Lawmakers who overturned voter-approved Clean Elections now revere voter input.

BOSTON (AP) – Let the people vote.

This democratic rallying cry has been heard repeatedly during Massachusetts’ marathon gay marriage debate, with lawmakers heralding the ideal of voter participation to support their call for placing a constitutional ban on the ballot.

That same reverence for the people’s wisdom was not on display earlier this decade, however, when many of the same lawmakers worked doggedly to overturn a voter-approved Clean Elections law that would have provided for publicly financed political campaigns.

Beacon Hill critics say the gay marriage debate is another prominent example of the Legislature’s manipulation of the democratic process, arguing that lawmakers only seem to recognize voters’ value when it suits their political purposes.

“It’s hypocritical for legislators who have subverted the initiative petition process to tout voter approval as a pre-eminent value,” said Common Cause executive director Pam Wilmot, a strong defender of Clean Elections, which was put on the ballot as a result of petition rather than action by legislators. “They seem to be saying that it’s all right to send this to the people if they agree with me but it’s not OK if they don’t.”

Legislative leaders denied any hypocrisy. Marriage, they said, is a fundamental social and constitutional issue that rightfully belongs before voters, especially when the state’s high court has given the Legislature little wiggle room on the matter. Clean Elections, in contrast, they argued, was simply a confusing budgetary initiative.

“It’s too simplistic an argument to pretend that one is like the other,” said Rep. Joseph Wagner, D-Chicopee, a leading legislative opponent of taxpayer-funded elections. “Legislators don’t have a voice in this process so they have to let the people have a voice. This is entirely different.”

The leader of Citizens for Limited Taxation, which has championed several voter initiatives that were ultimately overturned by the Legislature, said she sees hypocrisy on both sides of the debate – but in this one, especially among gay-marriage supporters in the Legislature.

Two years ago, those lawmakers defeated a constitutional ban on gay marriage, using parliamentary maneuvers to cut it off before a vote could be taken, according to Barbara Anderson. Now, these same lawmakers say they revere the constitution and do not want it tainted by amending it with a measure they believe is discriminatory.

“When I watch this debate all I see is hypocrisy,” Anderson said. “The same people who are arguing that they care about the sacred nature of the constitution are the same people who worked to violate the constitution in 2002.”

A November high court decision ruled it unconstitutional to bar gay couples from marriage in Massachusetts, paving the way for the nation’s first state-endorsed same-sex weddings.

on May 17. While some lawmakers are trying to stop those weddings from taking place, the only clear avenue left to opponents of gay marriage is a constitutional ban, which ultimately must be approved by voters before it could take effect.

The Legislature last week gave preliminary approval to an amendment that would grant gay couples civil union benefits while stripping them of their court-ordered marriage rights. If it receives final approval when the Legislature reconvenes March 29, the measure must be approved again by the Legislature during the 2005-06 session and then by voters in November 2006.

In mid-February, when the Legislature opened its constitutional convention on gay marriage, House Speaker Thomas Finneran made a rare speech to his colleagues, underlining the need to receive citizens’ input on a critical societal issue.

“In the end, (the voters) must speak,” said Finneran, a strong opponent of gay marriage. “All of us then … must not only respect, but must abide by their decision. But ladies and gentlemen, we first of all must give them the opportunity to speak. That is imperative.”

To those, who fought against Finneran on Clean Elections, however, these words struck a hollow chord.

Approved by more than 1 million voters on the 1998 ballot, the Clean Elections law provided public funding to candidates who agree to abide by strict campaign fund-raising and spending limits.

The Legislature refused to fund the law, leading to lawsuits and a court-ordered sale of surplus state property to provide financing to qualifying candidates. Last year, as part of the budget, the Clean Elections law was eliminated without a recorded vote and with only one elected official to its name.

Finneran said there is no inconsistency with his stance on the two issues, pointing out that Clean Elections was eliminated only after a second question was put to voters, asking them whether they approved of taxpayer funded political campaigns.

The question, which made no mention of the restrictions candidates would have to abide by, was overwhelmingly approved.

“There’s no inconsistency whatsoever,” Finneran said Thursday. “When the voters saw the alternative question – much more clearly written, unambiguous in language – the voters said that they did not want their taxpayer money being spent on political campaigns.”

At least two other voter-approved initiatives have been ignored by the Legislature recently: a tax deduction for charitable contributions and a rollback of the income tax.

Rep. Dan Bosley, D-North Adams, who opposes a constitutional amendment on gay marriage, said there has been an inconsistency in the arguments, but maintained that an argument can be made that Clean Elections and marriage are not comparable.

The problem with the “let the people vote” argument, he said, is that it ignores the fact that the constitution specifically gives the Legislature a role in the process for the very reason that some issues should not be put up to popular vote.

“This isn’t a budget item, but a lifestyle question in Massachusetts,” Bosley said. “I don’t buy their argument about letting the people vote, but I do think there is a difference.”

AP-ES-03-20-04 1249EST