Box Turtle Bulletin

Arizona Senate Breaks Own Rules To Pass Anti-Marriage Amendment

The Republican-controlled Arizona Senate late yesterday broke its own rules to shut down debate and force a vote to place a proposed constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage on the ballot.

According to Equality Arizona and the Arizona Daily Star, Sen Paula Aboud (D-Tucson) was engaged in a debate with Sen. Ken Cheuvront (D-Phoenix) on another tax bill in a move similar to a filibuster according to the Senate rules. During the debate, Majority Leader Thayer Verschoor (R-Gilbert) and Majority Whip John Huppenthal (R-Chandler), among others, devised a scheme with committee chairman Jack Harper (R- rural district 4) to violate the rules of the Senate and the rights of Senators Aboud and Cheuvront.

Barbara McCullough-Jones and Sam Holdren of Arizona Equality describe what happened next:

In the middle of their discussion, Senator Harper turned off the microphones of Senators Paula Aboud (D-28) and Ken Cheuvront (D-15) and called on the Majority Leader to make a motion. Then, when Senators Aboud and Cheuvront loudly called for a Point of Order several times, even walking to the front desk where Senator Harper sat, he deliberately ignored their calls. To add insult to injury, these people attempted to justify their actions, even after the Senate President and other Senators admonished them for deliberately breaking the rules. Tonight’s actions of these and other Senators have forever tainted that body, and it’s important that we all let the people of Arizona know how these individuals acted so unethically.

The chamber broke down into chaos for the next twenty minutes when]the matter was finally brought before Senate President Tim Bee (R-Tucson) for resolution. Bee, who had been trying to keep the proposed amendment off the calendar, lambasted the Center for Arizona Policy (CAP), the right-wing lobbying group behind the marriage amendment, for what he described as their divisive tactics, hostility, coercion and threats. He then publicly buckled under the pressure and became the constitutionally-mandated sixteenth vote to placed the measure on the ballot.

Sens. Aboud and Cheuvront are the only two openly gay members of the Arizona Senate. After the shouting was over, Sen. Aboud spoke again to the Senate:

“I just don’t understand how my personal, private relationship between two people affects anyone else in this room?

“Get your love off my back,” Aboud said. “Is your relationship with your family so fragile that you’re threatened by me?”

Today was a shameful day in the Senate’s history under Bee’s weak leadership. Bee is running for Congress to try to replace Gabrielle Giffords (D-Tucson) in a congressional district which voted against the 2006 attempt to write discrimination into the constitution by a wider margin than did voters statewide (45.4% to 54.6% in CD8, versus 48.2% to 51.8% statewide). During his term in the Senate, Bee represented a district which also defeated Prop 107 a margin wider than the statewide tally (47.5% to 52.5%).

Yesterday may well have marked the end of Bee’s political career. And with his shameful display of cowardice under pressure, it is an end well deserved.

Kolbe and Bee

“Tim Bee has demonstrated his toughness and his compassion, his ability to lead while at the same time listening to others. These are skills few people in public life have. We need Tim Bee working for us in Congress.” — Jim Kolbe (left), the gay former U.S. Congressman for the district Tim Bee is running in and the campaign’s “Honorary Chairman.”

Tim Bee was the sixteenth vote in the Arizona Senate’s shameless vote to put the anti-marriage amendment on the ballot yet again. Bee is running for the congressional seat that Kolbe once held. Kolbe voted for DOMA in 1996, a vote that led to his outing. I have heard him speak passionately against Prop 107 in 2006.

So what does Kolbe have to say about this? Is he ducking back into the closet again?

[Hat tip: Tucson Observer]

Arizona Senate Passes Anti-Marriage Amendment

We just received word that late this evening that the Arizona Senate was able to scare up the sixteen votes needed to put a proposed constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage onto the ballot.

Tucson’s District 30 Senator and Senate President Tim Bee was the sixteenth vote. He will be running against incumbent Gabrielle Giffords in November for the Congressional District 8 house seat. Voters in CD8 voted against the 2006 Arizona amendment, with 52.5%54.6% voting against Prop 107 and only 47.5%45.4% voting for it. That was a wider margin than the state-wide result of 51.8% against and 48.2% in favor.

Update: I had my figures crossed. I originally posted the results for Sen. Bee’s Senate district, not the Congressional district he is currently running for. As you can see, voters in the Congressional district defeated Prop 107 by a wider margin still. I apologize for the error.

