Voters pass gay marriage ban

Measure extending rights to same-sex couples is defeated

Myung Oak Kim, Rocky Mountain News

Wednesday, November 8, 2006

Colorado voters passed a ban on gay marriage and rejected spousal benefits for same-sex couples, dealing a setback to the gay-rights movement.

Voters approved Amendment 43, a citizens initiative that defines marriage as between one man and one woman in the state constitution, virtually eliminating the chance for gay marriage.

And voters opposed Referendum I, which would have granted gay and lesbian couples many of the legal rights and responsibilities of married couples, such as the ability to make funeral arrangements for a partner and to inherit a partner's property.

"People in Colorado have realized what became clear to people in New Jersey, that marriage needs to be cemented within the constitution to protect it from activist judges," said Jon Paul, executive director of Coloradans for Marriage, the coalition of 10 Christian groups that sponsored Amendment 43.

Paul was referring to a recent New Jersey Supreme Court decision ordering the legislature to give gay couples the same legal rights as married couples.

Lisa Moreno, campaign director of Say No to 43, said the fight against Amendment 43 was hindered because of the focus on Referendum I.

"Given that, we fought the good fight," she said.

Referendum I sponsors tried to put the best face on the loss.

"We spent a year really making the case to Colorado that there is a gap in our laws, and we came close to passing the first ballot initiative (in the country) to provide committed couples with basic legal rights," said Sean Duffy, executive director of Coloradans for Fairness, the Ref I sponsor.

"Colorado is much more aware tonight of the basic problems facing gay couples than they were a year ago."

National interest groups on both sides closely watched the campaigns because Colorado was the first state with two ballot initiatives related to gay unions.

Measures related to gay unions also were on ballots in seven other states. Voters in Arizona, Virginia, Tennessee, Idaho, South Carolina, South Dakota and Wisconsin decided proposals similar to Colorado's Amendment 43.

But unlike Amendment 43, measures in six of those states also would bar domestic partnerships and civil unions. Like Colorado, the Idaho ballot proposal is a gay-marriage ban only.

Constitutional amendments banning gay marriage have swept the country in recent years. Voters in 20 states already have passed amendments supporting the man/woman marriage definition.

Massachusetts is the only state that allows gay marriage.

Focus on the Family supported nearly all the constitutional gay marriage bans, and was active in Colorado. The evangelical group was the most visible proponent of Amendment 43 and the most aggressive opponent of Ref I.

Focus staffer Jim Pfaff said he knew going into the campaign that Coloradans were clear on the marriage issue.

He said gay philanthropist Tim Gill and his political action committee spent millions on a "deceptive" campaign to sell Ref I as basic legal rights for gay couples.

"Colorado voters followed their instincts that they're fair but they didn't want to put gay marriage into Colorado law," Pfaff said.

Ted Trimpa, Gill's political adviser, said he was disappointed. But he said Ref I did well, considering the political fallout from two recent prominent gay sex scandals involving former New Life Church Pastor Ted Haggard and U.S. Rep. Mark Foley, R-Fla.

Trimpa said Gill's $2.5 million contribution to the Ref I campaign was money well spent.

"He's an entrepreneur," Trimpa said. "You have to try new ideas."

Pamela Mitchell, 50, a computer programmer from Evergreen and a Democrat, said she voted for Ref I and against Amendment 43.

"I voted no because I don't think we need to amend our constitution for that," she said. "Clearly, that's on the agenda of the anti-gay rights movement to prohibit same-sex unions in all forms."

Conrad Miller, 45, an attorney from Evergreen and registered Republican, voted the opposite way.

"As an attorney, I'm fully aware of how you can parse words to say domestic (partnership) is not marriage," he said. "Legally it would be marriage."

He voted for Amendment 43.

"I think it's a slippery slope when you go beyond a man and a woman."

In Colorado, the campaigns for the two measures were launched at the beginning of the year.

Coloradans for Marriage, which includes Focus on the Family, the National Association of Evangelicals and the Colorado Catholic Conference, ran a comparatively low-budget campaign, raising almost $330,000 and obtaining most of its petition signatures through volunteers.

The campaign relied mainly on church support and the deep pockets of Focus on the Family, which spent $900,000 to back Amendment 43 and oppose Ref I.

Coloradans for Fairness raised more than $4 million and launched a massive campaign with at least two dozen paid staff and numerous consultants from Denver and the Washington, D.C., area.

The group also received direction from national gay-rights groups, Gill and his advisers from the Gill Foundation, and the political action committee Gill Action Fund.

Though Colorado has a marriage statute, Amendment 43 makes make the man/woman-only rule part of the Colorado Constitution. Supporters said that would deter lawsuits filed by gay couples seeking to marry.

The group opposing Amendment 43 raised just over $350,000, nearly all from the Gill Action Fund.

It argued that the measure is designed to activate social conservative voters and divert attention from other issues like the Iraq War.

Despite a recent string of defeats in court, gay rights organizations predict that the country will eventually accept full legal recognition of gay couples and their families. They say Colorado is a key battleground state for the near future.

Money trail on gay issues

Referendum I: Would have allowed gay couples to register as domestic partners and obtain many legal rights and responsibilities given to married couples.

• Winners: Focus on the Family and its political arm spent about $900,000 to fight Ref I and support Amendment 43.

• Losers: Coloradans for Fairness, the Ref I sponsor, raised $4.2 million. Gay philanthropist Tim Gill and his political action committee, the Gill Action Fund, gave $2.5 million. Fort Collins heiress Pat Stryker and her Michigan architect brother, Jon Stryker, gave a combined $725,000. The Service Employees International Union gave $150,000.

Amendment 43: Defines marriage in the state constitution as a union only between a man and a woman.

• Winners: Coloradans for Marriage, a coalition of 10 Christian groups, raised almost $330,000. Largest donors were Greenwood Village Republican businessman C. Edward McVaney, Focus on the Family and the Colorado Catholic Conference.

• Losers: Don't Mess with Marriage raised more than $350,000, mostly from the Gill Action Fund. The group also used the name Say No to 43.