Globe columnist Adrian Walker complains this morning of the backroom dealing that has been the hallmark of this multi-part constitutional convention:
At this point, the issue of gay marriage has been debated ad nauseum…. by now there’s a limited amount left to say.
So what we are left with is nothing but a mind-numbing shell game. What will the House Republicans do? Who will vote for Travaglini-Finneran only to vote against it later? Who on earth has any idea who’s winning? Or even what’s going on?
I don’t profess any special knowledge about this insider game, but anyone invested in the outcome this week can’t help but reflect on what’s really going on at the State House. As of now - at least according to Globe updates - the convention is in recess after procedural discussion of whether Senate president Travaglini has the authority to determine the order of amendments to be voted on. The convention reaffirmed his authority on the matter, but the motion does show some legislators’ anger at the president’s management of the convention (from the Globe’s analysis piece: “Critics from both parties, such as House Minority Leader Bradley H. Jones Jr. or House Ways and Means Vice Chairman Peter J. Larkin, contend that Travaglini has acted like former Senate president Thomas M. Birmingham, who in 2002 shut down the first constitutional debate over gay marriage to prevent a ban from being passed.”).
Last week I’d wondered if Finneran thinks he has enough votes for a straight-no-chaser DoMA amendment. A scenario I’m finding more likely is that he is feeling the resentment among anti-gay-marriage legislators who felt they were taken for a ride by MassEquality’s two-votes-yes-third-vote-no strategy. They’d entered the compromise in the hope of getting something on a referendum and became part of a political ruse.
So expect the anti-gay folks to be playing hardball today. And keep your eye on the middle shell.
No comments have been added to this post yet.