March 27, 2009

Ross concerned with legislative process
on domestic partnership policies

The House Judiciary Committee yesterday passed a measure to expand the rights and responsibilities of domestic partnerships in Washington. Rep. Charles Ross, R-Naches, voted against the measure, and offered amendments to address concerns raised by constituents.

Senate Bill 5688 would allow domestic partners be treated the same as married couples in the law.

Ross authored two amendments on the proposal. One would require that parents give consent before their children enter into any publicly-funded class or activity regarding opposite or same-sex relationships.

"In the public hearing, I sensed fear from folks about what could be taught to their children, and if that would conflict with their family's beliefs or ideologies," Ross said. "The most fair thing we can do is to recognize both sides of this issue and inform parents about what their children are reading and discussing in school."

Another amendment sponsored by Ross "recognizes the Legislature's policy against same-sex marriages and that nothing in the act is intended to, or shall be, construed to promote or endorse same-sex marriage."

Ross points to the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) which was approved by the Legislature in 1998, vetoed by the governor and overridden by a two-thirds vote in both houses.

He said calls and e-mails he has received from constituents in his district this year have been overwhelmingly opposed to unions outside that of a man and a woman.

"My office has counted about six people contacting me in support of the bill, compared with 52 contacting me in opposition to the bill," Ross said. "I'm voting with my district, and my conscience, which tells me this should be decided by a majority vote of the people, not the powerful Seattle-centric Legislature."

Ross voted in favor of attaching a referendum clause to the bill, requiring the provisions in it to be sent to a vote of the people. The amendment failed.

"Sending a referendum to the people is the wisest thing we could do with this question," Ross said. "It would give us an opportunity to have an open statewide discussion, outside the marble halls of Olympia, to find out what the public wants. If we put this to a vote of the people and they support gay marriage, then that would be a direct reflection of the will of the people."

Proponents of the bill argued that they were sent to Olympia to represent the will of the people.

"It's interesting that the majority believes they need to vote for the people as their representatives on this bill, but when we hear talk of tax increases they want to punt that decision to the voters," Ross said.

The 111-page bill makes changes in dozens of places throughout the Revised Code of Washington (RCW). In the meeting, Ross asked one member who supports the bill if the same result could have been accomplished by re-defining marriage.

The prime sponsor responded that a two-page bill would have accomplished the same thing with regard to rights and privileges of those in domestic partnerships. When Ross asked why the sponsors did not try to change the definition of marriage, the prime sponsor responded that there has not been consensus for gay marriage.

"It's time for an honest conversation about the intent of these domestic partnership expansions. The prime sponsor knows there is not enough support for gay marriage and that the majority party must push this through on a technicality," Ross said. "The majority is setting up our state for a court challenge to overturn DOMA. People in public hearings have expressed their frustration that the process over the years has been very sneaky. I would bet when we vote on this legislation on the House floor it will be a creature of the night that does not see the light of day."

Ross explained that before the first floor deadline a couple weeks ago, several bills were passed out in the late hours of the night which hampered detailed media coverage or public viewing. The House began floor debate on House Bills 1402, 1393 and 1517 after 8:30 p.m. and ended as late at midnight due to their controversial nature.

The Senate approved Senate Bill 5688 by a vote of 30-18 on March 10. The bill will now be considered by the House Rules Committee for a full House vote before the last day of session, April 26.

# # #

For more information, contact:  Sarah Lamb, Public Information Officer - (360) 786-7720