Massachusetts Liberal Elites Ignoring the Rules

In Massachusetts the process to amend the Constitution is a cumbersome one, as it should be, but the rules are pretty clearly laid out. Once citizens obtain the required signatures for a constitutional amendment, the legislature is required to vote on it, and if that amendment receives the support of 50 legislatures two years in a row, it can then go to the voters as a whole for a final up or down vote.

There is an amendment banning gay marriage that has received 170,000 signatures from Massachusetts voters and is now awaiting the required vote, but the liberal elites in the legislature have decided to use unconstitutional means to stop the amendment. They are simply refusing to vote on it.

Jeff Jacoby has the whole story and sums it up this way:

Some members brag openly about their plans to flout the Constitution. ``Legislators won't be hiding in Oklahoma," House majority leader John Rogers told Bay Windows, a leading gay newspaper. ``In fact, they'll be standing right in front of the State House steps, probably singing freedom songs and hugging one another in plain sight, not cowering." And by the way, Rogers added -- whether from ignorance or fraudulence isn't clear -- ``that is perfectly acceptable as constitutional behavior."

Those intoxicated with their own moral superiority often find it easy to believe that it is ``perfectly acceptable" to make a mockery of the rules that ensure fairness for those they look down on. Homosexual marriage is widely supported by Massachusetts elites; few of them are likely to lose much sleep if the proposed amendment is derailed by an illegal parliamentary maneuver. In a newspaper ad appearing this week, 165 Massachusetts business executives and civic leaders endorse same-sex marriage and urge the Legislature to reject any amendment ``that would take away rights." But the ad says nothing about the right of 170,000 Massachusets citizens to have their petition put to a vote on Beacon Hill.

``I think we have had enough of this debate," says Democratic gubernatorial candidate Deval Patrick, siding with those who favor procedural tricks to cheat the amendment's supporters out of a vote. ``The basic question here is whether people come before their government as equals." His position, in other words, is that scores of thousands of petitioners must be treated as second-class citizens in order to ensure that people aren't treated as second-class citizens.

Same-sex marriage supporters dominate the Massachusetts power structure; if they are hell-bent on denying voters a chance to be heard on the issue, they can probably get away with it. The result, however, will not be a fairer, more liberal Massachusetts. It will be one that is even more unfair and illiberal -- a place where citizens who play by the rules get treated with contempt, and where democracy is more dysfunctional than ever.

Just as Texas Democrats tried to stop the state's redistricting by running to Oklahoma and New Mexico, the Massachusetts liberals will attempt to thwart the will of their voters by refusing to do their jobs. Once again, the liberals cannot enact their agenda if the voters are allowed to decide because the voters don't agree with them. The libs either need to find a friendly judge, or simply run and hide and block the process.