ”
The measure had been expected by both sides to gain easily the 50 votes required
from the 200 legislators as the first step toward making same-sex marriages
illegal.
Kris Mineau, president of the Massachusetts Family Institute, which sponsored
the amendment, called the recess vote a “travesty,” and, waving a copy of the
State Constitution, said the legislators had “just said that it’s irrelevant.”
As for whether the fight was over, Mr. Mineau said, “We’re assessing the
situation.”
Gov. Mitt Romney, a Republican who opposes same-sex marriage, said the vote was
a “triumph of arrogance over democracy.” He said that he would “explore
any alternatives” to try to force a vote, but that “my options are limited.”
Eric Fehrnstrom, a spokesman for Mr. Romney, said: “The fact that they put
this off until the end of the year makes it easier for them to adjourn. If
they were giving consideration, I think they would have recessed until tomorrow
or maybe Monday or Tuesday next week.”
The action on Thursday came two days after Massachusetts voters elected Deval L.
Patrick, a same-sex marriage supporter, as the state’s first Democratic governor
in 16 years. Democrats were also elected to all of the statewide offices,
leaving the state’s Republican Party in shambles.
But the fact that the amendment had enough supporters to pass the first 50-vote
round indicated that the issue of same-sex marriage remains divisive three years
after the state’s highest court ruled that such marriages were constitutional in
Massachusetts. More than 8,000 same-sex couples have since married.
To bring the amendment before the legislature, the Massachusetts Family
Institute had gathered 170,000 petition signatures. If the amendment were
to get 50 votes, it would then require the votes of 50 legislators in another
constitutional convention in the 2007-8 legislative session. Then it would
be voted on in a referendum in November 2008.
Polls have generally found that just more than half of the citizens surveyed
supported same-sex marriage, but about the same number wanted the constitutional
amendment to come before voters.
The vote to recess followed a day of intense politicking and strategizing by
supporters of same-sex marriage. Many legislators, even supporters of such
marriages, had said they planned to vote for the amendment for fear that if they
did not they would appear to be shirking their responsibility.
Gay rights advocates persuaded the legislators to first take up another
amendment to ban same-sex marriage, one introduced nearly two years ago by a
conservative lawmaker, but which was now considered by Mr. Mineau and other
same-sex marriage opponents to be unable to pass constitutional muster because
it would nullify the same-sex marriages that had already taken place.
Because that amendment had been initiated by a legislator and not a citizens’
group, it would have needed 101 votes to pass. On Thursday it was defeated
unanimously.
Arline Isaacson, co-chairwoman of the Massachusetts Gay and Lesbian Political
Caucus, said the plan was to give the legislators political cover with their
constituents, because they “can all point to the fact that they fully debated
same-sex marriage and took a vote on it.”
Same-sex marriage advocates also persuaded lawmakers to vote for a recess and
not an adjournment because if they adjourned, Governor Romney could call them
back into session.
Representative Michael A. Costello, a Democrat from Newburyport and a strong
opponent of the amendment, said: “The way I looked at it was that we would
kill it with a handgun or a hand grenade. It’s never been proper to put
civil rights on the ballot. So we killed it through procedure, rather than
on substance.”
The debate in the House was full of impassioned speeches.
“I’m 3,000 feet to the right of Attila the Hun, they tell me,” Representative
Marie J. Parente, a Democrat from Milford who had lost her re-election bid on
Tuesday, told her colleagues. “But you’re not. You’re the other
side. The gracious people, the liberal people, the socially conscious
people.”
For the 170,000 people who signed the petition and want a referendum, “does your
graciousness end?” she asked. “Give the people the right to be heard.”
Senator Jarrett T. Barrios, who is gay and married, told the chamber, “It’s time
for a little straight talk.”
Pointing to his wedding band, he said: “You don’t have to live next to us.
You don’t have to like us. We are only asking you to end the debate,” so
that “we will at least have the right to enjoy the same rights that the rest of
you have enjoyed from time immemorial.”
Ariel Sabar contributed reporting.
|
