News From Terre Haute, Indiana

Local & Bistate

Discussion

Welcome to our online comments feature. We welcome your thoughts and your opinions, including unpopular ones. We ask only that you keep the conversation civil and clean. We reserve the right to remove comments that are obscene, racist or abusive and statements that are false or unverifiable as well as posts that are attacking other users. Repeat offenders will be blocked. You may flag objectionable comments for review by a moderator.
comments powered by Disqus
January 10, 2013

GOP expresses doubt on gay marriage ban

Maureen Hayden CNHI

INDIANAPOLIS — Some Republican state legislators are calling for the Indiana General Assembly to slow down on the constitutional ban on same-sex marriage, offering a variety of reasons why the effort shouldn’t go ahead.

Both publicly and privately, GOP lawmakers are expressing doubts about a measure that saw wide support in past sessions, and they cite changing public opinion on whether the state’s current ban on same-sex marriage should be locked into the state’s constitution.

Republican State Rep. Jud McMillin, a Brookville lawyer who sits on the House committee expected to hear the measure, thinks it needs to be put on hold this session. He cites the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to take up the issue of whether state constitutional bans on same-sex marriage are legal and wants the Indiana legislature to wait on the court’s ruling.

“I just think it would be irresponsible for us to be putting something in the public hands when we know the Supreme Court may come down and rule on something that may alter our ability to do that,” McMillin said.

Republican State Rep. Ron Bacon of Boonville, who voted for the constitutional ban two years ago, said he wouldn’t vote for it again this time.

Bacon’s reasons are two-fold: He agrees with McMillin that the legislature needs to wait for the court ruling, but he also objects to the language in the measure that would create a constitutional ban on civil unions as well as same-sex marriages.

“That’s a step too far,” Bacon said.

Their concerns are significant, given that Republicans control the Indiana legislature and that the amendment faced almost no GOP opposition in the past.

On the Senate side, both state Sen. Pete Miller of Avon and his fellow Republican state Sen. Luke Kenley of Noblesville have gone public with their opposition.

Neither supports legalizing same-sex marriage, but both say a sweeping constitutional ban isn’t needed.

“It’s already illegal,” Miller said. “What’s to be gained other than ostracizing a whole section of the population?”

Miller echoed the concerns expressed by Republican state Rep. Ed Clere of New Albany. Both Miller and Clere cite the opposition coming from some of Indiana’s biggest employers, such as Columbus, Ind.-based engine maker Cummins Inc., that say such a ban would hurt their efforts to recruit top talent.

“If we’re trying to attract the best and brightest people to work in Indiana, this doesn’t help,” Miller said. “It’s not just putting out a sign to gays and lesbians saying, ‘You’re not welcome.’ It sends a signal to a lot of talented young people that we’re not a welcoming place.”

Last month, Kenley — an influential, conservative lawmaker who holds the powerful position of Senate appropriations chairman —cited what he called the “rapidly evolving” shift in public opinion on the issue as one of the reasons for his opposition.

Enacting a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage and civil unions would handcuff future legislators from altering the current law through the legislative process. Kenley also said he opposed putting what he called “bigoted” language in the state constitution.

Privately, several key Republican lawmakers have told their colleagues that they won’t vote for the measure, which is part of a two-step process that would put the issue to a public referendum in 2014.

The Republican sponsors of the measure in both the House and Senate have told their caucus leaders that they want to vote on it this session, and not wait until 2014.

If the legislature decides to amend the current language to exclude the prohibition on civil unions, it would delay the process. Two separately elected sessions of the General Assembly have to approve identical language for the question to go to a public vote.

On Monday, the opening day of the 2013 session, House Minority Leader Scott Pelath, of Michigan City, said Democrats want a "two-year moratorium" on social issues and urged the legislature to focus on jobs, education and the budget.

“People deserve a break from the political exploitation of their fears and emotions as we work to rebuild our economy,” Pelath said.

Republican House Speaker Brian Bosma said he’s “not declaring a moratorium on anything” but also said that he hopes the General Assembly will focus on economic and not social issues this session.



