Hearings will be held Thursday on two bills that would repeal New Hampshire's gay marriage law.
House Republican Leader D.J. Bettencourt has said he will ask the Judiciary Committee to keep the bills until next year, but hearings must be held this year under House rules. The committee is expecting a large crowd and has reserved the House chamber for the hearings.
Democratic Gov. John Lynch has said he will veto a repeal bill if it reaches his desk. Republicans hold supermajorities in both the House and Senate which would be enough to override a veto if the GOP caucus was united in repealing gay marriage.
The law has been in effect a little over a year.
Monthly Archives: February 2011
NH bill repealing SSM to receive hearing Thursday
Indiana marriage bill could come to a vote today
According to local FOX59.
Interview: Bishop Cordileone Fights to Save Marriage
From the National Catholic Register:
Q: When we defend marriage between a man and a woman, our opponents say we’re just imposing our religion on everyone else. What’s the answer to that?
Bishop Cordileone: This is not a matter of religion. This is how every society has understood marriage in all of human history. The truth is: They’re imposing their new idea of marriage — an idea no society has ever had before — on everyone else. This is a very serious social experiment that will have dire consequences.
AP: SSM simmers as an issue
Maggie and NOM-RI are featured in this AP story:
Maggie Gallagher, chairwoman of National Organization for Marriage, which opposes same-sex marriage, said her group is working to increase that number by adding Indiana, Wyoming and possibly North Carolina, the only state in the South that does not have such an amendment. In Wyoming, the proposed amendment is heading to the full House after clearing a committee on Tuesday. It has already passed the Senate.
Gallagher said the group hopes it can block legislative efforts to legalize same-sex marriage in Maryland and Rhode Island, as well as in New York, where a similar measure could emerge this year. She said that she doesn't believe there are enough votes in New York to pass potential legislation, and that she's especially hopeful in Maryland, which has a voter referendum process similar to the one in Maine. Voters in that state repealed same-sex marriage in 2009 after legislators approved it.
If the bill is approved, Gallagher said, "the people of Maryland will, like the people of Maine, reverse their legislators' decision."
...The Rhode Island chapter of the National Organization for Marriage has aired TV and radio ads targeting Chafee...
Summary: Maggie's CPAC speech grades
Last weekend Maggie Gallagher rated the speeches made by the top speakers at CPAC, according to how they did on life, marriage and social conservatism.
Here are the grades (each person's name is linked to her full review):
Michelle Bachmann
On Life: D
On Marriage: D
On Social Conservatism: B
Haley Barbour
On Life: A
On Marriage: D
On Social Conservatism: B+
John Bolton
On Life: D
On Marriage: F
On Social Conservatism: D
Mitch Daniels
On Life: D
On Marriage: D+
On Social Conservatism: F
Newt Gingrich
On Life: B+
On Marriage: D
On Social Conservatism: D
Mitch McConnell
On Life: D
On Marriage: D
On Social Conservatism: D+
Tim Pawlenty
On Life: D
On Marriage: D
On Social Conservatism: D+
Mitt Romney
On Life: B
On Marriage: D
On Social Conservatism: D+
Paul Ryan
On Life: B
On Marriage: C-
On Social Conservatism: A
Rick Santorum
On Life: A
On Marriage: A
On Social Conservatism: A+
John Thune
On Life: C+
On Marriage: D+
On Social Conservatism: D+
Donald Trump
Life: C+
Marriage: D
Social conservatism: D
Ambassador John Bolton
It’s not fair to evaluate John Bolton on the social issues. He’s announced he’s thinking of running for one single issue: to call more attention to national security issues, and that’s what he did at CPAC.
Bolton announced he wanted to “shift the focus of attention away from Washington,” but he didn’t mean back to Kansas. He meant places like “Tunisia, Egypt, and today Algeria.”
Algeria? I have to go find out what’s happening while I’m watching CPAC speeches.
He devoted one or two lines in his speech to the need to cut domestic spending and urged that we do not attempt any large cuts to the defense budget.
He has previously told the Daily caller he supports gay marriage. But he didn’t say so today.
Grading John Bolton's speech
On Life: D
On Marriage: F
On Social Conservatism: D
Ken Leaves Barbie for Ben?
The website "Ken and Ben" is an attempt to parody toymaker Mattel's efforts to create a viral campaign centered on Barbie getting back with her (now ex-)boyfriend Ken ... by introducing "Ben" into the mix. The website has Ben saying, "So Barbie wants my doll Ken back, but he is really head over heels in love with me, Ben Collins. So help me win Ken back!"
What do you think? Amusing? Creepy?
Photo: www.kenandben.com
Haley Barbour’s Generosity
I don’t think I’ve ever seen a potential presidential candidate go out of his way to laud the record of one of his most serious potential opponents—but that’s what Haley Barbour just did.
