Gay marriage called election issue

State Representative Kathleen M. Teahan opened Thursday's Brockton Enterprise to find a taste of what she believes is in store for her this fall.

"Our State Representative, Kathleen M. Teahan, has stated she favors same-sex marriage," a quarter-page advertisement stated. "But is this the position of the constituents in her district?"

The ad was placed by a group that favors a state constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, and the group said it is not affiliated with any particular candidate or party. The group, a local 12-person coalition that calls itself the Committee to Let the People Vote, counts former Republican state Senator Edward Kirby and his wife, Mary Alice, among its leaders.

Teahan sees a broader message: She said the ad was the opening salvo in an election-year fight, in which a Republican challenger will try to use the gay-marriage issue to oust her from office. "It's a Republican attempt at framing an issue for this year's election," said Teahan, a fourth-term Democrat from Whitman who plans to vote against the amendment. "It's an issue with a lot of attention, and it's one that's very complicated and difficult. But on the surface, it can be expressed as a very simple one against us."

As state lawmakers consider the issue of gay marriage this week, they're keeping a wary eye fixed on November. Governor Mitt Romney is actively recruiting Republicans to take on Democratic incumbents in this fall's legislative races, and gay marriage is emerging as an early recruiting and campaigning tool.

Already, Republican leaders are seeking to recast the issue to fit it with Romney's broader government overhaul agenda. Rather than focusing on the definition of marriage, an issue that divides members of both major parties, Republican candidates are likely to point out that the issue was ignored for so long by the Democrat-controlled Legislature that it fell to the Supreme Judicial Court to sort it out, said Dominick Ianno, executive director of the Massachusetts Republican Party.

"This whole process is shining a light on the Legislature and their inability to tackle the tough issues in a timely manner," Ianno said. "The Legislature had a number of opportunities to address this issue before it got to the court, and they punted."

In 2002, Democratic legislative leaders scuttled an effort to put a constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union between a man and a woman on a state-wide ballot. If that had gone forward, the state constitution could have been amended as soon as this year, rather than 2006.

All 200 House and Senate seats will be up for reelection in November, and Romney has made it a priority to help break the Democratic stranglehold on both legislative bodies. Romney and other Republican leaders have pledged $75,000 to the first 100 GOP candidates who commit to run against Democrats.

For Romney's part, his aides say that the governor did not seek out the issue of gay marriage, but that it was thrust upon him by the court ruling. Now they are portraying his role as a demonstration of leadership on an issue he has always felt strongly about.

But other signs suggest that Romney is using the issue to establish a national profile for himself in GOP circles. Last week, the day after the SJC ruled against civil unions, Romney wrote a column in the Wall Street Journal, urging lawmakers across the country to act quickly to stop courts from establishing gay marriage.

John Prindiville, a Stoneham entrepreneur who is planning to challenge state Representative Paul C. Casey, said that if Casey votes against the amendment, he'll use it as a campaign issue. Prindiville, who would run as a Republican, said he sees a pattern in which the Legislature ignores the will of the people.

Casey, an eighth-term Winchester Democrat, has not said how he will vote, in part because the precise language is in flux, and he wants to be sure that the state can establish civil unions.

"The people should have the right to vote on an issue that affects their lives in a drastic way," Prindiville said. The law should not be imposed by unelected, appointed judges."

Based on recent history, Massachusetts lawmakers may have something to fear. In Vermont in 2000, voters gave control of the House of Representatives to Republicans for the first time in 14 years, after lawmakers voted to establish civil unions for gay couples.

But the strategy of focusing on gay marriage carries risks as well, Democrats say. If Republicans dwell on gay marriage this fall, they'll be ignoring a range of issues that have far more importance with voters, said Philip W. Johnston, chairman of the state Democratic Party.

"Most voters are concerned with their jobs and affordable health care and maintaining quality public schools," Johnston said. "This is a diversion. If the Republicans throw in their lot with right-wing, social conservatives. . . they'll be playing with fire."

An indication of the issue's potency in legislative races could come next month, when a special election is held to fill the Senate seat previously held by Cheryl A. Jacques of Needham. Both candidates say the issue is far down the priority list of the district's residents, but view their opinions on the constitutional amendment as a defining difference.

Rick Klein can be reached at rklein@globe.com.