Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

One way or another, you’re gonna have to wait

Posted in:

Illinois

* I can totally understand why some folks want to try and pass the gay marriage bill next week. They’ve worked hard, and they want to finally know who’s with them and who’s against them.

But if you’re a gay couple eager to get married as soon as possible, then waiting until January to hold a vote is a better option.

Why? Well, there’s no way the bill could get three-fifths in both chambers next week, but three-fifths is a constitutional requirement for any bill with an immediate effective date. A bill requiring a simple majority with an immediate effective date can only be approved after the first of the year. Passing an amended bill now means waiting until next June for the law to take effect.

* So, if you’re more into politics, making a “statement” and revenge, then go ahead and keep pushing for a vote next week without knowing whether you have enough votes to pass it. The risk, of course, is that the bill might actually be defeated and won’t come back for a floor vote until well after next year’s election. Maybe you’re feeling lucky. If so, go ahead and roll the dice. Just know that your bill won’t become law for seven more months.

If, on the other hand, you want gay marriage to be the law of the land as soon as possible, then all you have to do is wait to call the vote until January, or even after the March primary.

* Meanwhile, as you’ll recall, Springfield Bishop John Paprocki claimed some marriage equality supporters intended to stage a “loud” action at one of his churches last week, so he banned them from the grounds…

The Rainbow Sash Movement has encouraged Roman Catholics to come to Springfield to “have a loud Catholic presence for marriage equality.” They have announced plans to gather at the Cathedral of the Immaculate Conception at 4:30 p.m. just before the 5:15 p.m. Mass to stand in the Cathedral and indicate that they are there to pray the rosary for “marriage equality.”

It is blasphemy to show disrespect or irreverence to God or to something holy. Since Jesus clearly taught that marriage as created by God is a sacred institution between a man and a woman (see Matthew 19:4-6 and Mark 10:6-9), praying for same-sex marriage should be seen as blasphemous and as such will not be permitted in the cathedral.

People wearing a rainbow sash or who otherwise identify themselves as affiliated with the Rainbow Sash Movement will not be admitted into the cathedral and anyone who gets up to pray for same-sex marriage in the cathedral will be asked to leave.

Of course, our cathedral and parish churches are always open to everyone who wishes to repent their sins and ask for God’s forgiveness. [Emphasis added.]

* Springfield radio commentator Jim Leach strongly supports gay marriage, but he also sees Paprocki’s side…

The people who sought to stage such demonstrations are not helping their cause and are lending credence to one of the biggest allegations of their opponents. The anti-marriage-equality crowd sees the movement as a threat to their freedom to worship as they see fit. They are sure that allowing same-sex marriage is just the first step toward requiring them to modify their dogma to conform to political correctness. An absurd fear, to be sure – but protestors who seek to disrupt Mass or demand changes in Catholic orthodoxy make it seem far less absurd.

There are plenty of reasons to object to the bishop’s views and plenty of appropriate venues to do so. But a Roman Catholic cathedral during Mass is not one of them.

The bishop was correct to protect the sanctity of his church and to defend the legitimacy of its teachings. Just as religious freedom does not give the bishop the right to deny equal rights to gay couples, neither does it give marriage-equality proponents the right to deny the bishop and his followers the right to their own beliefs.

If you disagree with his view, you may wish to seek out a church that doesn’t see loving gay couples as “evil incarnate.” But if marriage equality supporters want Bishop Paprocki and others like him to live and let live, we have to be willing to do the same.

* Greg Hinz also weighed in…

To the extent anyone was going to disrupt services—I know of no evidence of that—the bishop was perfectly correct.

* Greg is right that there is little to no evidence of that intent. The Rainbow Sash folks did, indeed, say they planned to have a loud presence at the rally itself…

The Rainbow Sash Movement is organizing for the March on Springfield. We are encouraging Roman Catholics in the Parishes who support Marriage Equality to join us in Springfield so we can have loud Catholic Presence for Marriage Equality.

