More News

Another attempt at banning same-sex marriage gears up

Amendment was killed last week in the House; Eckardt wants to try a new version

Wednesday, Feb. 8, 2006

ANNAPOLIS — Supporters of a constitutional ban on gay marriage are planning to make another attempt at getting the measure through the General Assembly and on the November ballot.

Del. Adelaide C. Eckardt said she will offer a simpler version of the bill that overwhelmed Annapolis last week, leaving out a provision that led to the previous bill’s failure.

The new bill would omit a provision outlawing civil unions that had been criticized because it would have eliminated benefits that some companies and localities offer same-sex couples. Some said the provision’s broad language could have been construed to harm business partnerships.

‘‘I think most people have no problem with marriage being between one man and one woman,” Eckardt (R-Dist. 37B) of Cambridge said Tuesday.

Without the civil union language, the bill would be ‘‘far less onerous,” she said.

The measure is likely to be sent again to the House Judiciary Committee, which killed the earlier measure Thursday. That bill was sponsored by Del. Donald H. Dwyer Jr. (R-Dist. 31) of Glen Burnie.

Del. Joseph F. Vallario Jr., the committee’s chairman, looked surprised at hearing about Eckardt’s bill.

‘‘We will see if there’s anything worth having a hearing on,” said Vallario (D-Dist. 27A) of Upper Marlboro. General Assembly committees rarely take up a measure again after it has been voted down.

After the committee vote, proponents on Friday employed a rarely used parliamentary maneuver to bring the bill to the House floor for debate, but fell 10 votes short.

Once out of the House Judiciary Committee’s control, advocates wanted to debate the proposal and register an up-or-down vote to use in November.

Although a simple majority, 71 votes, would have launched debate about the measure, proposed constitutional amendments need a three-fifths supermajority, or 85 votes, before they can move on to the Senate.

‘‘The Democrats put the election in November above the issue,” House Minority Whip Anthony J. O’Donnell (R-Dist. 29C) of Lusby said after the vote.

Countered House Speaker Michael E. Busch: ‘‘The only complaint the opposition party can have is their opinion didn’t prevail.”

Dwyer’s supporters pledged to keep up the pressure to see the amendment on the November ballots, where voters will decide whether to include it in the state constitution.

‘‘The bottom line is the real marriage amendment was never voted on. There was a lot of trickery and chicanery done there, but not the vote,” Tres Kerns, executive director of VoteMarriage.org, said Monday. ‘‘This should not be a political issue. Marriage is bigger than these parties.”

To Del. Richard S. Madaleno Jr., who is gay, the same-sex marriage issue does not motivate people.

‘‘Ninety-five percent of the people of the State of Maryland do not wake up thinking about whether or not two people of the same gender can get married,” said Madaleno (D-Dist. 18) of Kensington.

Since 1973, Maryland statute has established marriage to be between one man and one woman. But on Jan. 20, Baltimore City Circuit Court Judge M. Brooke Murdock ruled the law unconstitutional. She stayed her decision until appeals have run their course, meaning the ruling has no immediate effect.

Democrats have tried to avoid any vote, fearing it could compromise some colleagues in more conservative districts. Their actions have energized the GOP.

Madaleno said the matter has presented a ‘‘de facto Republican ticket” for the November elections: Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. with Dwyer’s amendment as a running mate.

‘‘For every conservative he might energize, [Dwyer] turns off a minivan full of soccer moms in Columbia,” Madaleno said.

The Montgomery delegation, 23-0, opposed Friday’s attempt to bring the Dwyer bill to the floor. Del. Herman L. Taylor Jr. (D-Dist. 14) of Ashton was excused from the session.

Del. Jean B. Cryor (R-Dist. 15) of Potomac played an unusual role in the unusual week of proceedings.

On Friday, Cryor opposed the effort that would have brought the measure to the floor for debate. But on Thursday, she had been one of 47 delegates signing a ‘‘discharge petition” that essentially would have done the same thing.

The petition failed because Busch (D-Dist. 30) of Annapolis gaveled the session into recess before it could be delivered.

Cryor said later she did not approve of the bill but wanted a full debate about it. That debate took place Thursday afternoon in the Judiciary Committee, she said.

‘‘It’s time for us to return to the issues voters sent us to Annapolis in the first place,” said Del. Anne R. Kaiser, (D-Dist. 14) of Olney, who is also gay.

Ehrlich wrote off the legislature’s action.

‘‘We’re a little cynical after three years of shenanigans,” he said after Friday’s vote.