A RetroSearch Logo

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Search Query:

Showing content from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_Amendment_1 below:

2012 Minnesota Amendment 1 - Wikipedia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Minnesota Amendment 1

Choice

Votes % Yes 1,399,916 47.44% No 1,510,434 51.19% Blank votes 40,430 1.37% Total votes 2,910,350 100.00% Registered voters/turnout 76.42% County results Congressional district results State house district results Precinct results

Yes

  90–100%

  80–90%

  70–80%

  60–70%

  50–60%

No

  90–100%

  80–90%

  70–80%

  60–70%

  50–60%

Other

  Tie

  No data

Sources: [1][2]

Minnesota Amendment 1 (also called Minnesota Marriage Amendment[3] or Minnesota Gay Marriage Amendment[4]) was a legislatively referred constitutional amendment proposed to ban marriage between same-sex couples in the state of Minnesota, that appeared on the ballot on November 6, 2012. It was rejected by 51.19% of voters.[5]

Legislative approval[edit]

On May 11, 2011, the Minnesota Senate passed a bill to place a proposed amendment to the state constitution on the ballot that would ban same-sex marriage. The vote was 37–27, with all Republicans and one Democrat voting for the amendment. An identical bill was passed by the House on May 21; the vote was 70–62 with two Democrats and all but four Republicans voting for the amendment.[6] The proposed amendment was on the ballot on November 6, 2012.[7] The proposed amendment read: "Only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in Minnesota." It did not refer to civil unions or domestic partnerships.[8] The question being presented to voters on the ballot read: "Shall the Minnesota Constitution be amended to provide that only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in Minnesota?"[8]

Support and opposition[edit]

This section

needs expansion

. You can help by

adding to it

.

(October 2012) Julian Bond and Governor Mark Dayton at a "Vote No" rally in June 2012.

In March 2012, Minnesota's Roman Catholic bishops had an audience with Pope Benedict XVI, who told them that preserving the traditional definition of marriage was a priority. Roman Catholic Archbishop John Nienstedt of St. Paul and Minneapolis organized leaders of different religious denominations in support of the amendment and committed his own church to spend $650,000 on behalf of its passage. In September he joined other religious leaders in a demonstration in support of the amendment at the State Capitol.[9] The Minnesota Catholic Conference Marriage Defense Fund contributed more than half the $1.2 million raised by Minnesota for Marriage, the principal organization supporting the amendment, including $130,000 from the Knights of Columbus, a national Catholic organization.[10]

Immediately after the Minnesota legislature voted to put Amendment 1 on the ballot, Outfront Minnesota and Project 515, two groups working for LGBT rights in the state, formed Minnesotans United for All Families – the main campaign organization that would work to defeat the amendment. Over the course of a year and a half, Minnesotans United would raise and spend over $12 million, more than double the pro-amendment side.[11] More importantly, the Minnesotans United campaign formed a coalition group of allies with almost 700 member organizations that included political parties, labor unions, veterans, civic groups and businesses like General Mills.[12][13] The board and staff of the campaign reflected the same kind of diversity as its coalition partners and even included prominent Republicans.[11] Drawing on lessons learned from past campaigns in other states, Minnesotans United did not cede the religious ground – it hired a faith director to reach out to communities of faith, and more than 100 of its coalition members were churches and other faith groups from around the state.[14]

The centerpiece of the Minnesotans United for All Families campaign became its huge grassroots effort to have conversations with the voters about marriage. Rather than focus on equal rights and fairness, as was done in previous campaigns, Minnesotans United and its thousands of volunteers, had personal conversations over the phones and face to face about how marriage had the same importance and meaning for both straight and same-sex couples.[14] This messaging strategy, which was also used in the campaign's ad campaign, helped move conflicted voters and resulted in Minnesota being the first state, after 30 attempts, to defeat a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.[11] Minnesotans United is likely the biggest grassroots campaign in the state's history, having had 27,000 volunteers knock on over 400,000 doors and make over 900,000 phone calls in the final eight days of the campaign[15]

The Minnesota arm of President Obama's presidential re-election campaign announced his opposition to this proposed constitutional amendment in April.[16] Advertisements in opposition to the amendment also featured Minnesota Vikings football player Chris Kluwe.[17]

Various public opinion surveys of Minnesota residents have asked questions regarding same-sex marriage. The questions vary, with some surveys referring directly to the proposed Amendment and others asking more general questions.