McCain Supports CA Anti-Marriage Amendment

We’re still not sure what McCain might have told the Log Cabin Republicans during his still-unacknowledged meeting with them, the LCRs are sure to be disappointed by this news. “Protect Marriage,” the California group that is sponsoring the Californian anti-marriage amendment, has announced that John McCain is supporting their efforts to abolish more than 2,000 legal marriages in California. According to McCain’s statement:

“I support the efforts of the people of California to recognize marriage as a unique institution between a man and a woman, just as we did in my home state of Arizona. I do not believe judges should be making these decisions.”

Actually, Arizona defeated an attempt to write a ban on same-sex marriage into the constitution in 2006. Nevertheless, same-sex marriage is explicitly banned in Arizona by state law, and that law has been consistently upheld by the courts.

A vote to put another proposed amendment on the ballot may come up for a vote in the Arizona Senate as early as today. It’s still not too late to contact your Senator. And thanks to Equality Arizona, it only takes about three minutes of your time.

Arizona Anti-Marriage Amendment Re-Vote Likely for Friday

Yesterday’s vote by the Arizona Senate to advance an anti-marriage amendment to the voters fell short. But amendment supporters today vow to bring the measure back for another vote on Friday.

The thirty-member chamber voted 14-11 to place a proposed constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage onto the ballot. But since the Arizona constitution requires that a majority of the members elected must approve the measure, sixteen votes are needed for passage.

When supporters of the ban realized that they didn’t have enough votes — Sen. Karen Johnson (R-Mesa) had gone on vacation — Sen. Linda Gray (R-Phoenix) switched her vote in a procedural move to allow her to bring the measure back again for another vote. Another vote will likely be called on Friday when Johnson is expected to interrupt her vacation to support the measure.

Which means that come Friday, we may see an anti-marriage amendment placed on the ballot. Arizona residents are encouraged to contact their Senator and voice their opinions. Equality Arizona makes this easy. Just enter your zip code, and their web page will automatically provide you with contact information and talking points. It takes all of three minutes.

BREAKING: Arizona Senate Rejects Anti-Marriage Amendment

This just in:

The Arizona Senate has rejected a proposal that would have asked voters to amend the state constitution to prohibit same-sex marriage. The 14-11 vote fell two votes shy of what was required to send the proposal to the November ballot. Senators later voted to reconsider the measure at another unspecified date.

The Arizona legislature is just about to end its legislative session. And since this proposal has been rejected, I don’t know what’s meant by the line saying that they voted to reconsider the measure “at another unspecified date.” When I know, you’ll know. But for now, it looks like it might be dead for 2008.

Update: What that last line means is that they can still bring the amendment up for a vote at any time between now and the official end (“sine die”) of the session. In a just-released statement, Equality Arizona characterized the move as a “desparete maneuver” by Senate Republicans to force a vote. Sixteen votes (a simple majority of the Senate) was needed to pass the resolution. Five Senators did note vote.

Arizona Lawmakers At A Crossroads

On Monday, the Arizona House of Representatives voted 33-25 to approve SCR1042, a proposed anti-marriage constitutional amendment, sending it on to the Senate for its approval to place the measure on the November ballot.

Half a continent away on Tuesday, voters in northern Mississippi’s first congressional district chose Travis Childers (D) over Greg Davis (R) by a margin of 54% to 46% in a special election to fill a vacant seat. Just to give you a sense of how bit this was, this was a district which President Bush carried by 59% in 2000 and 62% in 2004. Roger Wicker (R), the previous incumbent whose appointment to Trent Lott’s Senate seat created the vacancy, had won every election since 1994 by at least 63% of the vote.

One certainly has to wonder what was going through Rep. Marian McClure’s (R-Tucson) mind as she picked up Wednesday morning’s paper. She was among those who voted to put SCR1042 on the ballot in November.

That wasn’t always her position though. Just last April, Rep. McClure had been one of four Republicans who joined a procedural maneuver to kill an earlier identical anti-marriage amendment. In doing so, she followed not only her conscience, but the will of the voters in her district who sent her to the state house. In 2006, those voters soundly rejected Proposition 107 (that year’s anti-marriage amendment) with 52.5% voting against it and only 47.5% voting in favor. That margin was even wider than the statewide result. The statewide tally had 51.8% voting “no” and 48.2% “yes” (PDF: 220KB/18 pages).

But since that April House vote, the Center for Arizona Policy (CAP), Focus On the Family’s official state policy council for Arizona, has been pulling out all the stops. They’ve exerted extraordinary pressure on state lawmakers to bring the measure back for another vote. That pressure included both threats and promises, and for some lawmakers it seemed to have worked. Rep. McClure was among those who caved to CAP’s pressure and switched her vote on Monday. Instead of following the voice of her constituents, she chose to dance to CAP’s tune instead.