Maureen Hayden is the Indiana Statehouse bureau chief for CNHI, the parent company of the Tribune-Star. She can be reached at maureen.hayden@indianamediagroup.com.



What To Know

The Indiana General Assembly has started the process that would amend the Indiana state constitution to include the state’s current legal ban on same-sex marriage. The proposed amendment would also go a step farther by prohibiting recognition of civil unions.

The proposed amendment, filed as House Joint Resolution 6, reads:

“Only a marriage between one (1) man and one (1) woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in Indiana. A legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized.”

The process of amending the Indiana constitution involves several steps: Any proposed amendment must be passed by the Indiana General Assembly in two consecutive legislative terms. The General Assembly approved HJR 6 in 2011; the exact same language in the resolution would have to be passed by the legislature again this year or in 2014 for the proposed amendment to go to a public referendum in 2014.

Some Indiana legislators want to pause the process while the U.S. Supreme Court is considering the issue of same-sex marriage. The court has agreed to hear challenges to the constitutionality of the federal Defense of Marriage Act and California’s Proposition 8 ban on same-sex marriage.

The court likely will hear the cases in March, but not rule until late June — after the General Assembly concludes the 2013 session in April.

The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to rule on a series of questions, including one of the most basic: Can states ban gay marriage, or does the Constitution protect that right for all couples?

— Maureen Hayden, CNHI

Text Only | Photo Reprints
Local & Bistate
Latest News
Community Calendar
Loading…
Events by eviesays.com
TribStar.com Poll
AP Video
NM Mom Chases Down Child Abductor Raw: Crash Sends Car Into Fla. Pool Raw: Obama Sits Down With Elementary Kids Dying Man's Blinks Lead to Murder Conviction Wash. State Releases Draft Rules for Legal Pot Raw: Driver Ejected From Truck, Over Bridge Wind Energy Push Leaves Trail of Dead Eagles Raw: Germany Protestors Picket Barbie House Horse Saved From Slaughter, Goes on to Win Big Ousted IRS Chief: Errors Not Caused by Politics Music Therapy Bonds Parents and Preemies Terror Suspect Due in Court in Idaho Friday Tensions As Israel Targets Syria in Airstrikes Fmr. IRS Head Insists No Politics in Targeting Raw: Spacewalking Astronauts Hope to Stop Leak Obama: 'Couldn't Be Prouder' of Jason Collins Raw: Bear Falls From Tampa Tree Officials Arrest Man in Idaho in Terrorism Case Today in History, May 6th Raw: Child, Stroller Falls Onto Pa. Train Tracks
NDN Video
Lotto Fever Sweeps the Country Coffee Stop Leads To Arrest Of YouTube Sensation Wanted For Murder Bearded Dragon Reunited With Owner Marine Reunited with Warzone Companion Raw: Crash Sends Car Into Fla. Pool Beyonce Is Pregnant! SF baseball player overpaid $500,000 RETURNS money -- and team says KEEP IT $1 Million in Jewels Stolen at Cannes Film Fest Dad returns from Afghanistan, surprises family during Rays' first pitch See Jennifer Lopez's New $10m Hamptons Mansion Woman tricked into taking abortion pill Emma Watson Goes Pantless IRS scandal: Republicans seek to tie Obama to agency's woes Play of the Day: Flipping to Safety Pregnant Kim Kardashian Squeezes Her Swollen Feet Into Stilettos Top Videos of the Week: Angry Taco Bell Guy, Glacier Moves on House, Dog Hates Baths Cindy Crawford Stuns At Cannes Raw: Marines Come to Obama's Aid in the Rain CUTE: Monkey shares lollipop with dog, then HITS pooch on head with it Miranda Kerr Looks Sexy in a Bikini Photo Shoot
Parade
Magazine
Click HERE to read all your Parade favorites including Hollywood Wire, Celebrity interviews and photo galleries, Food recipes and cooking tips, Games and lots more.
  • -

     

    March 12, 2010

activity
Real Estate News