Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 17:22:53 -1000
From: ramsey@math.hawaii.edu (by way of lambda@aloha.net (Martin Rice))
Subject: HAWAI`I SENATE HEARING on Bills 36, 97, 98, 795, 912, 1800, 117 & 118

Aloha kakahiaka kakou.

Following is from my friend Tom Ramsey in Honolulu.  You have absolutely no
idea how thankful I am that he saved me all the keyboarding.  The total
documentation is some 50 pages or so.

		SHORT SYNOPSES OF BILLS FOR MONDAY'S
		       SENATE HEARING

Proposed Constitutional Amendments:

	SB 36 (Due Process and Equal Protection Clause)  Add this language:
	"Nothing in this section or any other section of this Constitution
	shall be interpreted to create a constitutional right to marriage
	between two people of the same gender.  Marriage is reserved as
        a legal relationship that has been sanctioned by the State between
	a man and a woman as husband and wife.  Marriage may be subject
	to reasonable regulation by the State."
        Sponsored by Senator Robert Bunda

	SB 97 (Due Process and Equal Protection Clause)  Add this language:
	"For the purposes of this section or any other section in this
	Constitution, the term "sex" means gender and shall not be
	interpreted to apply, directly or indirectly, to sexual orientation
	so as to prohibit or otherwise restrict the State from defining
	marriage as a union between a man and a woman which may be
	sanctioned and regulated by the State."
	Co-signed by Randy Iwase, Marshall Ige, Joe Tanaka, Cal Kawamoto,
	James Aki, Rod Tam, Whitney Anderson, Robert Bunda, Malama Solomon

	SB 912
	"Marriage shall be defined in the State of Hawaii as the legal
	association reserved exclusively for the lawful union of a man
	and woman."
	Signed by Whitney Anderson and Sam Slom
	

	HB 117 (add to the Due Process and Equal Protection Clause)
	"Statutes, regulations, laws, rules, orders, decrees and
	legal doctrines that define or regulate marriage, The parties to
	marriage, or the benefits of marriage shall not be deemed in
	violation of this section or any other section of this
	constitution by virtue of a limitation of the marriage
 	relationship, to the union of only one man and one woman."
	This is Terry Tom's bill, that passed the House last week.

	SB 1800 (a whole new clause)
				"MARRIAGE
        The State shall have the power to regulate and
        define the institution of marriage, including the reservation of
        marriage to couples of the opposite sex; provided that this
        reservation shall be effective only if the laws of the State
        ensure that the application of this reservation does not deprive
        any person of civil rights on the basis of sex."
	This bill is introduced by Senate Judiciary Co-Chairs, Matt
	Matsunaga and Avery Chumbley.  Note that it makes a good attempt
	to preserve civil rights IN THE CONSTITUTION.

"DOMESTIC PARTNERSHIP BILLS"

	SB 98
	Authorize certain economic benefits to flow to certain adults
	who file an affadavit of the shared necessities of life.
	Co-signed by Iwase, Tanaka, Kawamoto, Aki, Sakamoto, Tam,
	Marshall Ige, Anderson, Bunda, Solomon
	[This is a long bill, which I've not fully read yet.]

	SB 795
	Creates a broad domestic partnerships, using that term.
	Introduced by Mike McCartney.  This is the comprehensive DP
	bill that passed last year.

	HB118 HD1
	This is the Terry Tom DP bill about "reciprocal beneficiaries"
	which gives 4 specific rights (out of hundreds).  It passed
	the House.


ADVICE ON TESTIMONY:  POLITELY OBJECT TO ALL CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS,
BUT ESPECIALLY TARGET ANY CHANGES IN THE EQUAL PROTECTION AND DUE
PROCESS CLAUSE.  SB1800 IS THE LEAST OFFENSIVE, BECAUSE IT TRIES TO
PRESERVE CIVIL RIGHTS.

	YOU CAN SUPPORT SB795, BUT THE OTHER TWO DP BILLS ARE MUCH MORE
LIMITED.  UNLIKE HB118 (WHICH ONLY TAKES EFFECT IF THE PEOPLE APPROVE
HB117), SB795 IS EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY UPON LEGISLATIVE PASSAGE AND
THE GOVERNOR'S APPROVAL.


						Best Regards,


						Tom Ramsey

~~pau~~