On Election Day, a majority of voters in 11 states wed a new amendment to their respective state's constitution-a definition of marriage that excludes gays and lesbians. When the Wisconsin Legislature reconvenes this January, it will be poised to let the people decide whether the Badger State will be next to say \I do"" to a constitutional amendment that bans same-sex marriage.
But while state legislators prepare themselves for another vitriolic session, it seems the real debate has shifted. No longer is it a question of whether the Republican-controlled Legislature will pass such an amendment-by law the Legislature must pass the amendment for a second time in the upcoming session before the public votes on it-but when it will become a referendum on an election ballot.
""If the people who are proposing [the amendment] delay it until November 2006, it will show very clearly what their real purpose is,"" Rep. Spencer Black, D-Madison, said. ""It would demonstrate for one and all how explicitly a political maneuver this is.""
The popular notion has been that the Republicans, who control the Assembly 60 to 39 and the Senate 19 to 14, would likely place it on the April 2005 ballot. However, Democrats in the Legislature fear the Republicans may use the referendum as a political tool to help win much more than a change to the state's constitution. They could delay the amendment vote until 2006 in an attempt to bring out conservative voters to defeat incumbent Gov. Jim Doyle.
UW-Madison senior sociology lecturer G. Donald Ferree said the state's Republicans would simply be following a model that appears to have succeeded elsewhere, since President Bush won the key swing state of Ohio, a state that approved a same-sex marriage ban on Election Day.
""In some states there were various constitutional amendments on the ballot that might have motivated people who might not have necessarily been motivated to [vote], decide to vote for president,"" Ferree said.
Juliane Appling, executive director of the Family Research Institute of Wisconsin, would like to see the amendment on the ballot as soon as possible.
""We'll do everything that we can to let the people understand how important it is that we preserve traditional marriage and we'll encourage the Legislature to handle this as quickly as they can,"" she said.
Perhaps Appling fears what Ferree acknowledged-it is dangerous to assume public opinion would stay static between now and any future election. The difficulty in gauging the ever-shifting public opinion has spawned strange bedfellows in the debate over which election, April 2005 or November 2006, would be more favorable for which side. Some of the amendment's proponents, like Appling, think the sooner the better, but so do some of the amendment's opponents. Black, for example, wants the amendment to be voted on in April to better protect Doyle's re-election chances.
Sen. Fred Risser, D-Madison, meanwhile, sees a delay as an opportunity to influence public perceptions, even if it means the amendment would be on the same ballot as the governor's race.
""The longer you hold it off, the better chance of educating the public on the subject,"" he said.
Eric Trekell, director of UW-Madison's Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Campus Center, agrees, saying the additional time would help gay rights groups appeal to the public.
""I feel confident the people of Wisconsin are fair-minded people,"" he said. ""If they listen, they'll understand that's it's an extreme amendment that would deny not only the right to marriage but also would abolish basically any domestic partnership statutes.""
Despite Black's wariness of a delay of the referendum, he concedes Risser and Trekell make a strong argument for allowing more time for the public to become aware of the amendment.
""I think the more the public learns this amendment is not strictly about marriage but also it prohibits civil unions, the less likely it is to pass,"" he said.
While optimistic voters can be educated, Risser worries it may have little effect.
""Those who wish to defeat it will face a tough road, because amendments like this have succeeded in a variety of other states,"" he said. ""I would hope that here in Wisconsin there would be an honest discussion.""
