Box Turtle Bulletin

Anti-Marriage Proposal Fails In Illinois

Illinois opponents to same-sex marriage failed to collect enough signatures to put an advisory referendum on the November ballot. Protect Marriage Illinois (PMI) had said that they would turn in 300,000 signatures to the state’s Board of Elections by the May 5 deadline. Supporters needed 270,000 valid signatures, but they did not file in time for the deadline.

This is the second time PMI failed to collect enough signatures. An earlier effort in 2006 failed also.

The advisory referendum would have asked the state legislature to amend the constitution to bar same-sex marriage.

Update: I neglected to include a link to the source.

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.

Visiting San Diego?

San Diego is worth a visit. The city is charming and friendly with a world famous zoo, beautiful parks, perfect weather, and a thriving gay community. And although it is a military city that leans Republican, they are often of the pro-gay variety and the city is very supportive of its gay residents.

However, not everyone will make you welcome. For example, much of the funding for the anti-gay marriage amendment in California came from San Diego.

Among the major donors to Protect Marriage are a group of San Diego County businessmen. Developer Doug Manchester alone has contributed $125,000 prompting gays to urge a boycott of his properties. Manchester owns the Manchester Grand Hyatt and the San Diego Marriott Hotel and Marina.

Mission Valley developer Terry Caster has donated $162,500, Carlsbad car dealer Robert Hoehn gave $25,000, and La Jolla businessman Roger Benson has given $50,000, according to state records.

Now these businessmen are entitled to their opinions and to seek the advancement of their political goals, even if they are designed to harm gay men and women. And we are entitled to avoid giving them a single cent, if possible.

So if you live in San Diego, or are planning a visit, you may wish to avoid patronizing any of the following businesses.

Manchester:

The Manchester Grand Hyatt San Diego
The San Diego Marriott Hotel and Marina
The Grand Del Mar
Whitetail Club & Resort

Caster:

A1 Self Storage (throughout California)
Caster Center and Stadium Park

Hoehn:

Hoehn Mercedes
Hoehn Porsche
Hoehn Audi
Hoehn Infinity
Hoehn Acura
Hoehn Honda

Roger Benson appears to be retired and I am unable to identify his investment or ownership in any business that might be impacted by my spending decisions.

Some activists in San Diego are considering calling for a boycott of the above listed businesses. Complicating matters is that some of the businesses have a national reputation for working with the community. Hyatt, for example, is proud of their perfect score by HRC.

But some are not waiting for an official boycott. GLAAD has already pulled from an event at Manchester’s hotel.

The Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation announced that it has withdrawn from a “Pride Rocks” event scheduled for the summer at the Hyatt owned by Doug Manchester. The event celebrates gay pride.

The president of the gay and lesbian alliance , Neil Giuliano, said in a news release that Manchester’s decision to fund an initiative that would “hurt loving, committed gay couples makes it impossible for us” to take part in an event that promotes his hotel.

So if you are considering a visit to one of the most beautiful cities in California, by all means please come. Just put some thought into where your money goes while you’re there.

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.

California Anti-Gay Marriage Amendment Petitions Submitted

The San Francisco Chronicle is reporting that the anti-gay group, Protect Marriage, has submitted their signatures to the county registrars to place an amendment on the November ballot.

A coalition of religious groups called Protect Marriage collected more than 1.1 million signatures in support of the amendment, said Brian Brown, executive director of the California office of the National Organization for Marriage.

The initiative needs 694,354 signatures, or 8 percent of the votes cast in the last governor’s race, to make it onto the ballot. However, a large percentage of signatures tend to be invalid so petition goals were at 1.1 million.

When I checked their site last week, Protect Marriage was still about 50,000 short. Their website currently is not self-congratulatory, but the Chronicle may be right in their reporting. But even if they are a little short, there is still a good chance that the sample validation may prove that adequate signatures were raised.

If this reaches the ballot for November, there will undoubtedly be an expensive and fierce battle within the state. Fortunately, the Governor has promised to oppose the constitutional amendment, which will be very helpful for appealing to moderates.

UPDATE: the Protect Marriage website now states “We have received over 1.1 million signatures to qualify the California Marriage Protection Act for the ballot!”

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.