Politics is a team sport, as Grover Norquist likes to say, and Gov. Barbour went out of his way to be an impressive team leader. I said in my last post that Mitch Daniels was the only candidate so far who wants to run on his record. Haley Barbour wants to run not only on his own record as governor, but on that of other Republican governors too.
He singled out three governors (besides himself): Bob McDonnell, Chris Christie and Mitch Daniels:
“I watched Mitch Daniels give Indiana its first balanced budget in 8 years without raising taxes.”
After praising Daniels, Barbour went on to drive a stake into Mitch Daniels' idea that tackling the big fiscal and economic problems requires ignoring the social issues. “Some say that while republican governors were attacking the fiscal and budget issues, we were ignoring social issues, but that’s not right,” he said proudly pointing to the pro-life legislation he shepherded through in Missisippi which he said caused “Americans United for Life to name Mississippi the safest place in America for an unborn child.”
“Governors get elected to solve problems. That’s why you see governors focused on economic problems, budget and spending. That year we passed the pro-life agenda, Mississippi had a $700 million budget shortfall—it took us two years, but we eliminated that deficit without raising anybody’s taxes.”
Haley Barbour has recognized his competitive advantage: he can run on his record in cutting government without raising taxes. And he can run on his pro-life record too.
Right now, Gov. Barbour pointed out "Republicans control only one-half of one-third of the government". He quoted his friend Fred Smith, CEO of Fed-Ex, “'The main thing is to keep the main thing, the main thing.' And the main thing is: electing a Republican president next year.”
Grading Haley Barbour’s speech
On Life: A
On Marriage: D
On Social Conservatism: B+
Mitch Daniels, A Serious Man
I don’t know if you are a fan of the Coen brothers (I am); it was from their 2010 movie “A Serious Man” that I learned that is the literal meaning of the Yiddish word “mensch,” as in “He’s a real mensch!”
And so Indiana’s Gov. Mitch Daniels is.
He gave the keynote address at the CPAC banquet last night honoring Ronald Reagan.
Phyllis Schlafly introduced George Will who introduced Mitch Daniels (a kind of visual iconography of conservative unity that was surely not unintended). George Will said Daniels offered “conservatism for grownups.” (He also called him the “thinking man’s Marlon Brando” who has the “charisma of competence.” Also that Mitch was the only politician he has ever heard make a predestination joke.)
Unlike any other presidential contender so far, Mitch Daniels made a point of running on his record as governor: “I bring greetings from a place called Indiana. We hoosiers hold to some quaint notions. . . we believe in paying our bills, we’ve kept our state in the black. . .by practicing an old tribal ritual: we spend less money than we take in.”
Mitch Daniels’ great theme was the urgent, mathematical need to cut spending seriously—or face a national economic crisis of humongous proportions. He called on all of us to unify around facing what he dubbed “the new Red Menace—this time of red ink.”
(The old Red Menace, for my younger readers, was Communism).
As the greatest generation rose up to defeat Nazism and Communism, he wishes us to rise up to right—our own profligate impulses. Once again he called for a truce on the social issues:
“If a foreign power advanced an army to the border of this nation, everyone in this room would drop everything and look for a way to help. We would set aside all other agendas and disputes as secondary. . . that is what those of us here, and every possible ally we can persuade to join us, are now called to do—it is our generational assignment,” he said.
Again he said “We don’t have a prayer of defeating the Red Threat of our generation without a long boom of almost unprecedented duration. Every other goal, however worthy, must be tested against and often subordinated to actions that spur the faster expansion of the private sector on which all else depends.”
There was no mention of the life issue at all. In fact there was only one hint of care about social issues in his speech—and it was a telling nod, to the importance of “family formation”:
“I urge with great care not to drift into a loss of faith in the American people. In speech after speech, article upon article, we remind each other how many are dependent on government, or how few pay taxes, or how much essential virtues like family formation or civic education have withered. All true. All worrisome. But we must never yield to the self-fulfilling despair that these problems are immutable, or insurmountable ... all great enterprises have a pearl of faith at their core, and this must be ours: that Americans are still a people born to liberty. That they retain the capacity for self-government. That, addressed as free-born, autonomous men and women of God-given dignity, they will rise again to drive back a mortal enemy.”
In his introduction, George Will brought up Gov. Daniels’ views on “social issues”, saying Daniels believes “We divorce too often, and increasingly do not bother with marriage.”
I appreciated George Will raising this, because of course both men are divorced.
But here’s one difference between Mitch Daniels and virtually every other man I know who has ever divorced: Mitch Daniels' wife left him with four girls in Indiana, moved to California, married a surgeon, realized her mistake, re-divorced and Mitch Daniels remarried her.
Like I said, a serious man.
Grading Mitch Daniels' speech
On Life: D
On Marriage: D+
On Social Conservatism: F
Evaluating Tim Pawlenty's Speech
We have right now at CPAC, a parade of midwestern politicians. As I write, in a few minutes Mitch Daniels will give the keynote speech at the banquest honoring Ronald Reagan.
