Photo by qbubblesNo surprise here, but the D.C. Board of Elections and Ethics has gone ahead and rejected the latest referendum petition on the issue of same-sex marriage. This is the third time the board has ruled that a ballot measure on gay marriage will not be allowed.
In an 18-page memorandum (download it here), the board concluded that an effort to suspend the implementation of the Civil Marriage Equality Act until it appears on the ballot is not a proper subject for a referendum. The legislation, which grants full marriage rights to same-sex couples, was passed by the D.C. Council and signed by Mayor Adrian Fenty last year.
The board once again used the District’s Human Rights Act, which prohibits the use of the initiative and referendum process to authorize discrimination, as its main point of argument. The difference is that the first of two previous efforts sought to derail a law that recognized same-sex marriages performed legally in other states, while the second attempted to place an initiative on the ballot that would redefine marriage as between a man and a woman. This time, the referendum’s petitioners, led by Bishop Harry Jackson, hoped to delay implementation of the Civil Marriage Equality Act, but the board found that the law was “clearly a legislative effort on the part of the Council to eradicate what it deems to be unlawful discrimination under the HRA.” As such, a referendum to stop it would itself violate the HRA.
In a separate and far more interesting component of the ruling, the board dealt somewhat of a blow to same-sex marriage proponents. Their pet argument du jour had been to point out that the Civil Marriage Equality Act is certain to generate tax revenue for the District. And since there is also a prohibition against referenda on acts that appropriate funds for the general operation budget, they argued that you can’t put this issue on the ballot for that additional reason. But the board ruled that this is not the case, determining that “such prospective fiscal impact is insufficient to transform the Civil Marriage Equality Act into an act appropriating funds for the general operation budget, i.e., budget request act.” In other words, just because gay marriage will make the city money, doesn’t mean it’s an appropriations bill.
MORE: I meant to add, Jackson and his cohorts will most certainly appeal this ruling, but, as the BOEE was keen to point out in today’s memorandum, the D.C. Superior Court has upheld both of its two previous rulings.