So now she can count on CAP’s support in the general elections in November. And with yesterday’s California Supreme Court ruling in favor of marriage equality, CAP’s political pressure has grown even stronger to get the bill scheduled for a vote in the Senate.

But does CAP really have the clout that they claim they have, when voters across the country have made it known that they’ tired of the same old politics that CAP represents?

Let’s go back to that vote in Mississippi on Tuesday. The national Republican Party had poured millions of dollars into that race. They even enlisted Vice President Dick Cheney to make an appearance. And yet Childers’ convincing win in what was supposed to be a solidly safe Republican seat sent shockwaves throughout the GOP. This loss follows earlier humiliating defeats in special elections to fill Rep. Dennis Hastert’s Illinois seat and Rep. Richard Baker’s Louisiana seat. These were also considered to be “safe” GOP seats.

A recent poll shows that 81% of Americans believe the US is on the wrong track. The divisive politics of the past have become an anathema. U.S. Rep. Tom Davis (R-VA) describes this year’s political atmosphere as “the worst since Watergate and far more toxic than the fall of 2006.”

So all of this makes reviving a failed amendment from 2006 an odd choice for Arizona lawmakers. It certainly doesn’t represent the kind of change that voters say they’re looking for. It looks instead like the same old style of politics that voters in Mississippi, Illinois and Louisiana have rejected. And if the massive resources of the GOP financial and political machine couldn’t pull out a win in a solid-red district in Mississippi, what can CAP possibly offer to Arizona legislators like Rep. McClure?

Arizona voters have already indicated that they have rejected the kind of politics that CAP stands for. This rebellion first took shape in 2006 when Arizona voters said no to CAP and defeated Prop 107. That was also when voters sent Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D) to Congress to represent Rep. Jim Kolbe’s (R) district. Jim Kolbe, you may remember, was the openly gay Republican Congressman who voters returned to Washington five times since his coming out in 1996.

Why do I bring this up? Well many of those voters who sent Rep. Giffords to Congress — and who re-elected Kolbe five times until he retired in 2006 — these are the same voters who will be asked to vote for Rep. McClure in November. Rep. McClure’s state district lies almost entirely inside Rep. Gifford’s Congressional district. (Gifford’s district, but the way, voted down Prop 107 by an even larger margin: 54.6% to 45.4%.)

CAP may be able to mobilize emails and phone calls to state legislators, but they can’t mobilize voters to turn out and support their causes in November. If anything, there’s a backlash building.

What must Rep. McClure be thinking right now?

It used to be a rare thing to see a politician stand up to powerful special interest groups. Those groups are looking much more like paper tigers these days. Our congratulations go to two state GOP lawmakers who were wise enough to see through CAP’s lobbying efforts and vote with their constituents. They are Reps. Pete Hershberger and Jennifer Burns. You might want to drop them a line and thank them for their support. After the pressure they’ve endured from CAP, they could probably use it right now.

Update: More GOP strategists see divisive marriage politics as a losing proposition this year:

“At best, it doesn’t move voters, and at worst for Republicans, it moves them against them,” said Matthew Dowd, President Bush’s 2004 chief strategist. “Why are we having a discussion on this issue when we should be talking about things that matter, like the economy, health care, or the war?”

AZ House Approves Anti-Marriage Amendment Proposal

We’ve just learned that thirty-three members of the Arizona House of Representatives approved SCR1042, the proposed anti-marriage amendment. The resolution passed 33-25, with two representatives not voting. You can see how each representative voted here. The battle now moves to the Senate. If SCR1042 passes the Senate, the proposed anti-marriage amendment goes onto the ballot for November’s general election.

Now it’s time for Arizona residents to shift their attention to their state Senator.If you don’t know who your Senator is, the Equality Arizona web site can find him or her for you and provide you with phone numbers and contact information. You can call directly, or you can even send a message via Equality Arizona. They’ve made it extremely easy to do this.

AZ Anti-Marriage Bill Scheduled For Vote Monday

As we reported earlier, the Arizona House of Representatives gave preliminary approval to move a bill onto the House floor that would place an anti-marriage amendment proposal on the ballot for November. Since that vote was taken, Speaker Jim Weiers (R-Phoenix) has placed SCR1042 on the calendar for a third reading on April 28th, 29th, 30th and May 5th. Each day has come and gone without a vote, and SCR1042 was pulled off the calendar for May 6th and 7th. Now we see it back on the calendar for Monday, May 12.

