Caledonia Argus

Same sex marriage bill passes house, fails senate committee

Posted: 3/30/04

by T.W. Budig
ECM capitol reporter

A proposed constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of man and woman passed the House Wednesday, March 24, after less than 90 minutes of debate.

Supporters in the Capitol hallways, watching the floor session on television monitors, cheered as the House voted 88 to 42 to pass the legislation.

ìThis issue is too important to leave to the Supreme Court justices,î said Rep. Mary Liz Holberg, R-Lakeville, introducing her bill on the House floor.

The people of Minnesota want to vote, reasoned Holberg.

Some 11 House DFLers voted for the amendment, which if passed by the Senate will appear on the ballot in November.

Three Republicans voted against.

DFLers speaking out against the proposed amendment ó an amendment supporters perceive as vital in warding off judicial activism ó labeled it a distraction concocted by Republicans to cloak the failings of the Bush Administration.

Rep. Karen Clark, DFL-Minneapolis, a lesbian member of the House, condemned the proposed constitutional amendment as extreme.

ìEverything about it is extreme. And everything about it is mean,î she said.

The proposed amendment served as permission for people to act out their bigotry towards gays and lesbians, said Clark.

The House vote follows a large rally at the Capitol on Monday that had thousands of amendment supporters spreading out from the Capitol steps onto the mall.

Gov. Pawlenty supports the proposed constitutional amendment.

The question proposed to go before voters in November reads:

ìShall the Minnesota Constitution be amended to provide that marriage or its legal equivalent is limited to only the union of one man and one woman?î

Some supporters of the proposed amendment believe its passage would forbid civil unions.

Local House lawmakers voting for the proposed constitutional amendment included Reps. Greg Davids and Gene Pelowski.

Amendment fails in senate Judiciary committee

Sen. Michele Bachmann, R-Stillwater, believes in miracles.

She better pray.

On Friday,March 26, the Senate judiciary committee voted along party lines to defeat her high-profile proposed constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.

But the committee ó with one Republican voting for and one DFLer voting against ó passed a proposed constitutional amendment authored by Sen. Don Betzold, DFL-Fridley, which would ask Minnesota voters whether the Minnesota Legislature alone, not the courts, could define marriage.

ìHis bill is better than no bill,î said Bachmann.

Still, gay marriage would be possible under it, she said. Thatís because marriage is not defined as between man and woman, she explained.

Yet Bachmann was upbeat.

ìThe issue remains alive,î she said.

ìAt this point in the legislative session itís better than nothing,î said Bachmann.

That might be exactly what supporters of Bachmannís proposed amendment end up in the DFL-controlled Senate.

Speaking after Friday four-hours hearing, Betzold explained it was up to the Senate rules committee ó DFL caucus leadership ó to decide what to do with his bill.

He doesnít plan to push for a hearing. Indeed, Betzoldís not certain whether heíd vote for his own bill if it reached the Senate floor.

Several committee members questioned whether the legislation would violate separation of powers ó whether the Legislature would be encroaching into the judicial realm.

Betzold believes the proposed amendment would stand up, he said.

One things for certain, he will not tolerate language from Bachmannís proposed constitutional amendment to be amended onto his bill.

ìIíll table it,î said Betzold. That is, the senator would in effect kill the bill.

Top of Page