Civil Unions Passes House Finance Committee

UPDATE #2: FOX 31’s Eli Stokols:

Friday was a roller-coaster that began with anxiety that Republicans were stalling and ended with evidence that they’re not, as the bill, after some legislative maneuvering, arrived in and promptly passed out of its second GOP-controlled committee in 24 hours.

On the yes vote of Rep. Don Beezley, R-Broomfield, Senate Bill 2 passed out of the House Finance Committee on a vote of 7-6.

“It really does come down to basic equity and fairness for human beings,” Beezley said after the hearing. “I think if the worst thing that happens in our society is that we have more people committed to long-term, meaningful, loving relationships, I think that’s a good thing.”

Rep. Don Beezley–he’s come a long way from comparing recycling to the Nazis.

—–

UPDATE: Senate Bill 2 passes House Finance Committee on a 7-6 vote with outgoing GOP Rep. Don Beezley voting in favor. Heads next to House Appropriations, then the floor.

—–

AP updates:

The Legislature adjourns Wednesday so the measure’s next committee hearing needs to happen soon.

Republican House Speaker Frank McNulty delivered a speech to lawmakers Friday morning cautioning them not to question others’ political motives if they don’t like what happens with a bill.

The latest word is that the necessary documents have been signed, and Senate Bill 2 will be heard in the House Finance Committee this afternoon. Assuming passage there, there’s one more gauntlet stop in the House Appropriations Committee before the bill reaches the floor. After the dramatic statement by GOP Rep. B.J. Nikkel, the former aide to Rep. Marilyn Musgrave who cast the deciding vote for SB-2 last night in House Judiciary, the mood at the Capitol can best be summed up as one of rapidly-building anticipation.

We’ll update with the latest developments as we receive word of them.

37 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. DavidThi808 says:

    That the powers who be realize that if they kill it now it will mean a lot fewer Republicans elected the next several cycles. So they’re working to get it through quickly before the base has time to get riled up?

    • harrydoby says:

      Yes, at this point, Colorado Republicans might finally realize that opposition to civil unions is a losing issue for them.  Either they accept the reality that civil unions are approved by the majority of Coloradans, including fellow Republicans, or they continue to submit to the litmus/purity tests from ultra conservatives.

      The reality is, civil unions, and for that matter civil marriages, are a legal decision, not a choice imposed upon or by any religious institution.

      • MADCO says:

        Then why did it get killed at the ballot box last time around?

        • LakewoodTodd says:

          Yes, I guess we do.

          There are elections. These are the things where you fill in a bubble next to your candidate of choice or opinion of a vaguely worded issue.

          And there are opinion polls. This is where someone calls you and asks your opinion of the issue.

          The one is manipulated by months of intense campaigning, barrels full of cash, and base organizing to get the “right” people to the polls.

          The other, when done professionally with an eye to discernment, is scientifically constructed to get the most likley picture of what the general population feels about something.

          The scientific polls show two things. One, Coloradans appove of freedom to be legally committed to a person you love regardless of genders and two, that this attitude is growing exponentially in the generations that are replacing the older genderations.

          So, the writing is on the wall.

          (Sorry, I’m feeling so snarky today. I got no sleep last night while I was on-call.)

        • Gilpin Guy says:

          Ten years is a lifetime for some issues.

        • DavidThi808 says:

          Old people die, young people reach voting age. Demographics is destiny and it means gay marriage is merely a matter of when.

    • davebarnes says:

      Good as guess as any.

      I see the actual voting by the House members as more dangerous to the Republican Party than killing it in committee.

      No one will remember the committee kill in November.

      But, every Republican who votes on record loses one way or the other.

      Vote yes and you get a primary challenge from the right-wing nutjobs.

      Vote no and live in a safe GOP district and you gain nothing.

      Vote no and live in a competitive district and you have lost votes from the majority.

    • rocco says:

      But the backlash will be like a tidal wave if it gets to a full vote.

      “The base”, as you referred to them, aren’t a majority of the voters, but they are a mean, vindictive demographic, given a much louder voice and more clout by extreme conservative mega churches and media, mostly radio.

      It’ll be interesting to see how Focus on the Family, the catholics, and some of the extreme rightie yakkers lean on the House republicans if this gets through Finance.

      But this is really a head turner.

      • DavidThi808 says:

        My mom thought that would happen in Hawaii. But after they passed it, pretty much nothing. A couple of people complaining but nothing substantial.

        I think most on the far right know they are going to lose on this eventually and so once it happens, it’s over.

      • dmindgo says:

        just a little quibble that it’s not catholics, as a group, that oppose gay marriage / civil unions.  It’s the pope and bishops who do.

        I like your comment, it is definitely a head turner and I find it hard to believe that the reactionary right won’t react.

        • rocco says:

          And I inadvertently omitted “leadership” in my comment.

          I’m a completely recovered catholic, never to look back, but several family members still attend mass, do the rituals, and the whole nine yards………..to a point.

          I can truly say that even with the older catholics in my family, it’s a matter of picking and choosing what parts of the catholic dogma they’re buying. Gay marraige, civil unions, birth control, contraception, none of those are topics that anybody (to my knowledge) is fretting about.

          There’s no “crises of conscience”.

          Short story long, I should have said the bishops and above are the problem.      

    • droll says:

      http://coloradoga.granicus.com

      Are you listening? If my eyes roll any harder they’re going to get stuck up there.

  2. droll says:

    Representative DelGrosso, Chair n

    Representative Swerdfeger, Vice-Chair n

    Representative Hullinghorst y

    Representatives Acree, n

    Beezley, y

    Conti, n

    Hobert,  y

    Kagan, y

    Kefalas, y

    Labuda, y

    McCann, y

    Pabon, y

    Swalm n

    (Sorry for the sloppy notes. Good night!)

  3. DavidThi808 says:

    If the GOP power brokers had decided to kill it, we’ld have ArapaGOP here spewing venom at BJ Nikkel and explaining why discrimination is good for America. Instead he’s silent as is most everyone else at the top.

    They’ll have it go through, but only because of one rouge member on each committee. That lets them appeal to the base saying we need more Republicans elected – look what happened. And at the same time they don’t give us Dems a giant weapon to take out all but those in very safe seats.

  4. taterheaptom says:

    I mean, shee-ut, even here in the boonies we preety much figured out we don’t really give a damn who’s shacking up with whom.  Hey McNulty!  Where are the jobs?  

  5. droll says:

    Rep. Cheri Gerou has indicated that she will support the bill.

    http://www.denverpost.com/brea

    Also, some stuff about Stephens/Looper that breaks my heart.

Leave a Reply

Comment from your Facebook account


You may comment with your Colorado Pols account above (click here to register), or via Facebook below.