Now Reading
Past the point of no return: fate of Colorado civil union bill to be decided today by GOP leadership

Past the point of no return: fate of Colorado civil union bill to be decided today by GOP leadership

When the doors of Colorado Capitol open to the public at 7:30 a.m. Tuesday, a ticking time bomb begins its countdown.

The Colorado House of Representatives will have just shy of 17 hours to either debate the Colorado Civil Union Act or let the clock run out on the bill that would establish legal protections for gay and lesbian Coloradans.

And while the bill is still alive, blame is already being exchanged for the bill’s death.

Supporters and opponents of the Colorado Civil Union Act sat through more than three hours of testimony May 3 while a Colorado House Judiciary Committee held a hearing on the bill. The legislation faces a deadline of midnight Tuesday if it is to become law. Photo by Sean Mullins

This year’s bill, sponsored by gay Denver Democrats Sen. Pat Steadman and Rep. Mark Ferrandino was introduced almost 120 days ago — on the first day the legislature convened. And now in the last 48 hours of the regular session, it comes down to a few precious moments, that will, for the bill’s supporters and opponents, seem like an entirety.

In one corner is the LGBT community, progressive Democrats and a handful of Republicans who believe civil unions is a fair compromise rooted in limited government and personal freedoms.

In another is Colorado’s staunch Religious Right and Republicans who either oppose same-sex unions out right, or believe voters decided the issue in 2006 when they approved a constitutional amendment defining marriage between a man and a woman, and at the same time vetoed a referendum to establish domestic partnerships.

And while there has never been more support for same-sex relationship recognition in Colorado — not to mention under the gold dome of the Capitol — it comes down to the decisions made by three Republican lawmakers: chairman of the House Appropriations Committee Rep. Jon Becker, Majority Leader Amy Stephens and Speaker of the House Frank McNulty.

The trio hold the bill in their hands. And no one, maybe not even the lawmakers themselves, know what they’ll do.

First, Becker must decided whether he’ll hold a hearing on the bill.

His committee received the bill late-Monday.

“The delay in the process was not done by myself or any body in the House,” he told reporters Monday afternoon. “It came across late. We adjourned Appropriations last Friday. My announcement at that time was I didn’t think we’d have another meeting. We’ll make a decision tomorrow.”

If Becker decides to hear the bill — which he is under no obligation to — the bill will pass with Evergreen Republican Rep. Cheri Gerou siding with the Democrats.

At that the point, if the House is still in session, it will be up to Stephens to schedule the bill’s second reading — or debate — in front of the full chamber.

The bill must be debated Tuesday because it will need a third reading and final vote Wednesday. The debate and final vote can not be on the same day.

Mario Nicolais, spokesman for Coloradans for Freedom, an organization of Republicans that supports civil unions, listens to testimony at a May 3 hearing. Photo by Sean Mullins

Stephens has not been shy about her opposition to the bill. And Speaker McNulty has done nothing to calm the angst of onlookers.

“It’s Amy’s call,” he told Out Front Colorado. “And we’ll see what happens. There are a number of other things we need to get done on the economic opportunity side and that’s where our focus will be.”

To which Ferrandino laughed out loud.

“That’s interesting. Where are their job bills at? We’ve been railing at them that they haven’t had a jobs bill all session,” Ferrandino said. “So, I’m surprised to hear the speaker say that his agenda is jobs. I can’t wait to see the bills he’s going to introduce today. Oh wait, you can’t do that today. I think that’s a funny statement for our speaker.”

Out Front Colorado has made a request to McNulty’s spokesman for examples of economic bills the GOP controlled chamber will focus on in its last days, but has yet to receive a response.

“If Speaker McNulty decides to bleed the clock out, he’s not respecting the votes of his Republican colleagues that have already happened to propel this bill forward,” said Jace Woodrum, deputy director of statewide LGBT advocacy organization One Colorado. “If this bill is killed, without a doubt thousands of committed couples will remain vulnerable.”

If it becomes apparent the majority leader has no intentions of hearing Senate Bill 2, Ferrandino said he’ll be well within the rules of the House to make a motion himself to hear the bill.

He’ll need 33 votes — all 32 Democrats and one Republican — to make that happen.

So far two Republicans have already voted in favor of the bill — Rep. B.J. Nikkel, R-Loveland, on the House Judiciary Committee, and Rep. Don Beezely, R-Broomfield, on the Finance Committee. Another three Republicans have publicly voiced support for the bill: Reps. Kevin Priola, Robert Rimerez and Laura Bradford.

“I think we’ll be able to get one at one Republican,” Ferrandino said.

And then there’s the idea of a special session. While the Colorado General Assembly must, by law, wrap up its business by Wednesday, Gov. John Hickenlooper, who has pledged to sign the bill, can call lawmakers back to addressed unfinished business.

The Denver Post, the state’s largest newspaper, opined Monday afternoon, the governor should do just that, if the GOP fails to act on the bill.

“It’s premature to talk about a special session as a good bill is currently working its way through the legislative process,” said the governor’s spokesman Eric Brown. “We have every expectation it will receive a vote from the full House of Representatives. It’s the right thing to do.”

George Gramer, president of the Colorado Chapter of Log Cabin Republicans, said he hopes it doesn’t come to that.

“Frank (McNulty) is astute enough to know if this bill gets out of three hearings, he needs to give it a full debate with sufficient time to pass the bill,” he said.

But at least one Republican faithful, who supports civil unions, thinks a special session is more than appropriate.

“Personally, I think that Hickenlooper should just call a special session,” the GOP operative said on the condition on anonymity because of his ongoing working relationship with leadership. “I think there would be ways to repay the general fund. Where there’s a will, there’s a revenue stream — and civil rights are priceless.”

What's Your Reaction?
Excited
0
Happy
0
In Love
0
Not Sure
0
Silly
0
Scroll To Top