Wednesday, January 25, 2006
Marriage amendment salvaged
A mostly Republican contingent thwarted Sen. John Edwards' attempt to alter the proposed amendment, which could face a November referendum.
Related
The latest from our Blue Ridge Caucus politics blog
- Va. Senate votes to restrict local government land grabs
- House advances “personhood” and abortion ultrasound bills
From The Roanoke Times
RICHMOND -- Senate Republicans and four Democrats turned back an attempt to gut a proposed constitutional amendment prohibiting gay marriage and civil unions Tuesday, clearing the way for a final floor vote today.
If approved, Senate Joint Resolution 92 will present state voters with the decision whether to approve the amendment in a November referendum. The House of Delegates already passed the measure by a 72-20 vote.
Sen. John Edwards, D-Roanoke, offered up a last-minute challenge to the constitutional amendment by offering an amendment of his own. It would have left the first sentence of the legislation, which defines marriage as a "union between one man and one woman." Edwards' proposal removed the rest of the amendment, however, which details the legal ramifications of the definition.
Edwards said the phrasing of the constitutional amendment will have the "unintended consequence" of affecting legal agreements such as health care, power of attorney, insurance arrangements and joint ownership of property.
"This provision would affect contractual relationships of all unmarried people, same sex or opposite sex," Edwards said. "It would prohibit contractual relationships having nothing whatsoever to do with same-sex marriage."
If senators had approved Edwards' amendment, the bill would have had to restart the two-year process needed to put a proposed constitutional amendment on the ballot.
The bill's patron, Sen. Steve Newman, R-Lynchburg, said that the office of Attorney General Bob McDonnell has found that the phrasing in the constitutional amendment won't affect non-marriage-related contracts.
"In the commonwealth, we've never relied on a relationship looking like or intending to be marriage to be a proper contractual law, whether it be for health care benefits or otherwise," Newman said.
Senators voted down Edwards' amendment 36-13. Sen. Russell Potts, R-Winchester, voted with a slate of Democrats for it, while Sen. Phillip Puckett, D-Russell County, Sen. Roscoe Reynolds, D-Henry County, and two other Democrats voted with the rest of the Republicans against it.
SJ 92, along with a related bill regarding the phrasing of the ballot issue, were both then passed on to their third reading. The Senate will likely vote on that final reading today.
Though Virginia law already prohibits same-sex marriages, supporters of the amendment insist a constitutional change is needed to safeguard the law against "activist judges" in federal courts and ensure that Virginia won't have to recognize gay marriages or civil unions performed in other states.
"If our generation fails on this point, it will be a forever failure," Newman said. "We will give up the definition of marriage as we know it forever."
Opponents have argued that the amendment will enshrine discrimination into the Virginia Constitution and possibly create unforeseen legal difficulties.