Date of opinion poll Conducted by Sample size For amendment Against amendment Undecided/Other Margin of error Question May 2–5, 2011[18] Star Tribune 806 adults 39% 55% 7% (Don't know/refused to answer) ±4.7% "Please tell me if you would favor or oppose amending the Minnesota constitution to ban same-sex marriage." May 23–24, 2011[19] SurveyUSA 552 RV 51% 40% 2% not sure
8% not vote ±4.3% "If an amendment to the Minnesota Constitution were on the ballot, that defines marriage as between one man and one woman, would you vote FOR the amendment? Against the amendment? Or not vote on the measure?" May 27–30, 2011[20] Public Policy Polling 1,179 voters 46% 47% 7% not sure ±2.9% "Should the Minnesota Constitution be amended to provide that only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in Minnesota?" October 17–26, 2011[21] St. Cloud State University Survey 626 LV 43.6% 47.4% 9% ±5% "Should the Minnesota constitution be amended to provide that only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in Minnesota?" November 2–3, 2011[22] Princeton Survey Research Associates International 807 adults 48% 43% 8% (Don't know/refused to answer) ±4.4% "Would you favor or oppose amending the Minnesota constitution to allow marriage only between a man and a woman?" November 2–7, 2011[23] SurveyUSA 543 RV 46% 40% 4% not sure
10% not vote ±4.3% "If an amendment to the Minnesota Constitution were on the ballot, that defines marriage as between one man and one woman, would you vote FOR the amendment? Against the amendment? Or not vote on the measure?" January 21–22, 2012[24] Public Policy Polling 1,236 voters 48% 44% 8% not sure ±2.8% "Should the Minnesota Constitution be amended to provide that only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in Minnesota?" January 31 – February 2, 2012[25] SurveyUSA 542 RV 47% 39% 4% not sure
10% not vote ±4.3% "An amendment to the Minnesota Constitution on the ballot defines marriage as between one man and one woman. Will you vote FOR the amendment? Against the amendment? Or not vote on the measure?" May 31 – June 3, 2012[26] Public Policy Polling 973 voters 43% 49% 7% not sure ±3.1% "Should the Minnesota Constitution be amended to provide that only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in Minnesota?" July 17–19, 2012[27] SurveyUSA 552 LV 52% 37% 6% not sure
5% not vote ±4.3% "An amendment to the Minnesota Constitution on the ballot defines marriage as between one man and one woman. Will you vote FOR the amendment? Against the amendment? Or not vote on the measure?" September 6–9, 2012[28] SurveyUSA 551 LV 50% 43% 8% ±4.3% "Also on the ballot is a ballot measure about marriage. It asks: Shall the Minnesota Constitution be amended to provide that only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in Minnesota?" September 10–11, 2012[29] Public Policy Polling 824 LV 48% 47% 5% not sure ±3.4% "Should the Minnesota Constitution be amended to provide that only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in Minnesota?" September 17–19, 2012[30] Mason-Dixon Polling and Research, Inc. 800 LV 49% 47% 4% ±3.5% "Another [amendment on the November ballot] asks "Shall the Minnesota Constitution be amended to provide that only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as marriage in Minnesota?" If the election were held today, would you vote: "YES", in favor of the amendment; "NO", against the amendment." October 5–8, 2012[31] Public Policy Polling 937 LV 46% 49% 5% not sure