* But the object of the organizers at the church was to pray in silence…

The Rainbow Sash Movement is calling for silent prayer to begin 4:30PM just before the 5:15PM Mass at the Cathedral of the Immaculate Conception. A rosary for Marriage Equality will be said in silence. By standing up in the Cathedral you will indicate you are there to pray the rosary for Marriage Equality. Let us come together as a spiritual family in prayer after the March.

* A subsequent statement from the Rainbow Sash group…

The Rainbow Sash Movement event was to be a silent rosary to be held in the Cathedral of the Immaculate Conception at 4:30PM in Springfield,. This would take place after the March for Gay Marriage in Springfield on October 22. We wanted this to begin prior to the 5:15 Mass at the Cathedral. The silent rosary would take about 10 minutes to say those present were invited to stand at 4:30PM and begin the mental recitation of the Rosary which would end at 4:40PM.

While the Bishop Paprocki’s statement was alienating and threatening to Catholic laypeople who support Marriage Equality, such as the Governor and other supportive Catholic politicians the Rainbow Sash Movement firmly believes the Church is more than brick and mortar.

How Bishop Paprocki could misrepresent this event in such a manner only points to a man who is clueless. His statement was both uncalled for and most certainly not in the spirit of Pope Francis general tone that we should stop obsessing about such matters.

The only charitable thing that can be said about the Bishops hysterical response is that it is misinformed, and I am sure most reasonable people would agree with that.

It is our opinion, his statement to the press should be challenged because of his misrepresentation of the facts. It was never our intention to either wear Rainbow Sashes at the 5:15PM Mass, nor were we going to wear them at the Rosary for Gay Marriage. The primary reason we called for this ancient prayer of the Church to be said is because October is also the month of the Rosary around the Catholic World, and we thought this prayer was appropriate in this setting.

posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Oct 30, 13 @ 11:52 am

Comments

Completely disagree with you on the timing, Rich. Call the bill next week. In January, there will be some other excuse not to call it. Legislators will say, “Wait ’til after my primary.” It’s time.

Comment by Roland the Headless Thompson Gunner Wednesday, Oct 30, 13 @ 12:04 pm
Roland: On my calendar January 2014 and March 2014 both come before June 2014.

Comment by SAP Wednesday, Oct 30, 13 @ 12:06 pm
- Roland the Headless Thompson Gunner -,

Umk, you don’t call a Bill that will “fail” and then say, “it’s time.”

Ask Heather “Vote Countula” Steans about it being “time” to call any Bill, unless you want to look foolish and lacking the understanding of what it takes to … pass … a Bill.

“It’s time”, when you get to 60, and know you got 60.

Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Oct 30, 13 @ 12:06 pm
And then there’s Pope Francis, who invited a prominent atheist into the Vatican, embraced him, then engaged in a dialogue with him on their respective beliefs.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/on-faith/wp/2013/10/01/key-quotes-from-pope-francis-interview-with-atheist-journalist-stop-vatican-centric-thinking/

Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Oct 30, 13 @ 12:11 pm
=But if marriage equality supporters want Bishop Paprocki and others like him to live and let live, we have to be willing to do the same.=

That seems to be appropriate. As I’ve said before: Sometimes, freedom is no more and no less than being able to get up and walk away from something that does not suit you.

Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Oct 30, 13 @ 12:18 pm
Taking the path that leads to the earliest adoption of the law is the correct way to do this.

I’ve said it here before (and many others have said it elsewheere), but since the DOMA decision, every day Illinois discriminates against same sex couples, there is a quantifiable harm being done. The goal is and should be to cease that harm as soon as possible.

Comment by Served Wednesday, Oct 30, 13 @ 12:30 pm
If the excuse for not calling it now is “it will not pass,” that’s a valid excuse. Going down valiantly in defeat is fine for warriors who think it will get them into Klingon heaven. It’s terrible as a strategy for passing landmark legislation.

