Mass. Constitutional Convention (Feb.2004)

Constitutional Convention (Thursday, Feb. 12, 2004)

«Previous Page · 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 · Next Page»

Rep. Kelly continued: You can go home and placate groups and spin it any way you want. The longer we stay in session, I think we are hurting ourselves. There is respect in adjourning. I move to adjourn.

Time was 12:45 pm.

Sen. Travaglini said there is no debate. We will go immediately to a roll call.

THE SENATE VOTE WAS 16-23.

THE HOUSE VOTE WAS 28-130

BY A ROLL CALL VOTE OF 44-153, MOTION TO ADJOURN REJECTED

Question again came on the Travis amendment. Time was 12:58 pm.

Sen. Barrios said it is a pleasure to see you here today thriving in your first convention Mr. President. Thank you Mr. Speaker for your hospitality. I enjoyed my four years here and it is a pleasure to come back.

Sen. Wilkerson said she is having trouble hearing. Sen. Travaglini said please, take your seats and subdue your conversations.

Sen. Barrios said we are talking about quite a historic event. We meet in convention every session. There are nine or ten other questions we should be debating during this session. What is special about today and what has attracted all of us to prepare speeches and listen to our colleagues, is an unprecedented event in history should it be successful. For the first time since 1780, we would amend our constitution to set up a two-tiered structure. On May 17 all of us will have the same rights, and protections and benefits of marriage. What this constitution will do is take away rights, benefits and protections. We are denying protections to a certain class of citizens. I am biased. You are all thinking that. He is up there because he is gay. I am the first person to speak on this who is directly affected by it. We will lose inheritance benefits, health care as a state employee and numerous financial benefits. My two children are also affected by this, Nathaniel and Javier, as well as my partner Doug. I will let some other people speak for me. You have a document from me. To refresh your memory, the words and details do matter. I ask you to read again the amendment before you. In California, a Supreme Court amendment in 2000 that the public voted on was not a long one. It was simple and direct. Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid and recognized in California. Many of us said we will lose domestic partnership benefits and we won’t be able to do civil unions. Proponents who said no rights would be lost went to court and cited the constitution and said Proposition 22 was intended to protect the institution of marriage, including all rights and benefits and duties of marriage. They appealed domestic partnership ordinances and a domestic partnership or civil union statute. In attempting to appeal that, they became liars. In Philadelphia, it is constitutionally barred to pass any local protection, any domestic partnership or civil union law or a law to allow you to visit your partner in a hospital. That is what DOMA does. You can call it super or simple DOMA or whatever you want. Don’t fool yourself about what you are voting for. This will deny basic rights that many of you might not understand are rights which you have. The other day, two weeks ago, the two boys we recently adopted, the younger one became sick. They are 7 and 12. It was our first serious illness. I was taken aback. I didn’t listen to him as seriously as I should have. I thought he just didn’t want to go to school. He had a fever and we brought him home.

«Previous Page · 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 · Next Page»


Home > Local News > Constitutional Convention Transcripts
Pictures and Photos Local News Constitutional Convention Transcripts Username Password	Constitutional Convention (Thursday, Feb. 12, 2004) «Previous Page · 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 · Next Page» Rep. Kelly continued: You can go home and placate groups and spin it any way you want. The longer we stay in session, I think we are hurting ourselves. There is respect in adjourning. I move to adjourn. Time was 12:45 pm. Sen. Travaglini said there is no debate. We will go immediately to a roll call. THE SENATE VOTE WAS 16-23. THE HOUSE VOTE WAS 28-130 BY A ROLL CALL VOTE OF 44-153, MOTION TO ADJOURN REJECTED Question again came on the Travis amendment. Time was 12:58 pm. Sen. Barrios said it is a pleasure to see you here today thriving in your first convention Mr. President. Thank you Mr. Speaker for your hospitality. I enjoyed my four years here and it is a pleasure to come back. Sen. Wilkerson said she is having trouble hearing. Sen. Travaglini said please, take your seats and subdue your conversations. Sen. Barrios said we are talking about quite a historic event. We meet in convention every session. There are nine or ten other questions we should be debating during this session. What is special about today and what has attracted all of us to prepare speeches and listen to our colleagues, is an unprecedented event in history should it be successful. For the first time since 1780, we would amend our constitution to set up a two-tiered structure. On May 17 all of us will have the same rights, and protections and benefits of marriage. What this constitution will do is take away rights, benefits and protections. We are denying protections to a certain class of citizens. I am biased. You are all thinking that. He is up there because he is gay. I am the first person to speak on this who is directly affected by it. We will lose inheritance benefits, health care as a state employee and numerous financial benefits. My two children are also affected by this, Nathaniel and Javier, as well as my partner Doug. I will let some other people speak for me. You have a document from me. To refresh your memory, the words and details do matter. I ask you to read again the amendment before you. In California, a Supreme Court amendment in 2000 that the public voted on was not a long one. It was simple and direct. Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid and recognized in California. Many of us said we will lose domestic partnership benefits and we won’t be able to do civil unions. Proponents who said no rights would be lost went to court and cited the constitution and said Proposition 22 was intended to protect the institution of marriage, including all rights and benefits and duties of marriage. They appealed domestic partnership ordinances and a domestic partnership or civil union statute. In attempting to appeal that, they became liars. In Philadelphia, it is constitutionally barred to pass any local protection, any domestic partnership or civil union law or a law to allow you to visit your partner in a hospital. That is what DOMA does. You can call it super or simple DOMA or whatever you want. Don’t fool yourself about what you are voting for. This will deny basic rights that many of you might not understand are rights which you have. The other day, two weeks ago, the two boys we recently adopted, the younger one became sick. They are 7 and 12. It was our first serious illness. I was taken aback. I didn’t listen to him as seriously as I should have. I thought he just didn’t want to go to school. He had a fever and we brought him home. «Previous Page · 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 · Next Page»