Mocking the Rules in Massachusetts

This is the title of a column Jeff Jacoby wrote before the Massachusetts Constitutional Convention this week. He explained that “the most notable item on its agenda will be a proposed amendment to ban same-sex marriage.

A record-breaking 170,000 state residents have signed petitions to put such an amendment on the state ballot. But the Massachusetts Constitution mandates a detour: The measure must first win the support of at least 50 lawmakers in two consecutive legislative terms. Only then can it be submitted to the people. If the amendment gets past every hurdle, it will reach the ballot in November 2008.

“It is a deliberately long and cumbersome process, meant to keep the Constitution from being altered recklessly, and to provide time for an amendment's pros and cons to be fully aired… Citizens who accomplish it demonstrate an admirable faith in the democratic system. That doesn't entitle them to win, of course. But it does entitle them to be treated fairly. If the petitioners have to play by the rules, the Legislature does, too.

“And what the rules say about the marriage amendment is that the Legislature must put it to a vote. The Massachusetts Constitution could not be clearer on the point. Article 48, which establishes the right of initiative and referendum, specifies that when amendments proposed by initiative petition come before the Legislature, a roll call is mandatory. They ‘shall be voted upon’ as written, the Constitution directs (unless amended by a three-fourths supermajority). Moreover, the Legislature is permitted to take action on them ‘only by call of the yeas and nays.’ (Italics added)

“Lawmakers are not given a choice in the matter. The Constitution requires them to vote. If it didn't, initiatives opposed by the legislative leadership could always be aborted by simply refusing to bring them up for a vote. Instead of operating as a check and balance on the Legislature, Article 48 would then be a toothless sham.

“But for weeks now, same-sex marriage advocates have been telegraphing their intention to kill the marriage amendment through just such an unconstitutional ploy. "Every possible option is on the table," says the head of MassEquality, a powerful coalition opposed to the amendment. Among the tactics being discussed: adjourning the joint session before the amendment is brought up, or arranging for enough legislators to stay away in order to prevent a quorum.”

Dirty Tricks in Massachusetts

So what happened yesterday in that session in Massachusetts?

The campaign to allow the voters to decide on the definition of marriage in Massachusetts expressed grave doubt that this legislature will ever take up the People's Amendment on Marriage for a vote — a clear violation of the state Constitution.

In a second move in as many months, Senate President Robert Travaglini recessed the Constitutional Convention without taking up the Protection of Marriage Amendment. The Convention is now set to resume on November 9, after state elections, a clear political attempt to insulate incumbent legislators at the polls this November from recording their vote on marriage and for all practicality kill the people's amendment on marriage.

If no action is taken on the amendment by December 31 of this year, the legislature will be in violation of Article 48 of the state constitution, which requires a vote by the joint session of the House and Senate on qualified initiative petitions. It also violates the citizens' right to be heard, thousands of whom came to rally at the State House today, on the marriage issue.

"This move shows the flagrant disregard for the will of the people by Senate President Travaglini and every legislator who voted to recess the convention until November," said Kris Mineau, president, Massachusetts Family Institute and spokesman, www.VoteOnMarriage.org.

This is especially troubling in light of the fact that nearly three-quarters of lawmakers voted against recessing the convention until Monday "recognizing that today's time was running short" but instead he chose to recess until after the election cycle. A vote to recess is tantamount to a vote to kill the amendment.

If allowed to go to the floor for a full and fair vote, VoteOnMarriage.org, as well as our opponents, is confident that there was sufficient support to pass the amendment.

In another move to silence the voice of the people, the convention today voted to send to committee — a veritable political graveyard — a citizen-initiative petition on health care.

As articulated in a floor speech by Rep. Marie Parente (D)-Milford, today's actions are tantamount to justice denied and democracy denied for the citizens of Massachusetts.

"The legislative leadership today has made the birthplace of American democracy its new graveyard," Mineau concluded.