1% won't vote ±3.2% "Should the Minnesota Constitution be amended to provide that only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in Minnesota?" October 12–14, 2012[32] SurveyUSA 550 LV 47% 46% 7% ±4.3% "Also on the ballot is a ballot measure about marriage. It asks: Shall the Minnesota Constitution be amended to provide that only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in Minnesota?" October 15–21, 2012[33][34] St. Cloud State University Survey 600 LV 44% 51% 5% ±5% "The second proposed amendment to the Minnesota Constitution asks "Shall the Minnesota Constitution be amended to provide that only a union of one man and one woman be valid or recognized as marriage in Minnesota?" If you were to vote today would you vote for the amendment, vote against the amendment, or not vote on this issue?" October 23–25, 2012[35][36] Mason-Dixon Polling and Research, Inc. 800 LV 48% 47% 5% ±3.5% "Another ballot question asks "Shall the Minnesota Constitution be amended to provide that only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as marriage in Minnesota?" If the election were held today, would you vote: YES in favor of the amendment; NO against the amendment" October 26–28, 2012[37] SurveyUSA 574 LV 48% 47% 5% ±4.2% "Also on the ballot is a ballot measure about marriage. It asks: Shall the Minnesota Constitution be amended to provide that only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in Minnesota?" November 1–3, 2012[38] SurveyUSA 556 LV 47% 48% 5% ±4.2% "Also on the ballot is a ballot measure about marriage. It asks: Shall the Minnesota Constitution be amended to provide that only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in Minnesota?" November 2–3, 2012[39] Public Policy Polling 1,164 LV 45% 52% 3% not sure
0% won't vote ±2.9% "Should the Minnesota Constitution be amended to provide that only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in Minnesota?" Constitutional Amendment 1
Recognition of Marriage
Solely Between One Man and One Woman Choice Votes % No 1,510,366 51.19 Yes 1,399,675 47.44 Breakdown of voting by county[41] County No Votes Yes Votes Aitkin 38.2% 3,428 61.8% 5,699 Anoka 49.4% 90,468 50.6% 94,690 Becker 37.1% 5,848 62.9% 10,364 Beltrami 48.9% 10,563 51.1% 11,334 Benton 44.6% 8,606 55.4% 10,943 Big Stone 32.9% 887 67.1% 1,888 Blue Earth 54.2% 18,291 45.8% 15,796 Brown 33.6% 4,604 66.4% 9,312 Carlton 48.1% 8,758 51.9% 9,632 Carver 49.9% 25,953 50.1% 26,552 Cass 38.1% 5,996 61.9% 10,041 Chippewa 36.9% 2,252 63.1% 3,944 Chisago 43.1% 12,459 56.9% 16,815 Clay 49.5% 13,903 50.5% 14,652 Clearwater 29.1% 1,168 70.9% 3,000 Cook 60.1% 1,978 39.9% 1,334 Cottonwood 30.0% 1,759 70.0% 4,143 Crow Wing 40.2% 13,770 59.8% 20,954 Dakota 55.4% 125,705 44.6% 103,250 Dodge 41.4% 4,199 58.6% 6,096 Douglas 36.4% 7,474 63.6% 13,436 Faribault 35.1% 2,668 64.9% 5,046 Fillmore 43.4% 4,609 56.6% 6,196 Freeborn 40.0% 6,518 60.0% 10,097 Goodhue 47.6% 12,079 52.4% 13,583 Grant 36.1% 1,226 63.9% 2,241 Hennepin 65.3% 433,803 34.7% 237,084 Houston 42.3% 4,256 57.7% 6,066 Hubbard 38.1% 4,310 61.9% 7,185 Isanti 39.0% 7,742 61.0% 12,391 Itasca 44.3% 10,412 55.7% 13,392 Jackson 31.2% 1,665 68.8% 3,785 Kanabec 35.5% 2,828 64.5% 5,281 Kandiyohi 37.2% 7,774 62.8% 13,523 Kittson 33.6% 780 66.4% 1,629 Koochiching 46.2% 2,910 53.8% 3,504 Lac qui