For Arizona residents, it’s still not too late to act. Remember: there are two representatives for each legislative district. Contact both of them and let them know where you stand. If you don’t know who your representatives are, the Equality Arizona web site can find them for you and provide you with their phone numbers and contact information. You can call them directly, or you can even send a message via Equality Arizona.

Arizona Anti-Marriage Amendment Still Held In the House

As we reported earlier, the Arizona House of Representatives has not yet formally passed the proposed anti-marriage constitutional amendment. The measure requires approval from the House and the Senate before it can be sent on to the voters.

At issue is what exactly the proposed amendment would ban. The new proposal reads, “Only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state.” Opponents say that the word “union” could be applied to more than just marriage, opening up the state to lawsuits over domestic partnerships.

Peter Gentala, general council for the Center for Arizona Policy (CAP, Focus On the Family’s official state policy council for Arizona), said proponents have no plans to target domestic partnerships with this new effort. Lambda Legal warns however that a similar measure in California resulted in years of litigation there, and that CAP used the language of Arizona’s current law to argue against the state expanding benefits to domestic partners in Arizona.

The measure has been placed on the House calender every day since last week’s preliminary approval, and every day the delay has been delayed. This means there is still time to let your representative know what you think about the proposal.

Remember: there are two representatives for each legislative district. If you don’t know who your representatives are, the Equality Arizona web site can find them for you and provide you with their phone numbers and contact information. You can call then directly, or you can even send a message via Equality Arizona.

Arizona House Still Hasn’t Scheduled Anti-Marriage Vote

There’s still time to contact your Arizona state representatives. The Arizona House has still not given its final approval to the proposed anti-marriage constitutional amendment (SCR 1041).

We reported that the Arizona House of Representatives brought the proposed anti-marriage constitutional amendment (SCR 1042) to the floor on Wednesday and that the final vote was expected to take place as soon as Thursday. Well, it didn’t happen, and last I heard the vote wasn’t expected to take place today either.

Please note: A lot of bloggers and out-of-state web sites are erroneously reporting that the House has approved the measure and it has gone on to the Senate. It hasn’t. The House has only given its preliminary approval to bring the bill to the floor. That means there’s still time for you to act.

Remember: there are two representatives for each legislative district. If you don’t know who your representatives are, the Equality Arizona web site can find them for you and provide you with their phone numbers and contact information. You can call then directly, or you can even send a message via Equality Arizona.

Please let your representatives know how much you appreciate their work in opposing this divisive and anti-family measure. And if they happen to not be working in your favor, please politely inform them of what they are doing to you and your family.

Arizona House Ditched Veterans To Go After Gays

That bill to place an anti-marriage amendment on the ballot in November that the Arizona House gave preliminary approval to yesterday? It started life as bill that would have established a Vietnam Veterans’ Memorial Day. But the House Judiciary Committee placed a “strike all” amendment to the bill which removed the original language in its entirety and replaced it with something completely unrelated: the anti-marriage amendment.

This had two effects. First, it short circuited the debate and review process. And second, because the new verbiage is attached to an unrelated bill that already has been approved by the Senate, then that means that when the bill returns to the Senate they will only have two choices: Approve the House-passed version of the measure or reject it. There will be no opportunity to amend it.

The House is expected to give final approval to the bill later today. The Senate has not yet scheduled debate. Arizona residents are asked to contact your Senator and House Representatives.

Arizonans! Your Voices Are Needed

We rarely ask you to do anything. What we generally do is provide you with information and leave it to you to decide whether you want to act on it or not. Today I’m making an exception with this special request to fellow Arizona residents.

The Arizona House of Representatives brought the proposed anti-marriage constitutionaal amendment (SCR 1042) to the floor this afternoon, bypassing the committe process. The final vote is expceted to take place as soon as tomorrow.

As Equality Arizona notes, “the entire arsenal of the Center for Arizona Policy” has been fully deployed to pressure lawmakers to vote in favor of SCR 1042. The Center for Arizona Policy is an official “family policy council” of Focus On the Family for Arizona.

As we reported yesterday, some of those legislators are set to vote against the expressed wishes of their own constituents. Equality Arizona and Wingspan ask that that Arizona residents contact their House representatives and ask them to stop their divisive measures.

Remember: there are two representatives for each legislative district. If you don’t know who your representatives are, the Equality Arizona web site can find them for you. You can even send a message via Equality Arizona. You can also call your representatives as well. Just look them up at the Equality Arizona web site to find your representatives and their phone numbers.

