Overview of Massachusetts Votes On Marriage

[David__77]

I have been looking at each legislator's votes yesterday at the constitional convention regarding marriage equality. A vote on banning marriage should be very close, and I'm sure I'm not the only one here on edge about how this will go.

Here's what I have:

The provision to

There are 99 legislators who voted against the anti-gay Finneran amendment and who indicated on an Associated Press survey that they would oppose amending the constition or who indicated they were "undecided." The main advocates of banning same-sex marriage supported the Finneran amendment, including Rep. Travis, who introduced the original amendment, and Gov. Romney. Its failure is a good indication.

Of these 99 legislators, 20 also voted against the Travaglini amendment that would have mandated civil unions equal to marriage in rights and responsibility. They were voting in this way because they support only marriage rights for same-sex couples. Civil rights groups are working with Sen. Traveglini to potentially reintroduce this measure today and urge these 20 to support it so that a less onerous amendment is not voted on. If adopted, civil rights groups will still urge that the measure not be voted onto the ballot, however. This is a tactical move.

There are also 98 legislators who voted for the anti-gay Finneran amendment and either indicated to AP they would support amending the constitution or who indicated they were "undecided." This includes 17 members who also voted for the Travaglini amendment mandating civil unions. It is clear, at a minimum, that if marriage rights advocates are won to support this amendment, it would pass if it maintains its support from last night. Gov. Romney indicated he would oppose such an amendment; however, a vote against such an amendment if placed upon the ballot would be a vote for same-sex marriage rights being maintained.

News records seem to be missing a legislator who voted against the Finneran amendment, and one member abstained from both votes and indicated that he was "undecided."

At the least, it seems that an amendment can be arranged that mandates "separate but equal," but at least would therefore be wholly unpalatable to the rightists. Optimally, the final amendment will voted down, which, if all those who voted against the Finneran amendment hold their position, will be possible.

[David__77]

1. Link to updates page...

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2004/02/12/earlier_updates_of_the_mass_legislature_same_sex_marriage_debate/

State Rep. Shaun Kelly (D-Dalton) has made a motion to adjourn the constitutional convention, saying that he believes that at least 100 legislators oppose any amendment to ban same-sex marriage. A roll-call vote is being taken.

The convention has soundly defeated a motion by state Rep. Shaun Kelly (R-Dalton) to adjourn the constitutional convention by a vote of 153-44. State Sen. Jarrett T. Barrios (D-Cambridge) is now speaking on his amendment, which would allow same-sex marriages in Massachusetts.

In his talk to the convention, state Sen. Jarrett T. Barrios (D-Cambridge), who is proposing an amendment to allow same-sex marriages, acknowledged that he will be viewed as biased on the issue because he is gay. He is biased, he said, because he has a partner and children who will be denied many rights and benefits if same-sex marriage is banned.

[LeftCoast]

2. I really appreciate the update!

Thanks for explaining what's been going on!