counter statistics

Sunday, March 26, 2006

A Plethora of Bachmann Amendments

Other Republican State Senators are introducing wannabe Bachmann amendments.

Andy from Eleventh Avenue South comments:

Republicans at the Minnesota Senate have submitted 7 bills for a constitutional amendment to end domestic partnerships and ban civil unions and same-sex marriage over the past week.

On Thursday, Senators Chris Gerlach (R-Apple Valley), Mady Reiter (R - Shoreview) with Michele Bachmann (R - Stillwater), Warren Limmer (R - Maple Grove), Michael Jungbauer (R - East Bethel), Thomas Neuville (R - Northfield) with Reiter again, and Betsy Wergin (R - Princeton), all introduced amendments. On Monday, Amy Koch (R - Buffalo) has an amendment pending for first reading.

Each of the amendments are slightly different from the one already introduced by Michele Bachmann last session and the other one introduced by Sean Nienow (R - Cambridge) and Neuville on March 13.

This follows the attempt by Bachmann and Nienow to circumvent the Senate process and force a vote.

These Republicans are acting like children who don't get their way. Violating Senate procedures and flooding the Judiciary committee with bills is not exactly a responsible way to act as an elected official.

I'm not sure this violates Senate procedures. The amendments are worded differently. They all seem be geared towards banning legal recognition of gay unions (not just marriage).

DFL Senator Betzold has his amendment proposal in there also.

S.F. No. 1958, as introduced - 84th Legislative Session (2005-2006) Posted on Mar 28, 2005

1.1 A bill for an act
1.2 proposing an amendment to the Minnesota Constitution
1.3 by adding a section to article VI; restricting the
1.4 judicial power to define marriage.
1.7 An amendment to the Minnesota Constitution is proposed to
1.8 the people. If the amendment is adopted, a section shall be
1.9 added to article VI, to read:
1.10 Sec. 14. The judicial power of this state does not include
1.11 the power to define the gender of parties who may enter into a
1.12 civil contract of marriage. The gender of parties who may enter
1.13 into a civil contract of marriage must be defined by law as
1.14 enacted by the legislature.
1.15 Sec. 2. [QUESTION.]
1.16 The proposed amendment shall be submitted to the people at
1.17 the 2008 general election. The question submitted shall be:
1.18 "Shall the Minnesota Constitution be amended to provide
1.19 that the gender of parties who may enter into a civil contract
1.20 of marriage must be defined by law and that the judicial power
1.21 of this state does not include the power to define the gender of
1.22 parties who may enter into a civil contract of marriage except
1.23 as provided by law enacted by the legislature?
1.24 Yes .......
1.25 No ........"

Betzold's proposal is more limited than a similar proposal he made a couple years ago. If the concern was really activist judges, the Republicans would support Betzold's version.

Senator Dick Day appears to answer his own phone when you call him early in the morning on a weekday. I encourage Lloydletta readers to call Dick Day and let him know what you think about these shenanagans. Be polite.