Hawaii voters asked to ensure protection of same-sex marriage
In November 1998, Hawaii adopted a constitutional amendment giving the Legislature the power to restrict marriage to opposite-sex couples after it received a clear majority in the election.
Twenty-six years later, voters will have an opportunity to reverse that decision, which has already been made irrelevant — at least for now — by a U.S. Supreme Court decision legalizing same-sex marriage nationally.
In the Nov. 5 general election, a new ballot measure will ask: “Shall the state constitution be amended to repeal the legislature’s authority to reserve marriage to opposite-sex couples?”
The proposal comes as the island state has developed a reputation as a leader in the legal effort toward marriage equality.
Same-sex marriage was legalized statutorily in Hawaii two years before the 2015 Supreme Court ruling. But the state constitution still has wording granting lawmakers “the power to reserve marriage to opposite-sex couples.”
Supporters say passage of the new constitutional amendment would remove discriminatory language from the constitution and make it crystal clear that Hawaii supports equal rights.
The U.S. Supreme Court’s 2023 ruling repealing Roe v. Wade on abortion rights has also raised fears that same-sex marriage and other rights could be threatened by a conservative court.
But opponents of the 2024 ballot measure say it amounts to political bullying from the state’s liberal Democratic majority, and that marriage has traditionally been between one man and one woman.
Changing Attitudes
In 1998, 59% of voters said yes to giving the Legislature authority over gender and matrimony. Barely one-third of voters, or 34%, voted against the proposal.
The Legislature never acted on that authority, but same-sex marriage advocates want the language removed from the constitution so there’s no ambiguity.
In April, the Legislature agreed to place the ConAm question on the ballot. Of the 76 members, only one Republican in the Senate and five in the House voted against the measure, as did one House Democrat.
U.S. Rep. Jill Tokuda was among those who testified in strong support of the legislation, referring to last year’s Supreme Court decision on Roe v. Wade.
“As someone who fought to establish and protect marriage equality in Hawaii for more than a quarter of a century, I refuse to stand by and watch this court take a hatchet to rights won that had previously been denied,” she wrote.
Honolulu Mayor Rick Blangiardi, City Council members Esther Kiaaina and Tyler Dos Santos-Tam, the American Civil Liberties Union of Hawaii and the Democratic Party of Hawaii also supported the proposed amendment.
Only a handful of testifiers opposed it.
“This is an attempt to codify a political opinion into the state constitution,” wrote Cari Sasaki. “If the opposite were being proposed, that the legislature constitutionally couldn’t define marriage as anything other than one man and one woman, liberals would honestly lose their minds. This bill is political bullying by the majority party.”
“Marriage is between a man and a woman,” testified David Ruiz.
Worries About Blank Votes
So far this year the marriage ConAm has not received anywhere near as much attention as the 1998 version did. That year, for instance, marked the beginning of the political career of Mike Gabbard, who publicly and vigorously denounced homosexuality.
Last year, however, state Sen. Gabbard voted for the 2024 ConAm, explaining that his views on marriage have changed over the years.
Jeff Hong was chair of the Change 23 Coalition, the local group that pushed for ballot initiative. (The marriage clause is in Section 23 of the state constitution.) Its partners include the Hawaii LGBT Legacy Foundation, the Hawaii Health and Harm Reduction Center, ACLU Hawaii, Papa Ola Lokahi and the Council for Native Hawaiian Advancement.
Hong said the coalition has evolved into a nonprofit Hawaii civil rights voter education fund. It has embarked on a campaign to urge voters to vote yes on the constitutional amendment, one of two on the fall ballot. The other is on the judicial selection process.
A major concern for supporters is that many voters may not bother to vote on the ConAm.
For a proposed amendment to be ratified it must be approved by a majority of all yes and no votes recorded, and in addition that majority must constitute at least 50% of the total votes cast at the election, including blank and overvotes.
“While we see a lot of positive momentum forward, the apathy of the blank vote goes against us,” said Hong. “And we need to ensure that the voters of Hawaii realize that in this election, if you’re for the initiative, you need to vote for it. Don’t leave the question blank.”
The Hawaii Family Forum, a faith-based group formed in 1998, played an active role in the passage of that year’s ConAm. The forum has a partnership with the local Catholic Conference.
Eva Andrade, president and CEO of the Hawaii Family Forum, said the group has not decided whether to take a position on the ConAm. She said the group is focused this election year on consumer issues, given concerns about the economy.
The forum’s 2024 voter guide, for example, does not mention the ConAm. But Andrade said the forum would conduct a modest educational campaign to make sure voters are aware of what it means to leave a ballot question blank.
___
This story was originally published by Honolulu Civil Beat and distributed through a partnership with The Associated Press.
