Wednesday, June 15, 2005

MA Family is Betting on an Alternative Marriage Question

Today's Globe states that the Mass Family Institute will be gathering signatures in Sept to try to put same sex marriage on the ballot in 2008. This action more than assures that the constitutional amendment currently before the Mass Legislature will fail in the fall.

The prospect of a new amendment with no provision for civil unions will probably undermine support for the competing, compromise measure. That compromise measure must clear the Legislature once more in order to be placed on the 2006 ballot.
It seems that Gov. Romney's Staff has been working with the anti-gay Mass Family Institute in crafting this new amendment although Romney hasn't made any statements about the new tactic.

Arline Isaacson says what all of us are thinking:
''We think they're crazy," said Arline Isaacson, cochairwoman of the Massachusetts Gay and Lesbian Political Caucus. ''We're amazed that they are writing off this year's [constitutional convention] when we know they have a very good chance of winning this year and therefore banning same-sex marriages starting in 2006. We're amazed they are considering letting us get married for two more years through 2008. It will virtually guarantee that many thousands more gay people will get married."


massmarrier said...

Isaacson's comments surprise me. I don't think the anti forces have the votes. They barely did before the interim elections. In addition, after a year and change, the sky hasn't fallen. Every day that same-sex marriage isn't a problem (and the voter polls show a majority in favor of it), pragmatic politicians have less incentive to put their names on this amendment.

It makes you wonder whether the Article 8/Mass Family/Goguen types are trying to cut their losses with this new tack. I for one will be fascinated to see what the spin on the announcement of this effort will be.

sco said...

If you only count people who were going to vote against the amendment because they favor marriage equality, I think Isaacson may have been right -- they didn't have the votes. The thing is, though, they were not counting on people to vote against the amendment because they don't want either civil unions or gay marriage. Given that these people are not happy with the compromise amendment, I think maybe a deal could have been made with some of these people. A "No" is a "No" and MassEquality and the GLPC shouldn't care why the legislator is voting the way they are.

Anonymous said...

I agree with Isaacson --- they are crazy --- and about the amendment initiative too. I just read that Governor Romney is supporting the initiative. Big surprise. Everyone knows that if you want to run in a Republican Presidential Primary you have to be against civil rights.