U.S. Senate See Full Big Line

(D) J. Hickenlooper*

(R) Somebody

80%

20%

(D) Michael Bennet

(D) Phil Weiser

60%↑

50%↓

Att. General See Full Big Line

(D) M. Dougherty

(D) Jena Griswold

60%↑

40%↑

Sec. of State See Full Big Line
(D) A. Gonzalez

(D) J. Danielson

(R) Sheri Davis
50%

40%

30%
State Treasurer See Full Big Line

(D) Brianna Titone

(D) Jeff Bridges

(R) Kevin Grantham

40%

40%

30%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Hurd*

(D) Somebody

80%

40%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert*

(D) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank*

(D) Somebody

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(R) Gabe Evans*

(D) Manny Rutinel

(D) Yadira Caraveo

45%↓

40%↑

30%

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
May 18, 2006 08:00 AM UTC

Federal Marriage Amendment Resurrected

  • 17 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

It looks like the battle over gay marriage won’t just be a local issue this year. From the Rocky Mountain News:

The U.S. Senate has set the stage to renew the battle over Sen. Wayne Allard’s proposed constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage, though critics dismiss next month’s scheduled vote as nothing but an election-year ploy. The Senate Judiciary Committee voted along strict party lines today to advanced the Federal Marriage Amendment for a Senate floor vote, expected for the week of June 5.

The amendment would define marriage as the union of a man and a woman and is a reaction to a Massachusetts Supreme Court decision that first allowed same-sex marriages in that state.

Allard, a Loveland Republican, is hoping to have more success than he did in 2004, when the amendment won only 48 votes on a procedural vote and was shelved for the year. It requires 60 votes to pass cloture, ending debate and bringing the measure up for final consideration. It then would take 67 votes for Senate passage.

Allard believes he has a better chance this year, since he has added 10 new Senate co-sponsors, including five first-term Senators who replaced lawmakers who voted against the amendment in 2004, Allard spokeswoman Carolyn Williams said Wednesday. But critics dismiss the scheduled vote as an election-year ploy simply designed to rally social conservatives during the run-up to the November elections.

Comments

17 thoughts on “Federal Marriage Amendment Resurrected

  1. Wayne Allard’s willingness to deny basic civil rights to all citizens and residents reminds me of the Sen. Robert Byrd of the 1950s and 1960s.

    At least Byrd has come around and given up his KK sheets, while Allard obviously believes hate wins votes, even in 21st Century America.

    So this is why so many civil rights backers no longer are Republicans. Allard had clearly sold out to Jim Dobson, Bill Armstrong and Pat Robertson before his first run back in 1996, which is why he’s the only Republican I’ve voted against during the last 10 years.

    Now that the party so obviously believes in Constitutionally-supported discrimination, government invasion of our bedrooms, political meddling while we’re dying and treating illegal immigrants as slaves, even more Republicans are leaving the party.

    What this means, of course, is that the base that the Christian Republican Party is appealing to will be out numbered by moderate and conservative independents who will not vote for those who do not share their moral values. Looks like the Republicans are destined to be a minority party for generations.

    For being against civil rights for all is like being a racist, and Americans won’t vote for 21st Century Repubican racists.

  2. Wayne Allard’s willingness to deny basic civil rights to all citizens and residents reminds me of the Sen. Robert Byrd of the 1950s and 1960s.

    At least Byrd has come around and given up his KK sheets, while Allard obviously believes hate wins votes, even in 21st Century America.

    So this is why so many civil rights backers no longer are Republicans. Allard had clearly sold out to Jim Dobson, Bill Armstrong and Pat Robertson before his first run back in 1996, which is why he’s the only Republican I’ve voted against during the last 10 years.

    Now that the party so obviously believes in Constitutionally-supported discrimination, government invasion of our bedrooms, political meddling while we’re dying and treating illegal immigrants as slaves, even more Republicans are leaving the party.

    What this means, of course, is that the base that the Christian Republican Party is appealing to will be out numbered by moderate and conservative independents who will not vote for those who do not share their moral values. Looks like the Republicans are destined to be a minority party for generations.

    For being against civil rights for all is like being a racist, and Americans won’t vote for 21st Century Republican racists.

  3. The Democrats would rather enable the pervy libertines who have their leadership’s ear to rewrite our marriage laws than end the foreign policy disaster of this White House.  They’ve successfully driven away their formerly loyal blue-collar moral conservatives, this is just one more reason for their old base to stay away, or even vote GOP. 

    Still killing Archie Bunker.

  4. Wait, wouldn’t pervy libertines be interested in anything *other* than public commitments of monogamy?  Could it be what makes you so nervous about gay folks, Kevin, is that they’re just so boringly normal?

