Should MD's Republicans Follow WI's Democrats Lead?

...and just "get on the bus?"

from the Baltimore Sun

The Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee is set to vote a few hours from now on the controversial same-sex marriage bill, but Senate leaders are already assuming the measure will clear the panel and are planning for a week of debate on the divisive issue.

Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller warned senators to be "flexible" with their evening schedules and said the body might even have to work on the weekend. In addition the same-sex marriage, other issues that evoke passions -- including oyster poaching -- are set to be on the floor.

Miller predicted that debate on same-sex marriage would start in earnest on Tuesday. "I want everyone to have their say," he said. "When it appears people are repeating themselves, then we will take a cloture vote." The senate president guessed the final passage vote would come Monday Feb. 28.

Advocates believe they have the votes to cut off debate. Whether they have the votes for final passage is much less clear. Twenty-three senators have said they'd vote for the bill, but 24 are needed.

Three senators have not publicly declared their intentions -- though one, Baltimore's Joan Carter Conway, has hinted that she'll support the bill.

The other two undecided senators faced a scrum of reporters this morning after session. Sen. Jim Rosapepe, who represents College Park, rebuffed questions from WBAL's Dave Collins. Holding his hand up to his face, Rosapepe said: "No, comment." And then quickly walked down the statehouse stairs.

Rosapepe has said he will announce his position before the week is out.

Anne Arundel County's Sen. John Astle also wouldn't declare his intentions until the vote is called. "You'll see it on the board," he said. "Watch it on the board when I cast my vote."

Meanwhile, House leaders have already scheduled a committee hearing for their version of the bill on Friday Feb. 25.

Let's face it, the real reason why democracy doesn't work is because Democrats don't want it to work. If they can't win democratically, they simply prevent the democratic process from occurring. These are NOT serious political partners who would bind themselves to ANY social contract. So why should we treat them as if they were?