Comment by OldSmoky2 Wednesday, Oct 30, 13 @ 12:34 pm
These games of Faith “Chicken” do nothing to enhance the chances of this bill passing. Since there’s loudness on both sides, I suspect little has changed since the last time the bill was not called. OW is right. You only call it when you have 60. Anything else is an exercise in futility. If there’s a moral victory to losing and getting people on the record, it’s sure lost on me. The scorecard looks to be pretty well defined with a little more work to go. No political apparel; T shirts, Rainbows, caps, arm bands, etc. belong in a place of worship. This crew could be ruining it for the cause. There are some very thoughtful Reps who may be forced into choosing against their faith on this. Shoving it down their throats and insulting their church isn’t going to help. You can say the rosary anywhere. I know. I do.

Comment by A guy... Wednesday, Oct 30, 13 @ 12:39 pm
== “It’s time”, when you get to 60, and know you got 60. ==

Given how unreliable the word of some representatives is, it’s best to have more than 60 to account for the last-second flipper.

Comment by reformer Wednesday, Oct 30, 13 @ 12:48 pm
It’s time for a chill-pill.

Comment by Belle Wednesday, Oct 30, 13 @ 12:49 pm
I hate waiting until January, but if people who would vote yes then but present now need to wait, then we have to wait.

Comment by Chavez-respecting Obamist Wednesday, Oct 30, 13 @ 12:58 pm
What is the damage if they call it this week and only get 56?

Is it a mortal defeat that energizes the anti-s? Does it let everyone know where everybody is? Does it give an advantage to one side or the other in organizing for the primary?

I’m genuinely asking. I’m a supporter, and my first reaction is similar to the “they’ll just find another excuse in January” sentiment. There must be something I’m not considering, however.

Comment by LincolnLounger Wednesday, Oct 30, 13 @ 1:32 pm
===What is the damage if they call it this week and only get 56?===

Legislators who wanted to wait may lock themselves into a “No” vote, meaning you’ve pushed people into hard opposition and then you may have to wait until a new GA is sworn in (January, 2015) for another try.

Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Oct 30, 13 @ 1:37 pm
Well, arguably the downside of waiting is that they could lose in January and at that point, it would be too late to punish those legislators who voted no.

However, since IL Unites is generally incompetent and doesn’t seem to be doing much to prepare to punish the anti legislators in primary and general elections anyway, then I suppose it does make sense to wait until January. If they lose in January, they won’t be able to inflict any punishment, but since they are not taking steps to do that anyway, nothing would be lost.

It is very strange b/c inflicting some electoral punishment on anti-gay marriage Dems was what broke the logjam and won the day in at least 3 states.

Comment by Richard Wednesday, Oct 30, 13 @ 1:46 pm
As certain t-baggers should have learned, politics is the art of the possible. If it ain’t possible, don’t do it.

Comment by D.P.Gumby Wednesday, Oct 30, 13 @ 1:53 pm
It is an exercise in futility to call it without the 60.
If they vote yes and get a primary opponent, where is the assurance the gay community will be truly on their side?
Have Rep Sullivan and Sandack seen foot soldiers for their petition drives from the gay community. Has the community come out for them at their fundraisers and committed hours to get them through their primary.
Checks don’t make the grade when the other side will have bodies at the doors.
Similarly in the African-American communities, have Rep Mitchell and Dunkin seen walkers, door knockers and phone banks touting their re-election bids? We all know the preachers will put out soldiers to hit the streets.
Seems to me there needs to be more responsibility to take up the banner of those that support you instead of bashing the ones who don’t?
Haven’t heard one commentator throughout this entire debate over the past year say that they will work tirelessly to get people who support reelected? Have only heard how they will throw people out of office who oppose them.

