You choose, we deliver
If you are interested in this story, you might be interested in others from The Journal Gazette. Go to www.journalgazette.net/newsletter and pick the subjects you care most about. We'll deliver your customized daily news report at 3 a.m. Fort Wayne time, right to your email.

Indiana

Advertisement

Long moves gay-marriage amendment to Senate Rules Committee

INDIANAPOLIS – Senate President Pro Tem David Long, R-Fort Wayne, has moved the gay-marriage amendment to the Senate Rules Committee for hearing early the week of Feb. 10.

He announced the move Thursday, which went against statements he made last week, in which he was adamant the bill would go to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Long said he did not think the amendment would stall there, but that the Rules Committee was more representative of leadership of the chamber and a better place for it to be handled.

The Indiana House narrowly passed the constitutional proposal to ban gay marriage last week after deleting a second sentence that would have banned future civil unions as well.

Long said it is his preference that the amendment remain the same in committee, but that any changes can be offered in the Senate on second reading. None will be blocked.

Long would not say how he personally feels about whether the second sentence should be restored.

“I’m going to keep my powder dry on that right now.”

Some supporters want the second sentence put back in so that Hoosiers can vote on the proposal in November. If it isn’t restored, the amendment would have to be passed again by the legislature in 2015 or 2016, and could not go to the voters until 2016.

“It’s a matter of when, not if,” Long said.

Megan Robertson, campaign manager for the bipartisan Freedom Indiana coalition fighting the proposal, didn’t agree with Long that it is a foregone conclusion the amendment will eventually pass two separately elected General Assemblies.

She pointed to how much support the amendment lost in the House since 2011, going from 70 yes votes to 57.

“After this session there’s not much appetite to do this,” Robertson said, noting public sentiment is shifting quickly.

Long conceded the debate about House Joint Resolution 3 “is a distraction, as any high-profile issue is.”

Advertisement