Capitol Review: Minnesota Voters to Define Marriage in 2012 Vote

The Minnesota House on Saturday voted to put the definition of marriage in front of voters on the 2012 ballot. If approved by Minnesotans, marriage would be defined as “only a union of one man and one woman.”

Despite an emotional five hour debate, the vote came in at 70-62, mostly along party lines, although four Republicans voted against the bill.

State Rep. Mary Liz Holberg (R-District 36A), of Lakeville, and Rep. Pat Garofalo (R-District 36B), of Farmington, both voted in favor of sending the issue to voters.

Minnesota law already bans gay marriage, but proponents of the proposal say only a constitutional amendment could keep the issue from being decided by the courts.

The Minnesota Senate passed the bill 38-27 on May 11.

State Sen. Dave Thompson (R-District 36) of Lakeville, should be determined through a statewide vote.

Last week, Thompson argued that conventional couples provide more nurturing environments for children than do same-sex spouses. He also asserted that marriage between a man and a woman was simply more natural.

“As a matter of fact and history, and I guess nature, it has always been that. Not to define marriage as the union of a man and a woman is inconsistent with the essence of the institution,” he told another Patch in an interview.

Thompson also argued for the legitimacy of a popular referendum on gay marriage.

“I think that how we define the most basic institution that we have in a society is a legitimate question to put to the people,” he said.

The Human Rights Campaign, the nation's largest lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) civil rights organization, admonished the Minnesota Legislature on Sunday for its push for the constitutional amendment.

“At a time when all Minnesota families are sharing concerns over the economy, it is appalling that the Legislature would seek to harm a segment of those families rather than pass a budget,” said Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese in a statement. “We are confident, however, that when November 2012 arrives, Minnesotans will reject these divisive tactics.”

Because the Legislature proposed it as a constitutional amendment—and not a bill—the issue bypasses DFL Gov. Mark Dayton.

Last week, Wendy Krauser, a Lakeville resident, told Lakeville Patch that the bill is not only shameful, but is designed to manipulate people into voting to change the constitution.

"People aren't going to understand that a no vote is a vote to keep things status quo," she said. "I'm a lesbian and as it stands now, I can't marry my partner in Minnesota. All this bill threatens to do is make it nearly impossible to allow such marriages in the future."

The debate consisted mostly of testimony from opponents of the bill. State Rep. Jeff Hayden (DFL-District 61B), of South Minneapolis, said his own marriage, because it's interracial, would have been illegal at one time.

“It is days like this that define you as a legislator,” Hayden told his colleagues, urging them to stand for their conscience. “This is when you know if you’re going to get the job done.”

Freshman Rep. John Kriesel (R-District 57A), of Cottage Grove, a veteran of the Iraq War who lost both legs in combat, was one of the Republicans to vote against the bill. “This amendment doesn’t represent what I went to fight for,” Kriesel told his colleagues.