Gay Marriages in Louisiana (FMA senate vote count on amendment)

kplctv.com ^ | 02/24/04 | Reported by KPLC Staff

[KQQL]

1 RAT is for it ..so far..

Hagel/Collins and Chafee against it.

Snowe is 50/50 about it.

[foreverfree]

bump

[puroresu]

At this rate, there's no way the amendment will get two-thirds in the Senate. If the 'Rats hold firm, it might not even get a majority.

The left simply cannot afford to lose their ability to govern via judicial fiat.

This nonsense should have been stopped decades ago, long before even Roe vs. Wade, let alone the impending "gay marriage" fiat.

But it wasn't stopped, and we're now governed by a judicial elite which is protected in power by politicians who prefer it that way.

[AntiGuv]

Looks as if Specter is 50/50 on it as well:

A varied reaction among the area's legislators

- while Sen. Arlen Specter (R., Pa.) thinks that it is "premature" to consider the amendment and prefers to let the states deal with the issue.

"If the states cannot preserve the traditions of marriage between a man and a woman," he said, "I would be prepared to consider a U.S. constitutional amendment."

Also, from the same Philadelphia Inquirer article it looks as if Carper of Delaware is against.

In opposing the amendment, Sen. Thomas Carper (D., Del.) echoed the view that states should decide for themselves. He also noted that the Constitution had been amended but "never... to deny liberties."

[AntiGuv]

Carper definitely against. See my post 45. I'll try to look up the others you mention to see if there's anything new.

[Right Wing Professor]

Hagel (RINO) and Nelson (D) of Nebraska are both against it.

[AuH2ORepublican]

"needs 67 ....to pass...Filbusters will be moot."

---

Probably, but not necessarily. For a constitutional amendment to pass the Senate, it must be approved by 2/3 of members present, so if not everyone shows up it can pass with less than 67 votes (provided quorum is present). I believe that the filibuster rule provides that one needs 60 votes (not 3/5 of votes) to end debate, so if less than 90 Senators are present it will be harder to break a filibuster than to get the 2/3 of votes needed for passage of the constitutional amendment.

[longtermmemmory]

Expect many out of date quotes.

We all hesitate to amend the consititution. I am only in favor of the amendment becasue THERE ARE NO OTHER LEGAL OPTIONS. The HRC and other homosexual groups were banking on people letting them have their "turn" in the courts and once they were done, have it too late to stop the soddomite marriage.

The NEVER calculated this level of growing opposition.

Make no mistake the lies will become more and more becaue the FMA trumps all the judicial activism. This is a good thing.

We should never hesitate doing the right thing, even if it means we have to amend.

[KQQL]

Sen. Ben Nighthorse Campbell (R): "As a supporter of the Defense of Marriage Act, I believe that the decision to ban gay marriages should be left up to the individual states, and I am reluctant to tinker with the Constitution. As a Catholic, I feel that marriage is between a man and a woman. I will study this carefully if it comes before the Senate floor."

50/50 Column

http://rockymountainnews.com/drmn/state/article/0,1299,DRMN_21_2681105,00.html

[AntiGuv]

None of these are out-of-date. Every source I've used has been from a statement released either on the Senator's website or in his or her local press since George Bush made his speech yesterday. The only cases where I've assigned a Senator without a specific recent statement are: (1) Senators that did not vote for DOMA are assumed to be against FMA; (2) Senators who have sponsored either the FMA or the reaffirmation of DOMA are assumed to be for the FMA. Most all of these have released statements since yesterday, anyhow.

BTW, Lott, Cochran back Bush on gay marriage ban

That brings the tally to 23 in favor, 28 against. Three of the against (McCain, Snowe, Specter) are not entirely clear and may eventually support.

[KQQL]

DU Dummies can't read english ...Campbell says he will consider it..

[AntiGuv]

OK, I think I will start a new 50/50 category and move Arlen Specter, John McCain, Olympia Snowe, and Ben Nighthorse Campbell into that. The others all seem more firm in their positions.

[KQQL]

put spector/mcpain/campbell on the tossup category...

[timydnuc]

Breaux is right. It must be done state by state. First, it is the only logical way to do it. Second, this will flush out the liberal, elitist judiciary for impeachment. Third, the 9th Circus and other lefty federal courts will be hard pressed to find these state constitutional amendments federally unconstitutional, if they do, impeachment. Fourth, the gay and lesbian radicals will spend every dime that they have fighting this times 50, and then some (go broke you idiots).

If we put as much passion behind this in a state by state battle then we could end up with impeachments, on the federal level, of the elitist judges, and a purge, on the state level, of the ilk that legislates from the state benches to thwart the will of the People. This is an area that the commies don't want to go, if they do, let the impeachments begin.

Delay and Frist should be watching the 9th Circus carefully on this San Fran deal. If they start interfering they should start the impeachments.....NOW!!

[AntiGuv]

Oh, and I missed Burns of Montana from that earlier link you posted. Since he said he'll work toward passing it, I'll assume he will even if he has 10% doubts.

[KQQL]

U.S. Sen. Mary Landrieu of Louisiana declined to comment on her views

http://www.2theadvocate.com/stories/022504/new_lagaymarriage001.shtml

EXCUSE US !

[SoDak]

All of a sudden Tommie comes out for states rights. Just another in a long string of things Tommie thinks he can have both ways. Stephanie's stance tells you something about how confident she, and the DNC, are about her winning. Larry is going to give her a better run than anyone has predicted. And thanks for the ping.