Senate fights over rules during same-sex marriage debate

The effort to bring a constitutional amendment on marriage before the voters of Iowa is coming down to a procedural fight over Senate rules.

Majority Republicans in the Iowa House are expected to pass a measure calling for a referendum on a constitutional ban of same-sex marriage. But Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstal, D-Council Bluffs, has indicated he does not plan to bring the issue up for floor debate in a chamber steeped in tradition where rules are rarely suspended to force floor debates on hot-button issues against the wishes of majority-party leaders.

This year minority Republicans appear willing to use existing rules to at least force a Senate vote on the procedures that could be employed to bring the marriage before the 50-member body – a situation that has caused majority Democrats to implement changes that Gronstal said would put in place implicitly what has been the “unwritten rules and tradition” for at least 40 years that senators don't seek to suspend rules or override a decision of the presiding officer.

However, Sen. Merlin Bartz, R-Grafton, said it is majority Democrats that are attempting to alter Senate rules to avoid dealing with the marriage amendment, while Sen. Kent Sorenson, R-Indianola, a newly elected senator who moved from the House – where representatives regularly hold votes to suspend House rules – said he is determined to force a vote in some manner this session to get senators on the record as to whether they are willing to advance the marriage issue.

All 24 GOP senators have co-sponsored a resolution calling for a constitutional amendment to declaring “marriage between one man and one woman shall be the only legal union valid or recognized in this state” that is the same version as House Joint Resolution 6. Sorenson said no Democrats signed on but several have expressed support for allowing Iowans to vote whether to amend the state constitution to include the marriage language.

“The real battle on the marriage issue could well be when we debate the rules,” he said, which could occur on Thursday or early next week. “I assure you one way or another we're going to get a vote, even if I have to overrule the ruling of the chair, which I'm told has never been done in the Senate. I'll do that if I have to.

“We will get a vote one way or another. I'm sure the Democrats will spin it that that's not a vote, it's a procedural vote, but the people of Iowa are very knowledgeable and understand this process,” Sorenson added. “Either they're going to let the people have a vote or they're going to be voted out in two years.”

Sorenson said he had planned to use a Senate rule that designates the presiding offer to designate bills received from the House to a Senate committee unless otherwise ordered by the Senate, but Democrats have proposed changes that Bartz and Sorenson say would circumvent that effort.