HJR3 amended in Indiana House

In a vote Monday evening, the Indiana House of Representatives changed the wording of a controversial same-sex marriage ban and possibly postponed a referendum that could place it in the state constitution.

The now-removed second sentence of House Joint Resolution 3 prohibited civil unions.
Large Indiana employers, including IU, Cummins and Eli Lilly, used it to justify their opposition to the ban, fearing policies granting benefits to same-sex partners of employees could be blocked.

Rep. Randy Truitt, R-Lafayette, introduced the amendment, which passed by a 52-43 bipartisan vote after less than a half hour of debate. His amendment’s supporters argued it would be better in the long run to clarify the proposed constitutional change.

Opponents said doing so could delay a public vote on the issue, the final step necessary to amend the state constitution.

“I do support the legal definition of leaving marriage between one man and one woman,” Rep. Kevin Mahan, R-Hartford City, said. “Not only do I believe that, I live it every day.”

Yet Mahan and others expressed concern that the conflicting language in H.J.R. 3 and its companion bill could lead to years of court battles.

“We don’t want this to become a full-time employment opportunity for lawyers,” he said.

Supporters of H.J.R. 3, which would reinforce an existing ban on same-sex marriage, have argued that employers would still be free to grant benefits to same-sex partners if the constitution were amended.

“It’s an issue of letting the voters vote on this issue as we have been talking about it for the last 10 or 11 years,” Rep. Woody Burton, R-Whiteland, said. “I find it very hard to believe that the folks that are opposed to the union part of this aren’t also opposed to the marriage part.”

Rep. Matt Pierce, D-Bloomington, voted to strike the second sentence, while Rep. Peggy Mayfield, R-Martinsville, who also represents some of the Bloomington area, voted to keep it in.

Although Monday’s decision could delay voter decision about H.J.R. 3, the legislative process will continue. The full House will vote on the new language on Tuesday. If passed, the Senate could change wording again and possibly reinsert the second sentence.

Hannah Alani contributed to this report.
Follow Michael Auslen on Twitter @MichaelAuslen.