Idaho will vote in November for a Constitutional Amendment to ban gay marriage.....
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/6420AP_ID_XGR_Gay_Marriage.html
Wednesday, February 15, 2006 · Last updated 3:03 p.m. PT
Senate passes proposed gay marriage amendment
By ANNE WALLACE ALLEN
ASSOCIATED PRESS WRITER
BOISE, Idaho -- A proposed constitutional amendment banning gay marriage in Idaho passed the state Senate on Wednesday and will go to voters this November.
A similar proposal fell short of the required two-thirds majority last year. Sen. Tom Gannon, one of five lawmakers who changed their votes to help the measure pass 26-9, said he was responding to pressure from his constituents.
"I've been told by some that if I vote against this bill, I'll never see this place again," said Gannon, R-Buhl, as he stood outside the Senate chambers. "Sometimes you've got to go with what your constituents are telling you."
The measure passed the House 53-17 last week and now needs only a simple majority vote from the public to become part of the constitution.
Sponsored by Sen. Robert Geddes, R-Soda Springs, it provides that "a marriage between a man and a woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized" in Idaho.
Opponents of the measure had argued it is not necessary because state law already defines marriage as being between a man and a woman. Supporters claimed the amendment would prevent judges from overturning that law and would protect children and families.
Senators debated the matter for two hours before they voted. Sen. John Goedde, R-Coeur d'Alene, stood up midway through the voting roll call to explain why he was changing his vote.
"Let's let the citizens vote, and the Supreme Court determine the law of the land," he said.
Sen. Richard Compton, R-Coeur d'Alene, told his colleagues he was changing his vote because many people in his district had told him they wanted a chance to vote on the matter themselves.
"When I vote in my district I will vote no," he said.
This year was the third in a row for gay marriage in the Idaho Legislature. A similar proposal passed a Senate committee last year but failed to win a two-thirds majority in the full Senate. The year before, the measure died in a Senate committee after it passed the House.
"This is an issue that is not going away," said Goedde after the vote. "Let's let the people vote on it, and then take the court challenges."
Similar discussions are going on all around the country. Eighteen states have amended their constitutions to ban gay marriage. Massachusetts allows gay marriage, and Vermont and Connecticut allow same-sex civil unions that confer the same legal rights heterosexual married couples get.
As the Idaho Senate was preparing to vote Wednesday, New Jersey Supreme Court justices were questioning lawyers on the matter there. Seven same-sex couples have sued the state, saying it is violating its own constitution by denying them the right to marry.
It's cases like the one in New Jersey that require Idaho to change its constitution, said Geddes. He said the state statute alone cannot prevent a judge from forcing Idaho to accept gay marriage.
"Statutes are much easier to adjust or to change," he said "This measure, if added to our constitution, will preserve all rights currently available to the citizens of Idaho; it takes nothing away."
After the results of the roll call were read, someone in the crowded gallery above the Senate floor loudly screamed, "No!" Other than that cry, reaction was muted.
Kelly Groce, 38, president of the Southern Idaho Gay Lesbian Bisexual and Transgender Community Center in Twin Falls, said his group will immediately start organizing a campaign to persuade voters not to approve the amendment in November.
"We pay our taxes just like everyone else, and we don't deserve to be discriminated against by our own state constitution," Groce said.
Bryan Fischer is head of the Idaho Values Alliance, a group that formed this year with a mission of persuading lawmakers to vote for the constitutional amendment. Fischer's group expects the measure to pass with a 70 percent majority.
"The pro-family groups, we're going to sit down together at some point and talk together about the best way to give the electorate the information they need," Fischer said.
