Voters will get chance to define marriage on Nov. 7
Voters will get chance to define marriage on Nov. 7 By Eric Krol and Harry Hitzeman
Copyright by The Daily Herald
Posted Monday, May 08, 2006
The battle over gay marriage is poised to be thrown into the laps of Illinois voters today.
Protect Marriage Illinois supporters plan to deliver “easily” more than the 283,111 signatures needed to get a question on the Nov. 7 ballot asking voters if marriage should be defined as between a man and a woman, one of the drive’s chief organizers said.
“This is merely an effort to join the 19 other states defending marriage,” said Peter LaBarbera, executive director of the Glen Ellyn-based Illinois Family Institute. “This is way beyond the religious right conservatives. It’s united people of all backgrounds, races and creeds.”
Opponents argue it’s about pure partisan politics this fall.
“I have no beef with them putting it on the ballot. What I do have a beef about is them using the gay community to build a hard, right-wing voter base,” said Rick Garcia, who heads up Equality Illinois, a gay rights group. “This has nothing, nothing, nothing to do with protecting marriage. If they were concerned about protecting marriage, they’d be passing petitions to ban divorce.”
While some black ministers and the state’s Catholic bishops group are endorsing the referendum, so are many conservative activist organizations. LaBarbera credits the conservative Family Taxpayers Network, which is funded by Carpentersville businessman Jack Roeser, for helping get enough signatures.
The hot-button issue has led to heated comments, especially from Garcia, who calls the referendum organizers “rank bigots.”
“These people do not want gay and lesbian folks to have any civil rights protections or to be treated fairly,” Garcia said. “If it walks like a bigot and talks like a bigot and acts like a bigot, what am I supposed to call it?”
LaBarbera so far refuses to take the bait, saying he’s happy to debate the issue and doesn’t “want this to degenerate into name-calling.”
What both sides agree on is that this fall’s vote won’t actually do anything to gay marriage in Illinois. The state already has a law banning it — then-state Sen. Peter Fitzgerald of Inverness sponsored the measure 10 years ago. Supporters of a constitutional amendment cite the Massachusetts court decision that legalized gay marriage.
The referendum itself is advisory-only, so it doesn’t require lawmakers to change the constitution. LaBarbera said he hopes that a convincing margin of victory will pressure the General Assembly to put a constitutional amendment on the state ballot so that could voters could cement it legally. With Democrats likely to be in charge of the legislature and possibly the governor’s mansion after November, that seems unlikely.
Whether the question will stay on the ballot is a question itself. Protect Marriage forces initially told backers their goal was 500,000 signatures, an amount that would render futile any ballot challenge, but have dropped that goal.
Garcia is coy about whether his group will try to knock the referendum off the ballot.
“Do we want to spend that much money to challenge it?” said Garcia, noting the $10,000 cost just to copy the petitions. “We may. We’re still thinking about it.”
Illinois is no California when it comes to referendums. Because so many signatures are required, the state hasn’t had an advisory question on the ballot since 1978. And that one — a tax reduction question which passed but had no effect — was the only one since World War II. Illinois voters did, however, approve a 1980 constitutional amendment to cut the size of the General Assembly.
Copyright by The Daily Herald
Posted Monday, May 08, 2006
The battle over gay marriage is poised to be thrown into the laps of Illinois voters today.
Protect Marriage Illinois supporters plan to deliver “easily” more than the 283,111 signatures needed to get a question on the Nov. 7 ballot asking voters if marriage should be defined as between a man and a woman, one of the drive’s chief organizers said.
“This is merely an effort to join the 19 other states defending marriage,” said Peter LaBarbera, executive director of the Glen Ellyn-based Illinois Family Institute. “This is way beyond the religious right conservatives. It’s united people of all backgrounds, races and creeds.”
Opponents argue it’s about pure partisan politics this fall.
“I have no beef with them putting it on the ballot. What I do have a beef about is them using the gay community to build a hard, right-wing voter base,” said Rick Garcia, who heads up Equality Illinois, a gay rights group. “This has nothing, nothing, nothing to do with protecting marriage. If they were concerned about protecting marriage, they’d be passing petitions to ban divorce.”
While some black ministers and the state’s Catholic bishops group are endorsing the referendum, so are many conservative activist organizations. LaBarbera credits the conservative Family Taxpayers Network, which is funded by Carpentersville businessman Jack Roeser, for helping get enough signatures.
The hot-button issue has led to heated comments, especially from Garcia, who calls the referendum organizers “rank bigots.”
“These people do not want gay and lesbian folks to have any civil rights protections or to be treated fairly,” Garcia said. “If it walks like a bigot and talks like a bigot and acts like a bigot, what am I supposed to call it?”
LaBarbera so far refuses to take the bait, saying he’s happy to debate the issue and doesn’t “want this to degenerate into name-calling.”
What both sides agree on is that this fall’s vote won’t actually do anything to gay marriage in Illinois. The state already has a law banning it — then-state Sen. Peter Fitzgerald of Inverness sponsored the measure 10 years ago. Supporters of a constitutional amendment cite the Massachusetts court decision that legalized gay marriage.
The referendum itself is advisory-only, so it doesn’t require lawmakers to change the constitution. LaBarbera said he hopes that a convincing margin of victory will pressure the General Assembly to put a constitutional amendment on the state ballot so that could voters could cement it legally. With Democrats likely to be in charge of the legislature and possibly the governor’s mansion after November, that seems unlikely.
Whether the question will stay on the ballot is a question itself. Protect Marriage forces initially told backers their goal was 500,000 signatures, an amount that would render futile any ballot challenge, but have dropped that goal.
Garcia is coy about whether his group will try to knock the referendum off the ballot.
“Do we want to spend that much money to challenge it?” said Garcia, noting the $10,000 cost just to copy the petitions. “We may. We’re still thinking about it.”
Illinois is no California when it comes to referendums. Because so many signatures are required, the state hasn’t had an advisory question on the ballot since 1978. And that one — a tax reduction question which passed but had no effect — was the only one since World War II. Illinois voters did, however, approve a 1980 constitutional amendment to cut the size of the General Assembly.
posted by Carlos T Mock at 8:11 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home