Prolonging The Distraction

Vermont Governor Jim Douglas vetoed a marriage equality bill today, hiding behind the "separate but equal" civil union law affording rights and benefits to same-sex couples. Last week Douglas claimed his veto threat was based on wanting to "focus" on the struggling economy. Now Vermont legislators will have to focus on a veto override for a week. Makes sense to me!

The State Senate, which passed the bill 26-4, will vote to override tomorrow. But the House vote was lower than the 2/3 threshold needed for override. According to the Kos diarist,

Several members of the Vermont House who voted no on the bill last week have indicated that they would vote to override the Governor's veto on principle stating they could not in good conscience vote for the bill itself, but were willing to vote to allow the will of the majority to become law over the veto. However, other members who voted for the bill may switch and vote against the override attempt using the governor for cover.

Hopefully the House will come through.

"...No, It's Iowa."

The Iowa Supreme Court today ruled unanimously that a 1998 state law banning same-sex marriage is unconstitutional.

The Iowa Supreme Court this morning struck down a 1998 state law that limits marriage to one man and one woman.

The ruling is viewed as a victory for the gay rights movement in Iowa and elsewhere, and a setback for social conservatives who wanted to protect traditional families.

The decision makes Iowa the first Midwestern state, and the fourth nationwide, to allow same-sex marriages. Lawyers for Lambda Legal, a gay rights group that financed the court battle and represented the couples, had hoped to use a court victory to demonstrate acceptance of same-sex marriage in heartland America.

Here's the opinion and the summary. You may be wondering whether Iowa can pull a Prop. 8 and reverse the decision at the ballot box. It's a little more difficult to do there under state law.

Some Iowa lawmakers, mostly Republicans, attempted last year to launch a constitutional amendment to specifically prohibit same-sex marriage.

Such a change would require approval in consecutive legislative sessions and a public vote, which means a ban would could not be put in place until at least 2012 unless lawmakers take up the issue in the next few weeks.

“If you’ll remember when we proposed the Iowa marriage amendment, the Democrats’ excuse for not taking it up was that it was in the hands of the Iowa Supreme Court,” Senate Republican leader Paul McKinley of Chariton said Friday. “It was implied that should they find against traditional marriage, that the Legislature would handle that. I would certainly hope they’ll keep their promise.”

Democrats run the House and Senate in Iowa, and could conceivably bottle this up in their respective Judiciary Committees. Even if they didn't, same-sex marriage will be the law of the land for a minimum of three years in Iowa.

Change happens slowly...

...I should add that the Vermont state House voted to allow gay marriage by a 95-52 count. The Republican governor Jim Douglas is expected to veto, but activists feel they have a shot to override it.

I Can't Interrupt My Laser Focus On The Economy To Write My Signature

The stupidest part of Vermont Governor Jim Douglas vowing to veto a same-sex marriage law that both chambers of the legislature will soon pass is his justification:

"The urgency of our state's economic and budgetary challenges demands the full focus of every member and every committee of this Legislature."

Um, the legislature has already passed it, and the amount of time it would take Douglas to sign the bill is approximately 2.7 seconds. In fact, the Legislature would be entirely LESS focused on the economy if they are forced to schedule a session to override Douglas' veto (and they have the votes to do that).

Maybe Jim Douglas can't walk and chew gum at the same time, maybe that's the problem.