Tim Pawlenty is therefore, almost by definition, just one of many Midwesterners vying for a voice in this presidential season. But his speech was --almost-- a caricature of the Midwestern sensibility.
He's a rock-ribbed Minnesotan from St. Paul, running for office.
God bless him!
I tried to evaluate him on life, marriage and social conservatism, but in this speech at least social conservatism was mostly biography, not policy.
For example:
"Back in the 60s, when I grew up there, it was home to some of the world's largest stockyards and meat-packing plants. Many families in my hometown relied on those big plants for their paychecks, for their family’s well-being and for their future. But those plants shut down, and so did a big part of the spirit and the soul of my hometown.
My mom died when I was 16 and not much longer after that, my dad, who worked for a trucking company, lost his job for awhile. The foundations of my hometown and my family were shaken hard.
At a young age, I saw up close the face of loss, the face of hardship, the face of losing a job and I saw in the mirror the face of a very uncertain future. I know many Americans are feeling that way today. I know that feeling – I’ve lived it.
But in those moments, we learn some things. We see some things. We remember what’s important. One of the most important things that we should always remember is the motto of our country "In God we trust.” And we should stand on that foundation as our founders intended."
He also drew from biography a lot of homespun, elemental wisdom, such as:
"But if you don’t, here’s all you really need to know about government reform. On a given weekend, go to two weddings. Go to one where there's an open bar where the drinks are supposedly free. Then, go to another wedding with a cash bar where people pay for their own drinks. You’ll see very, very different behaviors.
Now, I said this on Wall Street not long ago and somebody said, "Well, who the heck has a cash bar anymore?" That question right there from a Wall Streeter tells you about all you need to know, doesn’t it?"
I think that's the closes he came to a reference to marriage.
I have no doubt that Tim's a good man. His record is pro-life and pro-marriage. But at least in this one speech, he really did not say anything about what he would do to be pro-life, pro-marriage, or a social conservative, as president.
Grading Tim Pawlenty's speech
On Life: D
On Marriage: D
On Social Conservatism: D+
John Thune's Speech at CPAC
Here's the sum total of what Sen. John Thune, a strong pro-life and pro-marriage vote, said about social conservative issues at CPAC:
"My grandfather had three sons, including my father. And he instilled in his boys Midwestern values that my parents, in turn, passed along to me and to my four siblings:
They taught us to live within our means, even if it means going without.
They taught us to help our neighbor and to serve our community, to work hard and to pull our own weight.
They taught us about the importance of family and the value of life.
And they taught us to appreciate our freedom and our liberty - gifts that come from being fortunate enough to live in the greatest nation on earth."
Grading John Thune's speech
On Life: C+
On Marriage: D+
On Social Conservatism: D+
R.I. House speaker says it’s too soon for vote on SSM
From the Providence Journal, more signs that lawmakers are wavering:
After chairing an 8 ½-hour hearing the night before on a proposal to legalize same-sex marriage in Rhode Island, House Judiciary Chairwoman Edith Ajello was hoping on Thursday to have her committee vote on the bill next week.
“The next logical step would be a committee vote,” said Ajello on the day after the hearing that drew hundreds of people on both sides of the deep divide to the State House for a high-pitched rally and hearing. “I would hope that it would be next week,” she said.
But the state’s openly gay House Speaker Gordon D. Fox, who along with Ajello is a cosponsor of this year’s same-sex marriage legislation, said next week is “too soon” to bring the issue to a vote.
“I think next week is premature.” Fox said in an interview. [source]
Who is for people power? Jerry Brown or Prop. 8 sponsors?
Harold Johnson and Damien Schiff in the San Fran Chronicle:
The issue before the state Supreme Court -- the Prop. 8 "standing" issue -- goes to the heart of the initiative process, its viability and future.
And the outcome should concern you, no matter where you come down on Prop. 8. If sponsors of a successful initiative -- any initiative -- aren't permitted to step up and defend it in court, even when elected officials stand back and refuse to put on a defense of their own, then the "political power inherent in the people" will have suffered a roundhouse blow.
The initiative process -- which was put in place to give voters a route around the politicians -- will be put at the mercy of politicians' whims and ideologies.
What the Collapse of Marriage Means for Children
The decline of marriage in recent years not only signals trouble for the men and women missing out on the stability of the institution; it can also threaten the future success of children born outside the economic protection of marriage. The 41 percent of children born in the U.S. to never-married mothers are at a higher risk of experiencing poverty at some point in their lifetimes than are those born to married parents.

New Brief: "Majority of Courts Reject Right to SSM"
A new IMAPP policy brief by William C. Duncan concludes the majority of courts, as well as the majority of Americans, have rejected the idea that same-sex marriage is a right. For a summary of court decisions over the last decade, click here or go to www.marriagedebate.com.