Lawmakers Fail To Resolve Gay Marriage Issue

BOSTON -- Massachusetts lawmakers adjourned a contentious constitutional convention Thursday without reaching consensus, and will reconvene in one month to continue debate on an amendment that would ban gay marriage.

Video

Gail Huff Reports On Convention Adjournment AP Survey: Where Your Rep Stands Facts: Massachusetts Constitution Wording: Gay Marriage Amendment Ruling:Read SJC's Decision Survey:What Grade Do You Give Mass. Lawmakers? Discussion:Should Courts Be Making Law? Slideshow: Gay Marriage Debate

Lawmakers worked until midnight, but were unable to reach an agreement.

NewsCenter 5's Gail Huff reported that tension erupted at the convention when it became clear the vote would be deliberately delayed until midnight, when by law the convention had to adjourn. A group of legislators filibustered until time ran out, with Sen. Brian A. Joyce, D-Milton, reading a newspaper article aloud as other legislators stormed out of the convention chanting, "We want to vote." They blamed Senate President Robert Travaglini for doing nothing to prevent the delay tactics and ignoring their attempts to call for a vote.

After hours of debate, Travaglini gaveled the convention adjourned, saying the Legislature would reconvene on March 11.

"This was completely a Senate debacle, and I think the people of Massachusetts deserve better than that," said state Rep. Colleen Garry.

On Friday, Travaglini offered no apologies for the way he handled the convention.

"I think we've demonstrated a willingness to involve ourselves in a dignified debate relative to an issue that has sparked controversy nationwide. I think it's wise to let some time subside and hopefully the emotions will subside as well, we can revisit and review the actions we've taken until this time, and then proceed in the appropriate legislative way," he said.

"We've demonstrated a willingness to tackle this issue head on. We've followed all the rules governing the constitutional convention and it's my committment to continue doing so," he added, saying three votes were taken and amendments were defeated twice.

Opponents of gay marriage were angry, as were legislators who wanted the amendment to pass.

"The leadership blocked members of this body from voting on an amendment that was building consensus," said Ron Crews of the Coalition for Marriage.

Gay marriage advocates were relieved that the convention adjourned without any amendment passing and they called out "Thank you," to legislators who supported them.

"The Legislature, they are exhausted, they are mentally stressed and strained, they are trying to figure out the difference between the amendments," said Arlene Issacson of the Gay And Lesbian Political Caucuses.

Now both sides will have a chance to marshal their forces over the next three weeks. The latest version of the amendment on the floor is a fourth proposal, the Travaglini- Finneran compromise amendment, which says, "Only the union of one man and one woman shall be valid in Massachusetts ... two persons of the same sex shall have the right to form a civil union, (providing the) same benefits, protections, rights and responsibilities that we afford to couples married under Massachusetts law."

Three other compromise amendments failed during this week's two days of debate. Lawmakers must pass an amendment by 101 votes in two consecutive legislative sessions, this year and in 2005-2006, before the issue could be put to voters on a ballot in November 2006.

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court decided last November that gay marriage is legal under the state constitution, prompting opponents of gay marriage to say voters should have the opportunity to decide on the issue. Legislators then called for a constitutional amendment that would change the constitution. Any amendment must be approved by voters.

Thirty-eight states and the federal government have approved laws or amendments banning gay marriage. Only Vermont permits civil unions for same-sex couples.