It's wrong to put civil rights up for a vote.
Oh well. There are potentially going to be a lot of wrongs come November, 2012. What's a few more?
How much would YOU pay for a marriage equality ballot initiative?
You probably read about The
Washington State Senate today getting its needed 25th vote for marriage equality, and that the Washington State Assembly should have no trouble passing the bill, which Governor Gregoire will sign.
What you might not know is that these actions will all but inevitably trigger a ballot initiative on marriage equality. The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) will stop at nothing to put a "people's veto" on the ballot once the law is signed, and they will almost certainly succeed in getting the necessary signatures. The law will then not take effect until the voters have ratified it in November. (Fortunately, a poll asking the very ratification question shows the people supporting the hypothetical new law by a margin of 55% - 38%, but eternal vigilance is the price of freedom to marry.)
Exactly the same thing, many people hope, is about to happen in Maryland. With the support of the Governor and newfound support from labor groups and others, the bill that died in the Maryland House last Spring has metamorphed into a new piece of legislation that may be able to find the necessary votes in both Houses. And then a "people's veto" campaign will ensue, which will again all but certainly succeed. And so a second referendum on marriage equality may well take place in November, 2012.
Two for the price of one. But wait, there's more...
In
Maine in the Fall of 2010, hundreds of volunteers gathered twice as many signatures as were necessary to put a ballot initiative on the ballot making same-sex marriage legal. Equality Maine and friends will soon decide whether to actually submit those signatures and force the initiative. Amazingly (to me, anyway) after the incredible work the organizers and volunteers did (and not even mentioning all the donations solicited and given -- except I just did), the powers that be seem to be seriously considering not forcing the initiative onto the ballot. Depending on your point of view, they will either hopefully come to their senses or follow the path of darkness, and a third
ballot initiative about marriage equality will appear on the November, 2012 ballot.
But wait... There's even more!
It is even possible, under some scenarios, that the
New Jersey Legislature will ignore Goveror Christie and pass a constitutional amendment this legislative session instituting marriage equality. If it passes by at least a sixty percent margin in each House, the amendment would be
put to the voters in, you guessed it, November, 2012. (Other possible scenarios to marriage equality in New Jersey include the Legislature passing a bill, and Governor Christie neither vetoing nor signing it, allowing it to become law; the Legislature passing a constitutional amendment by less than sixty percent, in which case they would have to do so again next year before it went to the voters; and finally a court case that will eventually reach the New Jersey Supreme Court sometime before the next ice age.)
How many souls would you sell for FOUR initiatives? Don't answer!
Because there's one more fo' so' happenin'. The Darth Vader of voter referenda. The Evil Twin, from, wouldn't you know it,
Minnesota.
The Great Orange Satan said he would throw this one in for free, and even ship it to Siberia if you want.
Last year, the Minnesota legislature forced through a constitutional amendment that would define marriage as between a man and a woman -- realizing that a mere law to that effect already in effect would not be a strong enough preclusion. All constitutional amendments in Minnesota must go to the voters, and so, in November of 2012, the voters of Minnesota will be asked to enshrine bigotry into their Constitution.
Fortunately, a quirk of Minnesota law will make it significantly more difficult for them to do so. In order for a constitutional amendment to pass, at least fifty percent of all Minnesotans who vote in the election -- not just fifty percent of those who vote on the amendment -- must concur. Since a couple percent of voters generally leave such questions blank, that gives the good guys a fighting chance at defeating this nasty piece of work, given the polling that's been done so far.
In case you're wondering, no, I'm not forgetting North Carolina, where an equally pernicious constitutional amendment will be voted on, but in May or June rather than November. That's not looking too good right now.
Nor am I forgetting the initiatives that might have been -- in Oregon and California -- but won't be.
In Oregon, LGBT groups decided not to go through with a proposed constitutional amendment, feeling the necessary majority would not be in place by November, 2012.
In California, reasons for not overturning Proposition 8 via ballot initiative are legion, if questionable. In any case people are currently on pins and needles anticipating a decision in the appeal of Perry v Scharzenegger (now Perry v Brown). It will be handed down by a panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals at some indefinite point in the future but which could be tomorrow for all anyone knows. Even a favorable decision won't create marriage equality in California, as such a decision is sure to be stayed on appeal and no final ruling will exist until the Supreme Court rules in a year or two, or three. Californians will almost certainly be forced to watch and wait, as they've done since 2008, as states otherwhere enact marriage equality.
I'm calling the 800 number now.