House set to vote on same-sex union ban

Posted September 12, 2011

Republican state lawmakers unveiled a fourth version today of a proposed constitutional marriage that would prohibit same-sex marriages and civil unions. 

Earlier versions of the bill raised concerns from opponents that it could invalidate domestic partner benefits offered by employers. The latest version, Senate Bill 514, specifically exempts contracts entered into by "private parties."  

It also makes a crucial change in the timing of the amendment's appearance before voters.  Earlier versions would have put the amendment on the ballot in November 2012, leading some critics to accuse the bill's backers of using it as a political issue to drive Republican voter turnout.   

The new version moves the ballot date to May, 2012, during primary elections. Democratic sources say the change has given the measure a few votes from conservative Democrats who were inclined to support it, anyway.

As of this morning, the Senate's version of the amendment was set to be heard in Senate Judiciary 1 committee and voted later on the Senate floor. But at 12:45, House leaders announced they, not the Senate, would move forward on a House version of the bill, with a floor vote later today in their chamber. The amendment changed chambers, bill numbers, content, ballot date, committees, and rooms, all within 75 minutes. 

In House Rules this afternoon, it was standing-room only. Most of those attending were wearing stickers in favor of the amendment, having just come from a rally amendment backers held today outside the building.  Many members of the public had come hoping to speak on both sides of the issue, but House Rules Chairman Tim Moore elected not to allow public comment on the measure.

The amendment passed the Rules committee after about 30 minutes of discussion.  House debate is expected to start around 2:45pm. Speaker Thom Tillis said earlier he would allow open floor debate on the proposal before its initial vote.

We're streaming the debate live at WRAL.com   


This blog post is closed for comments.

Oldest First
View all
  • jakegoad Sep 12, 2011

    Letting the people vote would be letting them pick between allowed or banned. This is a vote between banned and double banned. This is a far cry from letting the people vote.

    We've got hurricane damage, a hard budget, soaring unemployment, schools that need improvement, and a difficult road ahead. Instead we (tax payer) are paying $50,000 a day to have this legislative session to focus on a distraction. Talk about priorities. Where are the jobs?

  • OnlyTheBestWillDo Sep 12, 2011

    This is great! Let the people vote!