Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register
firm ground

Iowa’s Senate Leader Mike Gronstal Will Rebuff Even Democratic Attempts to Put Marriage To A Vote

Iowa’s Democratic State Sen. Mike Gronstal, the only man standing between keeping same-sex marriage and a Republican attempt to let voters strike it down, was re-elected majority leader yesterday without challenge — and recommitted to keeping marriage equality from coming up for a vote. “As long as I’m leader I do not intend to take that up for debate. Is there any way that I’ve been unclear about this?” Nope! Not that Gronstal isn’t facing pressure from his own Democratic colleagues.

Sen. Jack Kibbie, re-elected Senate president, is among the Dems who think voters should get a chance to have a say on marriage. If the State House passes a marriage amendment bill, he says Senate leaders will take a look.

Gronstal remains firm: ““I know you want specifics. I want to have a conversation with the Republicans. I don’t want to negotiate through the media as to what we may or may not be able to do.”

I have this weird feeling in my stomach, seeing a politician firmly stick to his guns on issues of equality. Anyone else?

By:          Max Simon
On:           Nov 15, 2010
Tagged: , , , , ,
    • Cam

      Nice thing is, for anything that major, the Iowa Congress has to pass it in two consecutive legislative sessions. So even if he gets voted out in two years, it will take two additional years to make any change.

      It’s too bad that some of the Politicians in Washington don’t have a backbone like this guy.

      Nov 15, 2010 at 10:48 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • the crustybastard

      His opponents are going to paint him as an obstructionist.

      He should have made the point marriage is a fundamental right with an additional Constitutional dimension, and THEREFORE the matter is settled.

      Nov 15, 2010 at 11:26 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • gator91

      This man is my hero

      Nov 15, 2010 at 12:55 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brutus

      @the crustybastard: There’s a fundamental right to marriage, with (currently) an added constitutional dimension under the Iowa (but not the federal) Constitution.

      Leaving aside the Iowa constitution for a moment, a “fundamental right to marriage” doesn’t help us if “marriage” means “the partnership of one man and one woman.” You don’t get to just declare the definition that most helps you.

      Nov 15, 2010 at 12:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • scribe

      I dont live in Iowa, but this guy is going to get a check from me, for his next re-election bid. Open up the wallets gay dudes and join me, because you know religious nuts are writing checks to his challenger.

      Nov 15, 2010 at 7:30 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Please log in to add your comment

    Need an account? Register It's free and easy.

  • Copyright 2016 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.