SUMMARY: When the right wasn't looking, a bill to put a same-gender marriage ban on the ballot was wounded in Oregon's House and may be comatose in a Senate committee.

The move to place before Oregon voters a state constitutional amendment prohibiting same-gender marriage has turned out to be anything but the slam-dunk its supporters had anticipated in May. Taking the route to the ballot through the legislature rather than citizen petition, the proposal only made it through the Oregon House after being stripped of a prohibition against legal rulings recognizing unmarried domestic partners, and the state Senate on July 21 sent it back to committee. It could well die there if the legislative session ends July 23 as planned, but even if it emerges it will do so not as a constitutional amendment, but as an authorization for lawmakers to define marriage, which would add nothing to what they already can -- and have -- done. The bill's bumpy ride is a tribute to a vigorous lobbying effort organized by Basic Rights Oregon (BRO), while the ban's proponents took its support too much for granted. However, should the legislative route fail, the Oregon Christian Coalition is prepared to begin collecting signatures.

The announcement by three Republicans that they would not support House Joint Resolution 4 was key to the state Senate action. Senators Lenn Hannon (R-Ashland), John Lim (R-Gresham) and Verne Duncan (R-Milwaukie) called the measure unnecessary and divisive, just as BRO had in its lobbying effort targeting these and three other moderate Republicans. Lim said he'd received 40 calls in a single night against the bill. Meanwhile, the religious right had been devoting its energies to a measure requiring parental notification for minors to obtain abortions, essentially to the exclusion of active lobbying for the marriage ban. Senator Marylin Shannon (R-Brooks) hadn't thought she needed to whip up support from her colleagues because 20 had supported a similar measure just two years ago, which died in committee.

In the face of dissent from his own party, lead Senate sponsor Charles Starr (R-Hillsboro) conceded HJR-4 was not going pass. He agreed to consider an amendment which would make the ballot initiative not a constitutional amendment, but an authorization for the legislature to define marriage. That's a power the legislature already has, and has already used to define marriage as between one man and one woman.

Moderate Republicans also made the difference in the state House, where they refused to support the anti-domestic partners clause in Representative Kevin Mannix' (R-Salem) original HJR-29, resulting in its outright defeat. Mannix came back with HJR-4, which the House approved on June 28. He was convinced that a constitutional amendment restricting legal marriage to one man and one woman would still serve to prohibit local governments from recognizing same-gender couples.

LATE UPDATE: The Oregon Senate committee charged with reviewing the anti-marriage measure sent a reworked version to the floor on July 23 in the final hours of the legislative session. That proposal failed by a vote of 16 - 13. For details, see the July 26 edition of NewsPlanet.