Gay-wed ban won't get
hearing
By Mary Beth
Schneider, on the Web, January 19, 2008
A proposed constitutional amendment
to ban same-sex marriages in Indiana likely was dealt a fatal blow today when a
key lawmaker said he would not give the issue a hearing.
Rep. Scott Pelath, D-Michigan City, who is chairman of the House Rules and
Legislative Procedure Committee, said today that the most urgent issue facing
the state is property taxes, not same-sex marriage, which already is banned by
Indiana law.
“I’m not planning on having a hearing,” Pelath said. “The short session (of the
legislature) was designed to deal with emergencies. We have a very serious
problem with the property tax system, and we don’t have any gay marriages in
Indiana.”
The Senate committee plans to debate the amendment Thursday, but Eric Miller,
who has pushed for passage of the amendment as founder of the conservative group
Advance America, called that “disingenuous.”
The legislature, he said, is dealing with plenty of issues besides property tax
reform and has the time to debate and vote on this amendment before its March 14
deadline.
“There are hundreds of bills being reviewed by a variety of committees,” he
said. “Property taxes are the most important thing, but I’d view the marriage
amendment as very important as well.”
The bill is called House Joint Resolution 8 in the Democrat-controlled House; it
is Senate Joint Resolution 7 in the Republican-controlled Senate.
Turner said he is exploring options to try to get the bill a vote by the full
House. But House rules state that a bill may not be called back from committee.
The only route to a vote by the full House, apparently, is approval by a
committee.
To become part of Indiana’s Constitution, the proposed amendment must pass two
separately elected legislatures and then be approved by voters statewide.
The proposed amendment, which declares that marriage in Indiana is defined only
as the union between one man and one woman, overwhelmingly passed the Indiana
Senate and House in 2005.
A new legislature was elected in November 2006, and it voted on the amendment in
2007. While the Senate approved it 39-10, the House Rules committee deadlocked
5-5, and the amendment was dead for the year.
If it does not pass this year, the process must begin anew, and the earliest it
could be on the ballot for voters to have the final say is 2012.
The amendment died last year after encountering resistance from representatives
of Indiana businesses who were concerned it would jeopardize their ability to
recruit employees and offer domestic partner benefits. Since then, the Senate
had been reluctant to take the lead.
“There is little use to move it forward if the House is simply going to block
further consideration,” said Sen. Brandt Hershman, R-Wheatfield, before the
session started earlier this month.
Today, Hershman, who is sponsoring the amendment in the Senate, said that
despite the House’s lack of action, he’s glad the proposal will get a Senate
hearing.
“The Senate has endorsed this amendment three times in very strong bipartisan
fashion,” he said. “I’d anticipate a similar outcome this time. As to the House,
I can’t speculate (on what will happen.)”
Walter Botich, legislative chairman of Indiana Equality, a gay rights
organization, said he wasn’t surprised that the Senate would give the bill a
hearing, but he agrees with Pelath: “There are better things for the state to be
worrying about.”
He said public support for the issue has been dwindling, and Pelath agreed.
“This is an issue that jumped the shark,” Pelath said, using a common phrase for
an idea that has come and gone.
A November poll for The Indianapolis Star and WTHR (Channel 13) showed that 49
percent of Hoosiers support the amendment, down from 56 percent in 2005.
|
