Marriage plan goes without signature
Proposed amendment moves on, but it's missing the governor's name
BY PAMELA STALLSMITH
TIMES-DISPATCH STAFF WRITER
Tuesday, April 11, 2006
In a symbolic move, a proposed constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage will go on the Nov. 7 ballot without the signature of Gov. Timothy M. Kaine.
A governor isn't able to veto or amend the lan- guage of a proposed amendment itself. The bill from the General Assembly only puts the question on the ballot, so the lack of action by Kaine -- who has said he will vote against the amendment because he thinks it's overreaching -- sends a message.
"It is symbolic and relatively rare for a governor to allow a measure to take effect without his signature," said Kaine spokesman Kevin Hall.
The proposed amendment cleared the assembly this year with overwhelming, bipartisan support. Amendments must pass two legislative sessions, with an intervening election.
The amendment would define marriage as between one man and one woman, as well as ban civil unions, domestic partnerships and any relationship between unmarried couples that approximates marriage.
Nineteen states have passed similar proposals, and Virginia will be among at least six states to put such a measure before voters in the fall.
"I believe that marriage is between one man and one woman, and current Virginia law makes that abundantly clear," Kaine, a former civil-rights lawyer, said in a statement yesterday.
"But I am concerned that the broad wording of the proposed constitutional amendment goes much further than that, threatening the constitutional rights of individuals to enter into private contracts, and also threatening the discretion of employers to extend certain benefits, such as health care coverage, to unmarried couples."
Meanwhile, the Family Foundation Action yesterday criticized the Democratic governor -- who reached out to social and religious conservatives during the campaign -- for "reversing his position" because he completed a candidate survey last year indicating support of the amendment.
"It is disappointing that a governor who has spoken so eloquently about his faith has chosen to break his campaign promise," Victoria Cobb, the group's president, said in a statement.
The group's candidate survey last fall asked whether candidates supported "legislation identical to that which passed this year calling for a Virginia state constitutional amendment, which declares that marriage in Virginia shall consist only of the union between a man and a woman."
Kaine's response was: "Support. I have long supported Virginia law that declares marriage to be between a man and a woman, and I support a constitutional amendment."
Hall said Kaine's answer was accurate.
"It's a front-loaded question designed to play gotcha in a campaign season by a group predisposed to make mischief on social issues like this," Hall said.
In other developments, the campaign to defeat the amendment has picked up two $100,000 gifts.
The pledges of the Weinstein family of Richmond, owners of a real estate company, and an anonymous gay couple were announced at the formal launching Saturday night of the Commonwealth Coalition.
Equality Virginia, the state's largest gay-rights organization and one of the coalition's founding partners, has committed about $750,000 in staff resources and cash to the effort.
The Family Foundation Action, an arm of the Family Foundation of Virginia, is holding a series of fundraising receptions around the state. It hasn't received any large gifts that rival the coalition's.
"Supporters of marriage amendments have been outspent in nearly every state where amendments have passed," spokesman Chris Freund said. "So we anticipate working at a financial disadvantage."
Marriage ballot text
In November, Virginians will vote to accept or reject the constitutional amendment defining marriage. The ballot wording is the same as the amendment:
"That only a union between one man and one woman may be a marriage valid in or recognized by this Commonwealth and its political subdivisions.
"This Commonwealth and its political subdivisions shall not create or recognize a legal status for relationships of unmarried individuals that intends to approximate the design, qualities, significance, or effects of marriage. Nor shall this Commonwealth or its political subdivisions create or recognize another union, partnership, or other legal status to which is assigned the rights, benefits, obligations, qualities, or effects of marriage."
Contact staff writer Pamela Stallsmith at pstallsmith@timesdispatch.com or (804) 649-6746.
Source: Richmond Times-Dispatch (Va.)