Parle 32.3% 1,257 67.7% 2,711 Lake 49.0% 3,268 51.0% 3,496 Lake of the Woods 36.1% 769 63.9% 1,436 Le Sueur 42.4% 6,163 57.6% 8,559 Lincoln 29.8% 879 70.2% 2,211 Lyon 38.0% 4,628 62.0% 7,725 McLeod 34.3% 6,218 65.7% 12,253 Mahnomen 38.6% 807 61.4% 1,350 Marshall 28.2% 1,119 71.8% 3,541 Martin 32.4% 3,466 67.6% 7,465 Meeker 35.5% 4,264 64.5% 7,937 Mille Lacs 39.3% 5,053 60.7% 8,004 Morrison 32.1% 5,228 67.9% 11,424 Mower 43.2% 7,818 56.8% 10,603 Murray 29.0% 1,337 71.0% 3,419 Nicollet 53.0% 9,595 47.0% 8,670 Nobles 25.7% 2,035 74.3% 6,393 Norman 37.0% 1,132 63.0% 2,050 Olmsted 51.0% 39,053 49.0% 38,525 Otter Tail 33.5% 10,202 66.5% 21,180 Pennington 38.6% 2,444 61.4% 4,030 Pine 37.8% 5,216 62.2% 8,756 Pipestone 24.4% 1,092 75.6% 3,539 Polk 35.4% 4,951 64.6% 9,547 Pope 36.5% 2,242 63.5% 3,991 Ramsey 63.5% 172,197 36.5% 102,069 Red Lake 32.3% 617 67.7% 1,356 Redwood 30.5% 2,330 69.5% 5,455 Renville 33.7% 2,549 66.3% 5,145 Rice 53.7% 17,025 46.3% 15,010 Rock 26.6% 1,218 73.4% 3,579 Roseau 30.1% 2,115 69.9% 5,185 Scott 51.1% 35,951 48.9% 35,212 Sherburne 43.7% 19,953 56.3% 26,306 Sibley 31.3% 2,379 68.7% 5,404 St. Louis 55.9% 63,663 44.1% 51,272 Stearns 47.0% 36,309 53.0% 41,849 Steele 44.4% 8,339 55.6% 10,685 Stevens 44.3% 2,463 55.7% 3,163 Swift 39.1% 1,847 60.9% 3,293 Todd 28.8% 3,311 71.2% 8,448 Traverse 33.8% 602 66.2% 1,238 Wabasha 40.8% 4,698 59.2% 7,011 Wadena 30.4% 1,981 69.6% 4,769 Waseca 40.2% 3,873 59.8% 5,877 Washington 55.3% 77,108 44.7% 63,767 Watonwan 36.4% 1,828 63.6% 3,295 Wilkin 31.4% 967 68.6% 2,222 Winona 53.0% 14,132 47.0% 12,884 Wright 44.0% 29,259 56.0% 38,157 Yellow Medicine 34.5% 1,835 65.5% 3,572
  1. ^ Results for Constitutional Amendments 2012 Minnesota
  2. ^ Historical Voter Turnout Statistics
  3. ^ Zachary, Alexander (October 3, 2012). "Weathering the Storms of the Minnesota Marriage Amendment". HuffPost. Retrieved February 24, 2019.
  4. ^ "Minnesota to vote on gay-marriage ban". The Washington Times. Retrieved February 24, 2019.
  5. ^ "2012 Referendum General Election Results". Uselectionatlas.org. November 7, 2012.
  6. ^ "Voters to determine the future of marriage, House decides". Star Tribune. May 22, 2011.
  7. ^ "SF1308 Status in Senate for Legislative Session 87: Constitutional amendment to recognize marriage solely between one man and one woman". Minnesota State Legislature. Retrieved June 10, 2012.
  8. ^ a b "Minnesota Secretary Of State - Home". Sos.state.mn.us. Retrieved February 24, 2019.
  9. ^ French, Rose; Helgeson, Baird (October 7, 2012). "Marriage amendment: The archbishop draws the line". Star-Tribune. Retrieved October 25, 2012.
  10. ^ Helgeson, Baird (October 18, 2012). "Minnesota's marriage amendment fight funded by Catholics across U.S." Star Tribune. Retrieved October 25, 2012.
  11. ^ a b c Ringham, Eric; Aslanian, Sasha (November 9, 2012). "EIGHTEEN MONTHS TO HISTORY: How the Minnesota marriage amendment was defeated -- money, passion, allies". Mprnews.org. Retrieved February 24, 2019.
  12. ^ Moylan, Martin (June 14, 2012). "General Mills opposes marriage amendment". Mprnews.org. Retrieved February 24, 2019.
  13. ^ "Businesses drawn into fight over marriage amendment". Star Tribune. September 3, 2012. Retrieved February 24, 2019.
  14. ^ a b "What happened here? Three observations about Minnesota's marriage vote". MinnPost.com. November 26, 2012. Retrieved February 24, 2019.
