Same-sex marriage battle lines being drawn

M.E. Sprengelmeyer, Rocky Mountain News

Published May 18, 2006 at midnight

Text size

More Colorado Government

The U.S. Senate has set the stage to renew the battle over Sen. Wayne Allard's proposed constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage, though critics dismiss next month's scheduled vote as nothing but an election-year ploy.

The Senate Judiciary Committee voted along strict party lines today to advanced the Federal Marriage Amendment for a Senate floor vote, expected for the week of June 5.

The amendment would define marriage as the union of a man and a woman and is a reaction to a Massachusetts Supreme Court decision that first allowed same-sex marriages in that state.

Allard, a Loveland Republican, is hoping to have more success than he did in 2004, when the amendment won only 48 votes on a procedural vote and was shelved for the year.

It requires 60 votes to pass cloture, ending debate and bringing the measure up for final consideration. It then would take 67 votes for Senate passage.

Allard believes he has a better chance this year, since he has added 10 new Senate co-sponsors, including five first-term Senators who replaced lawmakers who voted against the amendment in 2004, Allard spokeswoman Carolyn Williams said Wednesday.

But critics dismiss the scheduled vote as an election-year ploy simply designed to rally social conservatives during the run-up to the November elections.

"They have a very fractured base of people in their party who are not rallying around this as they were in 2004," said Brad Luna, spokesman for the gay rights group Human Rights Campaign. "I think the American people see this for what it is. They see this as a political ploy. They have issues very critical to their daily lives that this Congress has decided to toss aside (in order to) bring up a discriminatory amendment to the constitution. That will backfire."

Allard has repeatedly denied charges that the amendment would insert discrimination into the constitution. He has said the amendment is necessary in order to preserve a traditional definition of marriage that is under attack in the courts.

The issue stirs passions on both sides. Outside groups, including the political arm of Colorado Springs-based evangelical Christian organization Focus on the Family, has encouraged amendment supporters to contact lawmakers in advance of the June vote.

Focus founder Dr. James Dobson recently warned Republicans that they could be punished at the polls if they abandon social conservatives who played a key role in the 2004 elections.

Williams said that a lot has changed since the 2004 debate. Since then, 11 states have passed state constitutional amendments similar to Allard's.

"There is a greater need today than there was in 2004," she said in an e-mail response to a reporter's questions. "Nine states face lawsuits challenging traditional marriage laws. There are also several new Senators that haven’t had a chance to vote on this issue."

But opponents say there also is a different political environment that has average voters more concerned about issues like gas prices, the war in Iraq and others.

Elliot Mincberg, legal director for the liberal group People for the American Way, issued a statement Thursday calling the Judiciary Committee action "a shameful act of election-year vandalism" against the U.S. Constitution's equal protection statutes.

"It’s not surprising that some Republican leaders want to distract Americans from crises that really threaten our families and values – unfair tax policies and a runaway deficit, a culture of corruption and lack of accountability for lawbreaking at the highest levels of our government, the neglect of children and families displaced by Hurricane Katrina, and more," Mincberg said. "But writing discrimination into our sacred charter of freedom for short-term political gain shows a basic lack of decency."

Subscribe to the Rocky Mountain News