Gov. Schwarzenegger Opposes Gay Marriage Ban

Scott Schmidt is at the Log Cabin Republicans Convention, liveblogging California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s address:

Speaking to the Log Cabin Republicans, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger came out against a ballot measure circulating in California to add a gay marriage ban to the State Constitution. Stating that he “will always be there to fight against that,” Schwarzenegger made one of his first pubic statements about the initiative constitutional amendment in circulation.

Arizona Anti-Marriage Amendment Not Dead Yet

We reported last week that efforts by members of the Arizona state legislature to place an anti-marriage amendment proposal on the ballot was dealt a blow when Rep. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Phoenix) lined up enough votes to tack on a provision to grant certain rights to unmarried couples living together. By tying the two issues together, the proposed amendment became unacceptable to conservative supporters and they voted to kill it altogether.

This morning, the Arizona Daily Star reports that the House Judiciary Committee voted 6-4 to move SCR 1042 to the full House for a second run at trying to constitutionally ban same-sex marriage. If it passes the House this time, it will still require Senate approval to be placed on the ballot for November.

Arizona voters defeated a proposed anti-marriage amendment in 2006. So far, Arizona is the only state to do so.

Arizona Anti-Marriage Amendment May Be Dead

UPDATED – See Below

In 2006 Arizona became the first state to vote down an anti-gay marriage amendent to their constitution. That amendment is believed to have been defeated because it extended beyond marriage to ban any form of civil union or domestic partnership, something that hurts many senior citizens.

So this year anti-gay activists were ready to push through the legislature an amendment that would ban only the use of the word “marriage”. This was fully expected to pass and be placed on the ballot in November.

However, an unusual tactic may have been employed to get the bill in the House pulled by its own promoters.

From the East Valley Tribune:

House Speaker Jim Weiers is likely to kill his own measure after Rep. Kyrsten Sinema, D-Phoenix, lined up enough votes to tack on a provision to grant certain rights to unmarried couples living together. That move effectively tied the two issues together — meaning voters who want to make same-sex weddings unconstitutional would be voting for some constitutional rights for gay couples.

From AZCentral

A change to the referendum in the state House of Representatives today would give new legal rights to domestic partners for hospital visitation and medical decision-making, funeral arrangements and inheritance. Because of the change, the measure will not go forward to a final vote, a spokesman for House Speaker Jim Weiers said.

Rep. Steve Yarbrough, R-Chandler, a supporter of the gay marriage ban, said putting the two issues together on the ballot is unacceptable.

Anti-gays often claim that they are not opposed to heath decisions or insurance but simply want to “protect marriage”. Sinema called their bluff and won this round, though only barely.

Sinema’s change passed 28 to 27, with five members absent and not voting. An attempt to strip the amendment off the measure failed on the same lines and the amended version was given preliminary approval, despite opposition from original supporters.

Four Republicans – Reps. Michele Reagan of Scottsdale and Pete Hershberger, Marian McClure and Jennifer Burns of Tucson – joined Democrats in supporting Sinema’s change.

This battle is not over but this vote may indicate that a marriage ban vote in Arizona in November may not be a forgone conclusion. Considering that “absent and not voting” is very very rarely accidental, this coalition may hold together to add the same provision to the Senate bill when it reaches the house.

UPDATE

The Arizona Star is reporting that the Senate version is also dead.

There is another version of the bill awaiting Senate action, this one still in its original form solely to constitutionally define marriage in Arizona as between one man and one woman. But Senate President Tim Bee, R-Tucson, the sponsor of that measure, said Thursday night that he will not bring that bill to the floor.

“I don’t see any point in it,” Bee said. Even if he corrals the 16 votes necessary in his own chamber, he said, the proposal still has to go to the House, where it lacks the necessary support.

The House vote and Bee’s decision constitute a major defeat for foes of gay marriage.

Happy day for gay Arizonans.

The optimist in me can’t help wondering if the vote indicates that there is adequate support in the Legislature to try for a Domestic Partnership law in Arizona.

California Group Claims Nearly Enough Signatures for Anti-Marriage Ballot Measure

The California organization “Protect Marriage” says it is close to meeting the requirement to place a proposed constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage on the ballot. The group says it has collected 881,000 of the 1.1 million signatures it needs to qualify. The deadline is April 21.