It really couldn’t be easier, and right now it’s important that your voices are heard. Because apparently 775,468 voices in 2006 wasn’t quite loud enough.

The Politics of Anti-Marriage Amendments

Arizona became the first state in the union to defeat an anti-marriage amendment in 2006. Thats when voters gave the thumbs down to Proposition 107, which sought to enshrine marriage inequality into the state constitution, with 48.2% voting “yes” and 51.8% “no” (PDF: 220KB/18 pages). Now legislators in the Arizona House appear poised to approve a measure to put another anti-marriage amendment on the ballot for 2008. Some of those legislators who are reportedly leaning towards approving the measure represent districts which voted against the 2006 proposal, bucking the wisdom of their own constituents.

Let’s take the 30th legislative district as an example. The 30th spans the eastern part of Pima County (including Tucson’s eastern suburbs) and dips down to cover the northern half of Santa Cruz county and a small bite of Cochise County. This is a lightly suburban and rural district.

The way the Arizona House is set up, there are two representatives for each legislative district. Voters are asked to choose two names from a slate of candidates, and the top two vote winners are elected to seats in that district. For the 30th district, voters in 2006 chose Marian McClure (R, 36%) and Jonathan Paton (R, 34%) over Clarence Boykins (D, 30%). McClure and Paton are two of the legislators who are expected to vote to place the 2008 anti-marriage measure on the ballot.

You might think that those voters in the 30th really like their conservative Republicans, and in Arizona that’s often the case. But things aren’t always so straightforward here in the independent-minded West. A careful analysis of all the individual voting precincts which make up the 30th reveals that Arizona voters are perfectly capable of thinking for themselves and don’t need party labels or outside pressure groups to tell them how to vote.

It turns out that those very same voters who sent McClure and Paton to the statehouse also chose Janet Napolitano (D, 62.6%) over Len Munsil (R, 37.4%) for governor, and they preferred Gabrielle Giffords (D, 51.5%) over Randy Graf (R, 48.5%) for the U.S. Congress. Rep. Giffords now represents Rep. Jim Kolbe’s (R) seat. Kolbe, you may remember, retired in 2006 after continuing to represent his district for some ten years after coming out as gay.

And those voters did not like the idea of having inequality written into the state constitution, with 52.5% voting against Prop 107 and only 47.5% voting for it. This means that voters in this suburban and rural district defeated Prop 107 by a wider margin than did voters statewide.

If McClure and Paton had been paying any attention to their own constituents, we wouldn’t be hearing about their intentions to vote next week against their own district’s wishes. But right now, it appears that they intend to ignore the very voters who sent them to the statehouse, and they will instead vote to permanently disenfranchise thousands of Arizona citizens — those same family members, friends and neighbors who the voters of the 30th district stood up for in 2006. Arizona is definitely changing. It’s time for our legislators to start paying attention.

Anti-Marriage Proposition Likely For Arizona

Update: Arizona residents can take action here.

Two weeks ago it looked like efforts by members of the Arizona state legislature to place an anti-marriage amendment proposal on the ballot was effectively killed when Rep. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Phoenix) managed to add, by a one-vote margin, a provision to grant certain rights to unmarried couples living together. This would force voters to consider guaranteeing rights for gay couples while simultaneously banning same-sex marriage. By tying the two issues together, the proposed amendment became unacceptable to conservative supporters and they voted to kill it.

Last Friday, we learned that the anti-marriage amendment is back on the agenda, and prospects for killing it this time aren’t so good. The proposed amendment was resurrected by the House Judiciary Committee without the pro-gay provisions, and the full House is expected to vote on it next Tuesday. This time, it’s expected that there won’t be enough votes to add Rep. Sinema’s pro-gay provisions. Several legislators who would have voted against the provisions two weeks ago were absent. They plan on being there this time.

If the proposal passes the House, it will go on to the Senate before being placed on the ballot.

Arizona voters defeated a proposed anti-marriage amendment in 2006, making Arizona is the only state to do so. I’ve looked into some of the precinct level results from that election. I’ve found that at least a few of those state representatives who are rumored to support the current attempt to ban same-sex marriage represent legislative districts where voters soundly defeated the 2006 proposal.

The 2006 proposed amendment not only sought to ban same-sex marriage, but all other forms of civil unions, domestic partnerships or any other state and municipal recognition of unmarried relationships. The current proposal calls for a “pure” anti-marriage amendment, without the prohibitions against other forms of legal recognition.