  5. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

    Why is Congress trying to break the Constitution on a normal bases?  We have no privacy, no freedoms, no free press, and no money for gas.

  6. Ah, the paucity of Allard’s service to the people of Colorado. Are ya’ll really gonna keep this genious as your Senator? Tell me it ain’t so…

  7. Is this the October suprise?

    On a plus side, we’ve finally gotten to the bottom of the Major League Baseball Steroid thing, and a flag burning amendment. Hallelujah.

    I stand by what I’ve heard to be the most reasonable compromise to date: Let anyone who wants a state-sanctioned marriage license have one to cover estates and mutual properties for deaths and divorces and whatnot. If the marriage needs to be sanctioned by the supernatural deity or being of your choice, well, that’s what your church is for.

    If there’s such a thing as “absolute truth”, can we not reasonably expect “absolute agreement”? 10,000 years and counting…

    Banning people from anything based on sexual orientation, in my mind, is at its heart discriminatory. A libertine can be as pervy as she/he/etc wants, so long as they pay their taxes, work, and do right by their families, neighbors, and communities. Just like everybody else. If you’re concerned with what consenting adults do behind closed doors, who’s to say this same logic won’t eventually lead to YOUR marriage being declared “illegal”?

    Thanks for the lending of your ears, and for letting me vent…

  8. This whole social issues agenda is designed as a “watch-the-monkey-dance” distraction, and a ploy to get the Talibangelicals out in force in November.

    Meanwhile, back at the Uber Emperor’s House, they continue to dismantle the democracy, turn over power to the multi-national corporacrats and prepare to build detention facilities.  Good thing they already have a Halliburton contract for that.

    By the time, they are rounding up the Talibangelicals, no one will be left to speak for them-get the reference?  Click here, if you don’t.

  9. Having some little pride in being one of the few to post openly (no hiding behind some silly anonymous moniker) I guess I should provide the correct link to my ramblings.

    Honestly, I understand the need for anonymity.

    Wayne Allard, the soft-spoken veterinarian, who serves as Dubya’s buttboy and who, of course, was relied upon to introduce the one and only issue dear to the hearts of the religious right (probably the sole, remaining “base” for this idiot who I’m ashamed to say is the leader of the free world!); yes, Wayne Allard should really feel proud of himself for introducing legislation that is so ipso facto discriminatory under the protections of the Constitution that even a trained monkey would be embarrassed to be associated with it.

    Preserve the base! Preserve the base! Way to go Wayne.

  10. So, George.  I think you are a Libertarian.  Please correct me if I am wrong.
    If not, for the Libertarians out there:
    Q: What are your priorities for the next election?
    Q: Are you for the Corporate Oligarchy or for Individual Liberty?
    Q: Will you join the “libertine” Dems and clean house this November?

  11. tmgt: Indeed, it looks that way doesn’t it. I’ve got nothing but left-leaning links on my blog. I’ve been seriously considering providing a smidgeon of alternative (libertarian, conservative)links for those folks who 1) Don’t buy Dubya’s bushit, and 2) Don’t think Teddy and that interestingly “effete” character Harry Reid are actually of this earth. They seem to reside in some never-never land that not even the Wizard of Oz would tackle…not even with ruby slippers to effectuate the effort.

  12. I am still amazed that the so-called religious right has never called for a vote on the so-called Human Life Amendment. The Republicans have controlled the House of Representatives for twelve years and the Senate for four.  They can whip up and pass out of committee amendments on gay marriage and flag burning, etc; but, the HLA is a poor stepchild which never even gets a vote.
    The strategy is brilliant.  The HLA is  introduced every legislative session and then immediately referred to the House Judiciary Committee which has been chaired by prominent Catholic (and acknowledged adulter) Henry Hyde forever.  The amendment is then buried and no one on the committee, let alone the House, has to vote, up or down, on abortion.  Instead, there is usually a bill introduced, on the margin of the issue (partial birth, Terri) which allows the Republicans to posture, bombastically, on the issue.  I think these laws are carefully constructed so as to fail  constitutional muster when they are challenged in court, which always happens immediately.  The laws are then stayed by the court and the Republican right wing gets to denounce, again, the independent judiciary.  This is Charlie and the football.  In order to work, it takes the absolute cooperation of the so-called religious right.  I don’t know what their game is; I know that Wayne and Marilyn are NEVER questioned about this strategy.  Why?  Because the Democrats are conflicted and confused. ” It is ALWAYS about the Constitution, Stupid.” 

    Except when it is about getting and keeping power.
    Gay marriage bans hurt others, don’t touch the Republican’s religious right’s base and so they are always safe to vote on and have proven to be a good way to get out the vote and keep power.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Gabe Evans
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

121 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!

Colorado Pols