Now that Illinois
has left same-sex marriage advocates at the altar, the question is inevitable:
Will other states start jilting them as well?
“The momentum has been
stopped,” predicted David Smith of the Illinois Family Institute, which opposed
the same-sex measure that collapsed Friday in Springfield, under a national
spotlight. “It shows that it’s not as popular with people as the national media
is telling us.”
After months of
moving toward what appeared to be a landmark embrace of the controversial
unions, Illinois’ same-sex marriage bill died suddenly in the final hours of
the 2013 legislative session.
It had already
passed the Senate, and Gov. Pat Quinn was eager to sign it. But the sponsor
acknowledged in a tearful, halting speech on the House floor Friday night that
he didn’t have the support there to call it for the final vote.
“I apologize to the
families who were hoping to wake up tomorrow as full and equal citizens of this
state,” said Rep. Gregory Harris, D-Chicago, as angry gay-rights advocates
raised so much noise in the overhead gallery that they were threatened with
removal.
Harris vowed
to continue pushing the bill when the Legislature
returns after the summer. He quoted Illinois favorite son Abraham Lincoln:
“‘Fellow citizens, you cannot escape history.’”
It was a historic
role that Illinois appeared destined to play — 13th in a dramatically growing
list of same-sex marriage states, and one of the most prominent.
The sense of a
national juggernaut started in the November elections, when gay-rights
advocates went 4-for-4: Four states with same-sex marriage on the ballot either
approved it or refused to outlaw it. That was followed by a seeming domino
effect of three more states in May.
National news
organizations and even some conservative leaders had begun referring to it as a
tidal wave that had to be heeded. The failure of the measure in Illinois
interrupts that narrative.
Just as ominous for
advocates is that it’s Illinois. “Bluest” state in the Midwest. Home of
President Barack Obama (who, along with former president Bill Clinton, publicly
backed the measure). Its Legislature is controlled not merely by Democratic
majorities, but “supermajorities” of three-fifths.
If gay marriage
fails here, how would a state like Missouri ever even flirt with it?
“The Democrats have
71 votes in the (Illinois) House, and still couldn’t get the 60” needed for
passage, noted Smith, of the Illinois Family Institute. “It could be a
bellwether.”
Illinois since 2010
has allowed civil unions for same-sex couples, which provides them with most of
the same legal benefits as marriage.
Critics of the
same-sex marriage measure argued that civil unions should be sufficient to
address any concerns about fairness under the law. Proponents say denying those
couples the cultural validity of the word “marriage” makes it unfair.
“During the week, I
make the coffee. I do the laundry, she does the kitchen,” state Rep. Deborah
Mell, D-Chicago, one of several openly gay lawmakers in Illinois, told her
House colleagues in an emotional floor speech Friday, after the measure died.
Mell and her
partner, Christin Baker, were married in Iowa in 2011.
“On Sunday mornings you’ll
find us at church. ... We give to charity,
we pay our bills and we pay our taxes,” Mell said. “We are more alike than we
are different. At the end of the day, Christin and I want what you want.”
The bill specified
that all legal and governmental rights would apply to same-sex couples, but
that “nothing in this Act shall interfere with ... the religious practice of
any religious denomination or Indian Nation or Tribe or Native Group.”
That assurance
wasn’t enough for opponents who worried that religious organizations opposed to
gay unions would ultimately be forced or pressured to accept them.
“We are embarked on
a profound change in the fundamental institution of society … an institution
which is revered and held sacred,” state Sen. Bill Haine, D-Alton, warned
during Senate floor debate on the bill in February. He called the measure “a
strike at the heart” of marriage.
The fallout of the
debate hit both parties. The Illinois Republican Party last month forced out
its state chairman, Pat Brady, after he told an interviewer that the GOP should
support the measure to prove it’s “a party that welcomes all ideas.” Democrats,
meanwhile, were fractured along cultural, racial and religious lines, with
rural and black urban legislators bucking their party’s position of support.
Nonetheless,
proponents engineered Senate passage on Feb. 14 — Valentine’s Day — by a comfortable
34-21 margin, prompting cheers and applause on the Senate floor.
It headed to the
House, and supporters talked as if it was already law. But there the bill
stayed for more than three months.
Sponsors, counting
their votes in the marble back halls of the state Capitol, were a dozen or more
short, according to various estimates. For week after week they didn’t call the
bill. By Friday, as the end-of-session clock ticked down, its prospects had
gone from sure thing to long shot.
The problem wasn’t the
Republicans; they were mostly opposed to the bill, but so outnumbered in the
House that that wouldn’t by itself matter. The real roadblock was downstate
rural Democrats and urban black Democrats — two groups that have often bucked
their party’s support for gay rights based on cultural and religious concerns.
Among the
African-American lawmakers caught in the conflict was Rep. Eddie Lee Jackson,
D-East St. Louis. He was one of those targeted by a “robo-call” campaign by
Rev. James Meeks, a prominent black Chicago pastor, trying to pressure black
lawmakers into voting no.
Jackson didn’t need
a lot of pressuring, having voted against the measure in committee. “This is a
fairly liberal area, but when it comes to this particular topic, there are
mixed emotions, because of religion,” Jackson told the Post-Dispatch last
month.
Proponents could
attempt to revive the issue starting in the fall veto session.
Formal same-sex
marriage is currently allowed in 12 states: Connecticut, Iowa, Maine, Maryland,
Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Vermont, Washington and — as of May —
Rhode Island, Delaware and Minnesota.
Additional states
recognize various types of same-sex civil unions or domestic partnerships.
Missouri is not among them.
“The Democrats have 71 votes in the (Illinois) House, and still
couldn’t get the 60. It could be a bellwether.” David Smith of the
Illinois Family Institute
No comments:
Post a Comment