Comment by The DuPage Bard Wednesday, Oct 30, 13 @ 2:10 pm
I wish the bill could be passed in November, but I fear it can not. And while I understand wanting to try to bring pressure against the those who oppose on religious grounds, personally I believe the better tactic - because those confrontations do not change minds, only harden opposition - is to emphasize the civil nature of this bill, and the fact that Illinois would be denying equality to its residents after the judicial demise of DOMA. You won’t change the minds of those at the extremes, so you’ve got to persuade those in the middle. I don’t want to bring it and lose, even in an attempt to pin down opponents. Let it wait until January when you might be able to get some votes from people who are afraid of being primaried.

Comment by Archiesmom Wednesday, Oct 30, 13 @ 2:12 pm
Just an observation Dupage Bard, I’m not sure the SSM group has established ground soldiers. Their support seems to have been more monetary than organizational to date. Maybe that’s what Sullivan and Sandack prefer. SSM isn’t the first thing on most people’s mind at the doorstep and both these guys might appreciate that. It’s just one of several positions they’ve taken. The fiscal stuff is a lot more important to people in the burbs.

Comment by A guy... Wednesday, Oct 30, 13 @ 2:28 pm
- Richard -,

Pretty ignorant about Illinois. Illinois is not 3 other states, ask the Equal Rights Amendment supporters.

Also, keep with the “punishment” bit and you will never get to 60. The “Madigan Rules” dictate that protecting the Majority is the Priority, not votes on SSM.

Learn.

Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Oct 30, 13 @ 2:33 pm
===it would be too late to punish those legislators who voted no.===

I’d really like to see a list of House Democrats y’all think you could beat in a primary.

Seriously, get me a list.

So far, the only credible threats that have been issued are about the legislators who support the bill, including the sponsor. And if you want to punish him you’re a member of the Moron Club.

Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Oct 30, 13 @ 2:37 pm
Also, as far as punishment goes, you already know who some of the hard Dem “No” votes are. People like Mary Flowers, Monique Davis, John Bradley, Jerry Costello, Eddie Lee jackson, Frank Mautino, Rita Mayfield, Brandon Phelps, Sue Scherer, Pat Verschoore and on and on and on.

Have you lined up a single candidate - primary or general - against any of those legislators yet?

Hello?

Anybody there?

Bueller?

Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Oct 30, 13 @ 2:44 pm
Can’t beat somebody with NObody.

Just saying

Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Oct 30, 13 @ 3:00 pm
Thank you for presenting both sides regarding the gathering outside of the Springfield cathedral. Bishop Paprocki formerly served in Chicago and he is in no doubt familiar with the “protests” led by Andy Thayer and others outside of Holy Name Cathedral.

Paprocki is a well educated clergyman with a law degree. He is also an orthodox Catholic.

Comment by Anon Wednesday, Oct 30, 13 @ 3:10 pm
As I am sure Rich has also heard, there is serious talk of delaying the effective date and calling the bill next week. Why? Legislators on both sides are sick and tired of this issue and just want it to go away. The best way to make that happen is to pass it with a delayed effective date and move on. If that happens it looks like there will be lots of June weddings next year!

Comment by Jaded Wednesday, Oct 30, 13 @ 3:31 pm
I have pretty much come to believe that it will take the courts to remedy the situation, and maybe that’s what some particular people are waiting for (rather than taking tough votes.)

I did agree with Richard re: Illinois Unites for Marriage. Any hope that a well-funded coalition with everybody playing nice could get this done is dashed. The lack of communication, strategy, effective fundraising, and cohesion has been astonishing in a state that boasts plenty of talent.

Comment by LincolnLounger Wednesday, Oct 30, 13 @ 3:40 pm
===As I am sure Rich has also heard, there is serious talk of delaying the effective date and calling the bill next week===

That’s what this post was all about.

Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Oct 30, 13 @ 3:41 pm
Of course, the GA could obtain an almost unanimous and bipartisan vote by passing a bill to place the question on the ballot for a public referendum and allowing the voters to decide.

