Gay marriage ban expected to fail
Wednesday vote may be precursor
Less than two years after the Supreme Judicial Court legalized gay marriage, backers of the ruling say they have built a majority in the Massachusetts Legislature sufficient to block a proposed constitutional amendment that would ban same-sex matrimony.
A poll of lawmakers conducted by the Associated Press has found at least 104 who plan to vote against the amendment when it comes up for a vote on Wednesday. Same-sex marriage advocates told the Globe last week that their internal polling put the number at 102.
''The thinking in the Legislature is clearly going in the right direction," said Representative Alice K. Wolf, a Cambridge Democrat who supports gay marriage.
The rapid growth in opposition means a key vote on a pending 2006 constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriages and create civil unions is likely to be defeated on Wednesday. It also gives gay marriage supporters a stronger hand against another amendment, aimed at the 2008 ballot, that would ban same-sex marriages without creating civil unions. That measure will require just 50 votes in two successive sessions to make it onto the ballot.
Lawmakers said the change in position developed as they found that the onset of same-sex marriages did little to alter the fabric of life in the Bay State. Gay-rights groups also staged a months-long campaign to win over skeptical legislators by arranging meetings with same-sex couples to discuss their lives.
State Senator James E. Timilty, a Walpole Democrat who campaigned last year in favor of the proposed constitutional amendment, said the meetings were crucial to altering his position because they converted abstract moral arguments into tangible reality.
''At many of these meetings, when I would look at the children of these couples and see that they deserved all of the benefits that I had certainly growing up in a family, the principles of fairness changed my mind and I decided that a no vote was the correct vote," Timilty said.
Over the past few months, 43 lawmakers who favored the proposed constitutional amendment met with same-sex couples, their friends, and their clergy, according to Marty
The meetings appear to have achieved their desired effect. By Friday, legislators' internal polling revealed that at least eight House lawmakers and at least two senators who last year voted for the amendment sponsored by Senate President Robert E. Travaglini and Senate Republican Leader Brian P. Lees have decided to switch their votes.
Because subsequent elections left the Legislature with a net increase of at least eight lawmakers who oppose the amendment, at least 102 lawmakers in the 200-seat body now oppose the creation of a constitutional amendment that bans same-sex marriage -- and advocacy groups say the number is likely to be significantly higher when the vote takes place Wednesday. In order to appear on the 2006 ballot, the Travaglini-Lees measure needs to secure the backing of at least 101 lawmakers.
''We've been working hard to build a pro-marriage majority in Massachusetts, and next Wednesday we'll see that we do have that majority," Rouse said Friday. ''It's extremely gratifying."
Last spring, after several grueling and emotionally charged debates, the Legislature gave initial approval to the Travaglini-Lees amendment by a 105-to-92 margin. But 8 of the 92 lawmakers said afterward that they voted against the amendment because they were opposed to civil unions as well as same-sex matrimony. That meant only 84 of the Legislature's 200 seats were occupied by supporters of same-sex marriages.
That vote, however, was taken before legalized gay marriages began on May 17, 2004. Since then, some 6,500 gay couples have married in Massachusetts.
Groups that oppose same-sex nuptials have asked lawmakers sympathetic to their cause to oppose the Travaglini-Lees amendment -- a reversal from their position last year. Instead, the groups are asking legislators to focus on passing a separate ballot initiative that is aimed at banning same-sex marriages without creating civil unions by 2008. Several of those lawmakers, such as Representative Philip Travis, a Rehoboth Democrat, have agreed to do so, which means the Travaglini-Lees amendment was probably doomed regardless of whether gay-marriage supporters became a majority of the Legislature or not.
Backers of the 2008 measure will begin gathering signatures next week in hopes of placing the ballot question before the Legislature by early next year.
If they can obtain the roughly 66,000 certified signatures, then attract the support of 50 lawmakers in two successive legislative sessions, the measure would appear on the 2008 ballot. Only 50 lawmakers are required because the measure is considered a citizen petition.
As a result, Wednesday's vote will show how far gay-marriage supporters have to go to defeat that measure. For many gay-marriage supporters, it is now the 2008 ballot question that is foremost in their minds.
''If we're going to put this matter behind us, we need to have a majority of legislators who say we are not going to enshrine discrimination in the constitution," said Representative Byron Rushing, a Boston Democrat who has helped lead the internal polling effort in the House. ''If another version comes before us, you can assume these people will vote against it also, and that's what's so key about this." 