Gronstal rules out same-sex marriage debate

DES MOINES –The Senate's top Democrat said Monday he won't let the same-sex marriage issue be debated this session – a position the top GOP leader decried as obstructionist.

“I have no intention of taking it up,” said Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstal, D-Council Bluffs. “I'm not going to put discrimination in the state Constitution. It's just a horrible idea.”

Gronstal said the Iowa Supreme Court ruled last week that a state law defining marriage as only between one man and one woman violated equal protection guarantees for all people. To follow that with a resolution to amend the Constitution with a one-man, one-woman marriage amendment would be adding an “except” to that equal protection clause.

“I think that's unacceptable,” said Gronstal, who added that he was “not inclined” to move the constitutional amendment legislation forward during the 2010 session either.

Senate GOP Leader Paul McKinley of Chariton said what is unacceptable is the fact that “seven elites” on the Supreme Court were able to enact a major change in social policy that should be rightfully decided by a direct vote of the people.

“I believe the final arbiters of this important issue should be the people of Iowa,” he said. “Iowa is a sovereign state and I will accept the will of the people but we will not know the will of the people until a vote of the people is taken, and it is wrong for Sen. Gronstal to deny that vote.”

Senate President Jack Kibbie, D-Emmetsburg, said he would like to see the issue go to a vote of the people, but added the General Assembly won't deal with the constitutional amendment proposal any more this session. He did not rule out the possibility of the issue coming up in 2010.

Rep. Dwayne Alons, R-Hull, who co-sponsored a resolution seeking to amend the Constitution to recognize only one-man, one-woman marriage, urged Democratic legislative leaders to let the issue come to a vote this year.

“I think we should keep pressing the issue that the people of the state should have a say-so in this and they really are part of the constitutional process. So unless the Legislature acts, this cannot be put into the hands of the people,” Alons said.

However, House Speaker Pat Murphy, D-Dubuque, has indicated he would consider any attempt to offer the resolution for a constitutional amendment to be out of order procedurally this year.

To change the Iowa Constitution requires a resolution to be adopted in the exact same form by the House and the Senate of two consecutive General Assemblies before the issue would go before voters for ratification. The earliest such a resolution would clear that process would be the 2011 session.

Another option that has emerged would be for voters to agree to convene a wide-ranging constitutional convention when the issue comes before them on the November 2010 ballot – an issue that by law appears on the ballot every 10 years.

Steve Davis, a Judicial Branch spokesman, said state court officials received “significantly more” Web page contacts after the 69-page, unanimous ruling was issued Friday morning.

“The majority of them are civil, both for and against the ruling,” he said. “There were quite a few phone calls. We were prepared for that. It wasn't overwhelming -- some people calling and saying thank you and others who were calling to say they were disappointed. They just wanted to express their opinions and we listened.”