BY PAMELA STALLSMITH
TIMES-DISPATCH STAFF WRITER
Tuesday, April 11, 2006
In a symbolic move, a proposed constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage will go on the Nov. 7 ballot without the signature of Gov. Timothy M. Kaine.
A governor isn't able to veto or amend the lan- guage of a proposed amendment itself. The bill from the General Assembly only puts the question on the ballot, so the lack of action by Kaine -- who has said he will vote against the amendment because he thinks it's overreaching -- sends a message.
"It is symbolic and relatively rare for a governor to allow a measure to take effect without his signature," said Kaine spokesman Kevin Hall.
The proposed amendment cleared the assembly this year with overwhelming, bipartisan support. Amendments must pass two legislative sessions, with an intervening election.
The amendment would define marriage as between one man and one woman, as well as ban civil unions, domestic partnerships and any relationship between unmarried couples that approximates marriage.
Nineteen states have passed similar proposals, and Virginia will be among at least six states to put such a measure before voters in the fall.
"I believe that marriage is between one man and one woman, and current Virginia law makes that abundantly clear," Kaine, a former civil-rights lawyer, said in a statement yesterday.
"But I am concerned that the broad wording of the proposed constitutional amendment goes much further than that, threatening the constitutional rights of individuals to enter into private contracts, and also threatening the discretion of employers to extend certain benefits, such as health care coverage, to unmarried couples."
Meanwhile, the Family Foundation Action yesterday criticized the Democratic governor -- who reached out to social and religious conservatives during the campaign -- for "reversing his position" because he completed a candidate survey last year indicating support of the amendment.
"It is disappointing that a governor who has spoken so eloquently about his faith has chosen to break his campaign promise," Victoria Cobb, the group's president, said in a statement.
The group's candidate survey last fall asked whether candidates supported "legislation identical to that which passed this year calling for a Virginia state constitutional amendment, which declares that marriage in Virginia shall consist only of the union between a man and a woman."
Kaine's response was: "Support. I have long supported Virginia law that declares marriage to be between a man and a woman, and I support a constitutional amendment."
Hall said Kaine's answer was accurate.
"It's a front-loaded question designed to play gotcha in a campaign season by a group predisposed to make mischief on social issues like this," Hall said.
In other developments, the campaign to defeat the amendment has picked up two $100,000 gifts.
The pledges of the Weinstein family of Richmond, owners of a real estate company, and an anonymous gay couple were announced at the formal launching Saturday night of the Commonwealth Coalition.
Equality Virginia, the state's largest gay-rights organization and one of the coalition's founding partners, has committed about $750,000 in staff resources and cash to the effort.
The Family Foundation Action, an arm of the Family Foundation of Virginia, is holding a series of fundraising receptions around the state. It hasn't received any large gifts that rival the coalition's.
"Supporters of marriage amendments have been outspent in nearly every state where amendments have passed," spokesman Chris Freund said. "So we anticipate working at a financial disadvantage."
Marriage ballot text
In November, Virginians will vote to accept or reject the constitutional amendment defining marriage. The ballot wording is the same as the amendment:
"That only a union between one man and one woman may be a marriage valid in or recognized by this Commonwealth and its political subdivisions.
"This Commonwealth and its political subdivisions shall not create or recognize a legal status for relationships of unmarried individuals that intends to approximate the design, qualities, significance, or effects of marriage. Nor shall this Commonwealth or its political subdivisions create or recognize another union, partnership, or other legal status to which is assigned the rights, benefits, obligations, qualities, or effects of marriage."
Contact staff writer Pamela Stallsmith at pstallsmith@timesdispatch.com or (804) 649-6746.
Source: Richmond Times-Dispatch (Va.)
1 Comments:
And on the issue of children, well the world is full of untold unwanted orphans. I sometimes wonder at those straight couples that will marry and choose to reproduce rather than adopt one of those children – the children of God. And yet some of those same couples will oppose stringently qualified adoption by gay parents.
Post a Comment
<< Home