  15. ^ "OPINION EXCHANGE - Minnesota lawmakers won't be rushed on gay marriage". Star Tribune. February 17, 2013. Retrieved February 24, 2019.
  16. ^ Louwagie, Pam (April 9, 2012). "Obama weighs in against Minnesota's marriage ballot". Star Tribune. Archived from the original on January 27, 2013. Retrieved October 25, 2012.
  17. ^ Gervino, Tony (October 19, 2012). "The Punter Makes His Point". New York Times. Retrieved October 25, 2012.
  18. ^ Minnesota Poll: Majority oppose gay marriage ban Archived 2012-08-18 at the Wayback Machine
  19. ^ "SurveyUSA News Poll #18243". Surveyusa.com. Retrieved February 24, 2019.
  20. ^ "Minnesotans like Dayton, split on gay marriage" (PDF). Publicpolicypolling.com. Retrieved February 24, 2019.
  21. ^ "Annual Minnesota Statewide Survey Fall 2011 – Findings Report" (PDF). Media1.stcloudstate.edu. Retrieved February 24, 2019.
  22. ^ Minnesota Poll results: Marriage Amendment Archived 2012-11-08 at the Wayback Machine
  23. ^ "Results of SurveyUSA Election Poll #18726". Surveyusa.com. Retrieved February 24, 2019.
  24. ^ "Dayton Sees Strong Approval in Minnesota" (PDF). Publicpolicypolling.com. Retrieved February 24, 2019.
  25. ^ "SurveyUSA News Poll #18953". Surveyusa.com. Retrieved February 24, 2019.
  26. ^ "Minnesotans' opposition to marriage amendment growing". Publicpolicypolling.com. June 5, 2012. Retrieved February 24, 2019.
  27. ^ "SurveyUSA Election Poll #19394". Surveyusa.com. Retrieved February 24, 2019.
  28. ^ "SurveyUSA Election Poll #19612". Surveyusa.com. Retrieved February 24, 2019.
  29. ^ "Minnesota split on marriage amendment". Publicpolicypolling.com. September 12, 2012. Retrieved February 24, 2019.
  30. ^ "MINNESOTA POLL RESULTS: Marriage amendment". Star Tribune. September 23, 2012. Retrieved February 24, 2019.
  31. ^ "Minnesota marriage amendment narrowly trails" (PDF). Publicpolicypolling.com. Retrieved February 24, 2019.
  32. ^ "SurveyUSA Election Poll #19873". Surveyusa.com. Retrieved February 24, 2019.
  33. ^ "St. Cloud State poll shows slender lead for opponents of marriage amendment". MinnPost.com. October 26, 2012. Retrieved February 24, 2019.
  34. ^ "FALL STATEWIDE SURVEY OCTOBER, 2012" (PDF). Minnpost.com. Retrieved February 24, 2019.[permanent dead link]
  35. ^ "Breakdown of poll findings on marriage amendment". Star Tribune. October 28, 2012. Retrieved February 24, 2019.
  36. ^ "How the poll was conducted". Star Tribune. October 28, 2012. Retrieved February 24, 2019.
  37. ^ "SurveyUSA Election Poll #20056". Surveyusa.com. Retrieved February 24, 2019.
  38. ^ "SurveyUSA Election Poll #20105". Surveyusa.com. Retrieved February 24, 2019.
  39. ^ "Obama up 8 in Minnesota, amendments trail for passage" (PDF). Publicpolicypolling.com. Retrieved February 24, 2019.
  40. ^ "Source for Popular Vote data: Minnesota Secretary of State. Results for Constitutional Amendments, Minnesota Secretary of State". Uselectionatlas.org. Retrieved February 24, 2019.
  41. ^ Results for Constitutional Amendments Archived 2012-12-11 at the Wayback Machine

U.S. same-sex unions ballot measures

1990s 2000s 2010s 2020s 1

:

De facto

ban, granted Legislature authority to ban same-sex marriage. Reversed in 2013 by the

Hawaii Marriage Equality Act

.

RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue

Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo

HTML: 3.2 | Encoding: UTF-8 | Version: 0.7.4