The exit of Massachusetts House Speaker Thomas Finneran and the elevation of a pro-marriage rights rival suggest a real moment in the battle over marriage rights. What it means is that it’s unlikely now that the establishment of such rights will be overturned by a state constitutional convention or amendment. Money quote from the Globe:
“It is pretty much over,” said Senate minority leader Brian P. Lees, a Springfield Republican who cosponsored the amendment with Finneran and Senate President Robert E. Travaglini. The House and Senate, sitting in a constitutional convention, must vote a second time in the next session before it could go to the voters on the 2006 ballot.
“In fact, there will be a question as to whether the issue will come up at all,” Lees said. He said the issue has faded to the “back burners of Massachusetts politics,” because few problems have surfaced with the implementation of the Supreme Judicial Court’s decision to legalize gay marriage.
“With the fact the law has been in effect for a number of months and with the change in the House leadership, it would appear any change in the constitution to ban marriage is quickly fading,” Lees said.
The real reason is that the change has become a non-event. The relatively small number of marriages for same-sex couples has barely made a dent in the social fabric and the upheaval of a constitutional amendment seems to many too big a deal for such a minor social change. Still, I hope the amendment moves forward. I would love to see a democratic majority back equality under the law, and I think that will happen in Massachusetts.
The Dish 