SSM BAN LOSES GROUND IN MASS. LEGISLATURE: From the Boston Globe

Opponents of a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage in Massachusetts picked up at least two seats in the Legislature in this week's election, diminishing the measure's chances in the Bay State, even as voters in 11 other states overwhelmingly approved similar proposals.

A total of 105 lawmakers voted for the amendment earlier this year, four more than the 101 necessary for passage. The measure must be approved again in the coming session before it can go on the November 2006 statewide ballot. The amendment would ban same-sex marriage, but allow gay couples to enter civil unions.

Senate President Robert E. Travaglini, who presides over the Legislature's joint constitutional sessions, said through a spokeswoman yesterday that he will convene a Constitutional Convention with the same-sex marriage measure on the agenda in 2005. The spokeswoman did not specify when it might be scheduled.

A Globe analysis of Tuesday's elections found that two or perhaps three newly elected opponents of the proposed same-sex marriage ban are replacing lawmakers who voted in favor of the amendment in the spring. Two more opponents would lower the margin of support from 105 lawmakers to 103 if everyone else voted as they did earlier this year.

However, activists and lawmakers caution that the vote totals are fluid, for several reasons. For example, a dozen legislators who voted against the amendment because they oppose both same-sex marriage and civil unions could back the measure this time, because they might view it as better than allowing same-sex marriage to remain legal.

On the other hand, a handful of lawmakers who initially voted for the amendment have told reporters that they are likely to back off next time because thousands of gay couples have married here without significant disruption.

Marty Rouse -- campaign director for MassEquality, a group pushing to defeat the amendment -- said his organization is buoyed by Tuesday's results in the state legislative elections but would still like to persuade several more lawmakers to change their votes.

''Several people voted against the amendment for the wrong reasons; they didn't even want civil unions in the constitution," Rouse said. ''That was 12 people. So we really have our work cut out for us."

Of the 17 seats changing hands in the Legislature after Tuesday's elections, at least seven and perhaps eight will now have lawmakers who plan to vote differently on the amendment than their predecessors, a Globe analysis of the election results found.

Five seats changed from favoring the amendment to opposing it. At least two seats changed from opposing to favoring the amendment; another seat is also expected to follow suit, based on an interview with the victorious candidate in that race. ...

Finally, it's not at all clear that the most diehard opponents of same-sex marriage will be willing to throw their support behind the amendment, if it comes up.

Brian Camenker, head of the Article 8 Alliance, a group that opposes same-sex marriage, said his organization will expend no energy to ensure passage of the constitutional amendment proposal, because it was ''calculated to not pass."

''I don't want it to pass," said Camenker, whose organization spent about $40,000 in a dozen legislative races. ''I may form a ballot committee against it. Why would we want civil unions in our constitution?"

more

posted by Eve at 4:22 PM | link

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home