It will never happen for practical political reasons. Governor Quinn would not want the question submitted to the voters nor would the party leaders. The SSM proponents could not run the risk of their pollsters being wrong either. Support for SSM may well have been overstated in the samples.

If SSM was rejected at the polls in liberal California, its prospects would be somewhat suspect in the Heartland too. Nationally, SSM has been routinely defeated when the voters weighed in.

In Illinois, it is going to be handled by the GA or the courts. The voting public is not going to be allowed to decide this question.

Comment by Popularity Sovereignty Wednesday, Oct 30, 13 @ 3:55 pm
** The voting public is not going to be allowed to decide this question.**

Putting civil rights up to a public vote is rarely a good idea.

Do you also think that we should have put school desegregation up to a public vote? The Civil Rights Act?

Comment by dave Wednesday, Oct 30, 13 @ 4:08 pm
It seems like the idea is to wait until after the primary filing date and a majority will appear from suddenly safe legislators with just a little lobbying. What is plan B if that doesn’t work? I’m asking that seriously. Would the plan be to hope some R seats switch to D and wait until 2015? Or, just hope the courts at some level take care of it and let all the House members off the hook?

Comment by From MN Wednesday, Oct 30, 13 @ 4:30 pm
=== What is plan B if that doesn’t work?===

March, then May, then whenever.

If it doesn’t have the votes, it doesn’t have the votes. You cannot just wish it so.

Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Oct 30, 13 @ 4:33 pm
===You cannot just wish it so.===

I would like for those jumping up and down screaming to talk to those who were part of the ERA votes and trying to get a social issue passed and it not passing.

Legislation is not something you “hope” happens. Legislation needs to be “worked” and votes harvested and when the vote is ripe, you vote.

Nothing is guaranteed, and nothing is “Required” to pass.

Legislation passed is not intitled. “Well, we deserve it, and they are required to give it”.

Doesn’t work that way, never worked that way.

Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Oct 30, 13 @ 4:44 pm
==The voting public is not going to be allowed to decide this question. ==

Nor should it.

Comment by Demoralized Wednesday, Oct 30, 13 @ 5:03 pm
I guess what I was asking for with “plan B” is, if you don’t have the votes, how do you get the votes. If lobbying and waiting for a better time doesn’t get the votes, the only way is through elections. If primarying is out, then you need to switch R seats to D seats in a midterm election for a D president.

If, next week, by some magic, you do get 60 votes (or whatever additional margin seems safe) through lobbying, then call the vote even if it results in a later effective date. Take the bird in the hand - by March, a legislator could change their mind back or resign from a scandal or die. And, the difference in effective date isn’t that much compared to March. (The big difference is between one calendar year and the next for things like income taxes.)

If you don’t have the votes, then there is nothing to be gained by calling a vote and everything to be lost. And please, don’t wait until the last second with a Capitol full of people with tshirts and signs to call off the vote. A big rally is not going to change someone’s vote at the last minute, you are just jerking your supporters around if you give them false hope and you don’t have the votes.

Comment by From MN Wednesday, Oct 30, 13 @ 5:23 pm
I wonder how the New Jersey court ruling factors into the calculations of House Dems, if at all.

New Jersey got gay marriage via the Courts because the Courts found that their civil unions violated equal protection by not being the same thing as marriage. I find it hard to believe this same result would not eventually come about in the Illinois courts as well. The question is just if you are going to make gay couples wait for the Courts to step in or pass this legislatively and get it over with.

Comment by hisgirlfriday Wednesday, Oct 30, 13 @ 7:11 pm
Friday,
There is already pending 12CH19178, Darby v. Orr, in Cook County. But it won’t be decided before the end of veto session, or likely before the middle of 2014.

Comment by DaveM Thursday, Oct 31, 13 @ 11:53 am