Posted on 05/13/2004 5:41:08 AM PDT by Theodore R.
Same-sex proposal falls short in Senate
By MARSHA SHULER mshuler@theadvocate.com Capitol news bureau
A proposed constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriages in Louisiana fell one vote shy of passage Wednesday in the state Senate.Six senators were missing in action for the vote.
Proponents said the loss was a setback but they expect to win Senate passage when the legislation comes up for another vote later. Some pro-amendment senators were absent Wednesday.
The Senate voted 25 to 8. But 26 yeas -- a two-thirds majority of the 39-member body --- is required to pass any proposed constitutional amendment.
If the measure passes the Legislature and is signed by the governor, then voters would have to approve it in a Sept. 18 election, instead of on the Nov. 2 presidential ballot.
Louisiana law forbids same-sex marriages and doesn't recognize those from other states.
Senate Bill 166 would define marriage in the state constitution as a union between one man and one woman. The new article would prohibit state government and state courts from recognizing same-sex marriages from other jurisdictions.
SB166 author Sen. John Hainkel, R-New Orleans, argued that a constitutional amendment would make a stronger case should the state laws come under constitutional attack.
"The core value of marriage will be more protected," Hainkel said. "I believe it deserves the highest status we can give it."
Opponents scoffed, arguing that the state laws have served Louisiana well; that no challenges have been filed; and that the "conservative" state Supreme Court would never overturn those laws if challenged. In fact, opponents said, barring same-sex marriage in the state constitution would invite a contest in federal court.
Sen. Joel Chaisson, D-Destrehan, said, "This is about us not doing something that's going to cause division. That's what it's going to do. Families include gays and lesbians for many of us. This is nothing more than a kick in the gut."
As debate began on Senate Bill 166, senators had on their desks a flier entitled "Blanco on Gay Marriage Amendment." The single-sheet contained Blanco quotes from two newspapers, in which she questions the need for the constitutional amendment as well as the damage it might do to the state's economy.
Senate President Don Hines, D-Bunkie, said he authorized the distribution with Blanco's knowledge.
The issue of whether marriage should be only between a man and a woman wasn't the subject of disagreement. Proponents and opponents of the proposed constitutional change agreed on that front.
The difference came down to the necessity of changing the state constitution.
Hainkel pointed to a same-sex prohibition in Massachusetts law that was struck down by that state's high court on due process grounds.
Hainkel said Louisiana's statutes could be challenged on similar grounds. That is, married gays could argue Louisiana's existing law takes away rights enumerated in the state constitution without a legal determination. However, Hainkel batted away several opportunities to specifically say how that would happen.
"I never thought we would have any argument in this state that marriage is between a man and a woman. It has been that way since biblical times," Hainkel said. "I believe it's the essence of our civilization."
Sens. Cleo Fields and Kip Holden, both Baton Rouge Democrats, said the Legislature already has gone on record against same-sex marriages.
Fields said four separate laws address the issue.
"The question today is do we need to do anything more than we have already done. Our laws have never been challenged," Fields said. "My question is what's the fear?"
Fields said inserting the ban in the constitution would bring equal protection challenges under the U.S. Constitution.
Holden said the issue wouldn't be before the Legislature, except for what people are seeing on television: same-sex marriages occurring and being challenged in other states.
"Do we look at the effects we create, the division that we cause in our state, when we rush to judgment without looking at the consequences? When we separate people from one another?" Holden said.
Holden said the U.S. was built on "tolerance."
"I think tolerance is what is tearing down the foundation of this country. The foundation of this country is God, faith and family," said Sen. Noble Ellington, D-Winnsboro.
Ellington said Louisiana voters should be allowed to vote on the issue.
Sen. Tom Schedler, R-Slidell, said the debate here is being fueled by outside events -- a California mayor bucking the law to marry same-sex couples and the Massachusetts law being struck down.
"What occurs in people's private lives. I really don't care," said Schedler. But, he said, "a government, a Legislature should determine certain values."
"I don't know what's inherently wrong with letting the people of Louisiana decide," he said.
Here's how the Louisiana Senate voted Wednesday when it failed to pass Senate Bill 166, a proposed constitutional amendment banning same sex marriages:
FOR the constitutional amendment (25): Sens. Adley, Amedee, Barham, Boasso, Cain, Cheek, Cravins, Dardenne, Duplessis, Dupre, Ellington, Fontenot, Hainkel, Heitmeier, Kostelka, Lentini, Malone, McPherson, Michot, Mount, Nevers, Schedler, Smith, Theunissen and Ullo.
AGAINST the constitutional amendment (8): President Hines and Sens. Bajoie, Boissiere, Chaisson, Fields, Holden, Jackson and Jones.
NOT VOTING (6): Sens. B. Gautreaux, N. Gautreaux, Hollis, Irons, Marionneaux and Romero.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.