Skip to comments.Massachusetts Constitutional Convention - Live Thread
Posted on 01/02/2007 11:06:41 AM PST by pickledelf
Live streaming video of the Massachusetts ConCon:
Welcome to Free Republic.
Shouldn't that be ConCon Con?........
It's like a 3 card Monty game.....Nobody's watching, and if they are they are getting screwed and don't realize it.........
People in Mass just don't care. For them it's about being "nice" to gay people, not that the legislature should obey the law.
Keep your eye on the Queen, just follow the Queen, It's easy.....
Well my connection pooped out. Maybe Big Brother decided there was something I shouldn't see. I don't know what, everyone was voting, "no".
Have they declared Massachusetts a nuclear-free zone yet? How about calling for President Bush's impeachment? Or ethical slaughter of chickens?
I don't reckon there is any group of people in the world, better able to screw up a constitution, than the folks in Massachusetts!
OK, the stream is dead and the baywindows com link you provided is now also dead. Anyone know what happened?
2:36 p.m. -- It's unclear what happened to the motion to reconsider. A roll call vote is now being taken on a motion to recess the ConCon for a hour.
2:26 p.m. The amendment passes with 54 yeas. They are still compiling the nays. State Rep. Byron Rushing is now offering a motion to reconsider. If this motion passes and the ConCon adjourns, the amendment will not take effect.
Yay!!! According to Boston.com, the legislature voted 132-61 to defeat the measure. However, since only 50 are needed to approve, the measure has passed onto the next session for approval.
From the Bay Windows site it appears a vote to reconsider was stopped and now they are voting to recess (to work backroom deals?)?
WHAT?? What the heck is a motion to reconsider??
yes, the link posted below was saying that the vote was to recess for an hour. I tried to hear what was being said on
the streamcast and did hear the bit about "shall we recess
for an hour?" and the rollcall, but it was so plagued
with audio drops and video freezes that I gave up.
The amendment's backers had collected 170,000 signatures to get a question on the 2008 ballot asking voters to declare marriage in Massachusetts to be between a man and a woman, but they still needed the Legislature's approval in two consecutive sessions.
On Tuesday, 61 lawmakers backed moving the measure forward, compared to 132 opposed. The amendment need 50 votes of support to advance.
WBZ radio a sec ago: "Lawmakers put an effort to ban gay marriage one step closer to the ballot box"
That is MORE BS from this legislature. That vote should count!
via WBZ: "Prop. gay marriage ban very alive for now as lawmakers allow it to appear on the ballot."
"Trav took everyone by surprise--went straight to a vote--
req. only 50 votes in favor, amendment got 61 votes, that's
a comfortable margin. (BUT!!!) Then lawmakers voted to RECONSIDER
after an hour request".
So, they decided not to decide, for now. John Kerry would
be proud...flip flop flip flop flip
we'll prob. be talking about this on the Howie Carr live thread as well.
I do not like this new governor. He is asking the legislature to violate the Mass Constitution and their oath of office. That is so very "liberal" and wrong!
Devil is going to be in for a nightmare, too. The revenue forecast is for a big deficit and here we have a new governor who has a few new expensive programs. He is beholden to the teacher's union to reduce class sizes and he wants to help illegals with their education.
That's a shocker! Good news though. Why didn't they recess again? Were they afraid that Mitt was going to be mean to them?
Yep, resuscitated daily, a living-breathing document.
Either we are equal or we are not. Good people ought to be armed where they will, with wits and guns. NRA KMA
I've been deconstructing your screen name and I think I've got it: You were making New Year's resolutions yesterday and number one was "pickle self" but you kept on trying until you finished the 6-pack and then when you signed in this morning, your finger slid off the "s" right on to the "d", right?
I guess: stewed shorty.
This is a big deal, right? I can't remember a Constitutional Convention ever. Is this a warm up for what the Dems want to do for the whole USA to eliminate that pesky second ammendment (and trim down the 1st, 4th, 5th, 9th and 10th while at it)?
Unfortunately this thread is a total insider one. I live in Washington state and have seen no coverage of this, or the issues being voted on, or why it came about.
Could some kind freeper please take pity on me (and other uninformed readers) and post or link to a summary of what is going on out there.
THANKS IN ADVANCE. -JB
Do we have a roll call of the Votes?
This is a Massachusetts thing. Our state constitution allows citizens to gather a petition drive to amend the constitution. If they get a certain number of signatures, the legislature must vote at least 50/200 in favor in two consecutive annual sessions (the constitutional convention), at which point the issue moves to the ballot. The state constitution requires that the legislature vote on the petitions and recently the liberal MA supreme court (the same one that gave us "gay marriage") ruled unanimously that the plain language of the constitution means what it says. The advocates of gay marriage were attempting to get around this by recessing the convention (which requires only 101 votes, rather than the 151 needed to knock out the amendment fair and square) in the name of "equality" and "rights." However, they failed this time and therefore the amendment to ban so-called gay marriage in Massachusetts will continue to the next step (a second vote in the legislature next year).
www.voteonmarriage.org is the site of the group behind this initiative petition.
Thanks so much. I feel informed now!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.