By Barb Berggoetz and Tony Cook

barb.berggoetz@indystar.com

Indiana House Speaker Brian Bosma pledged to treat a proposed constitutional ban on same-sex marriage like any other bill this year. But critics say that vow fell away on Tuesday when he yanked the measure out of a committee where it seemed doomed to fail and sent it to one where it's all but certain to pass.

The highly unusual move means the proposed constitutional amendment is almost certain to get a vote on the House floor. It also reveals just how quickly positions are shifting on the issue — especially among Republicans.

A few weeks ago, no one would have anticipated that the measure would have had any trouble getting out of the House Judiciary Committee, where Bosma initially assigned it. But last week, three GOP committee members surprised many observers — including, apparently, Bosma — with reservations about the amendment.

That left Bosma with few options. He could let the measure die and risk angering conservatives who want an opportunity to vote on the issue. Or, he could use his powers as speaker to push the measure through at the risk of seeming desperate or heavy handed.

He chose the latter.

Opponents of a gay marriage ban called the committee switcheroo a power play. Supporters said it was a justifiable step to jump-start the stalled proposed constitutional amendment.

The amendment, known as House Joint Resolution 3, will be considered by the Elections and Apportionment Committee at 3:30 p.m. Wednesday in the House chambers. A survey by The Indianapolis Star on Tuesday of the 13 committee members found that five said they will vote for it; one was leaning in favor; five were undecided or wouldn't say; and two intend to vote "no."

It would take seven "yes" votes to send the bill to the full House.

The companion bill to the amendment — HB1153, which seeks to define lawmakers' intent — also was transferred to the Elections Committee. The amendment, which was passed by an overwhelming vote in the House and Senate in 2011, has to be approved a second time before it can go to the public in November.

Asked how he justified the step, Bosma said, "I responded to the overwhelming majority of the Republican caucus who have extensively lobbied me to bring this to the floor in one fashion or another."

One House Republican, who wanted to remain anonymous, estimated that between 10 to 15 caucus members didn't approve of switching committees.

The amendment unexpectedly stalled in the House Judiciary Committee on Jan. 13, after three hours of testimony, when committee chairman Greg Steurerwald, R-Avon, didn't call it for a vote.

Democrats and others didn't hesitate to attack Bosma's committee switch.

Judiciary Committee member Rep. Ed DeLaney, D-Indianapolis, called the move "embarrassing."

"This is what happens when you have a really bad idea and get over-committed to it," he said. "You start breaking the procedures. You start attacking the structure of the system. That's what the speaker has done."

Senate Democratic Minority Leader Tim Lanane, D-Anderson, said, "Instead of letting hours of testimony and the democratic process play out, the Speaker of the House has decided to start the clock over.

"Sometimes the legislative process does not garner the expected result, but that does not mean one gets to change the rules in the middle of the game," he added.

But the leader of one of the pro-amendment groups, American Family Association of Indiana, said Bosma justifiably took this step.

"After years of debating this issue, one or two legislators should not stand in the way of allowing over a million Hoosiers to vote on the future of marriage in Indiana," said Micah Clark, the association's executive director. "Hopefully this will move the marriage amendment through the process so that Hoosiers can finally have their say concerning if both men and women are important in a marriage."

That's the mantra supporters have repeated for weeks: Let the people decide.

"I believe we need to get it out of committee, get it on the House floor, and hopefully it will go to our voters in November to decide this very emotional issue," said Milo Smith, R-Columbus, Elections Committee chairman. He'll decide whether to take a vote or not Wednesday.

He said his committee is an appropriate choice and he "eagerly accepted this responsibility" because it's about an election.

Robert Dion, chairman of the University of Evansville's political science department, said it's a "bit of a stretch" to send a public policy issue like gay marriage to the Elections Committee, which is usually reserved for crafting election law.

"Bills are often complex and could go to any number of committees and speakers often use their discretion to send it to a favorable committee," said Dion. "In this case, we saw something a little bit different because it got bogged down in the most obvious committee, then we saw this switcheroo to something of an unlikely committee."

Megan Robertson, campaign manager for Freedom Indiana, a statewide coalition working to defeat the amendment, went even further.

"Bosma broke his commitment to Hoosiers to uphold the traditional legislative process," she said.

Robertson said he repeatedly promised to treat this issue like any other bill and that no one person would make this decision. "This power play only spurs us to fight harder."

Asked if he was worried about the perception of moving the bill because it might have been defeated, Bosma said he is more concerned about the questionable path the bill appeared to be taking in the Judiciary Committee.

"It was a hard left turn that came kind of out of the blue," said Bosma. "But as I indicated there was more intense discussion, pressure, lobbying on this issue than I've seen maybe in a long time … I decided this was the right course to protect the institution."

Pressed further, Bosma said, "I said early on I was not going to ask somebody to vote in accordance with what I wanted but with what they wanted, I stuck with that. I believe this is the best course to proceed."

Bosma's move came after weeks of him and fellow Republicans saying the issue is not a priority for him or House Republicans. Now, that will be harder to say.

"I think it's fair to say he owns it," said Dion. "He has definitely hitched his star to the future of this amendment."

Star reporter Eric Weddle contributed to this story. Call Star reporter Barb Berggoetz at (317) 444-6294. Follow her on Twitter: @barbberg.

House Elections Committee

Here's a look at how members of the House Elections and Appointment Committee are likely to vote on the proposed constitutional ban on gay marriage.

Eight voted for the amendment in 2011, two voted against it and three members were not in the General Assembly at that time.

The Star on Tuesday surveyed all 13 members to find out how they would vote this year. Five said they will vote for it, one was leaning in favor, five were undecided or wouldn't say and two intend to vote "no."

• Chairman Rep. Milo Smith, R-Columbus, voted for the amendment in 2011 and said he will vote for it this year.

• Vice Chairwoman Rep. Kathy Richardson, R-Noblesville, voted for the amendment in 2011 and said she will vote for it this year.

• Rep. Woody Burton, R-Whiteland, voted for the amendment in 2011 and said he will vote for it this year.

• Rep. Jeffrey Thompson, R-Lizton, voted for the amendment in 2011 and has said he will vote for it this year.

• Rep. Timothy Wesco, R-Osceola, voted for the amendment in 2011 and has said he will vote for it this year.

• Rep. Edmond Soliday, R-Valparaiso, voted for the amendment in 2011. Says he hasn't made a final decision.

• Rep. Casey Cox, R-Fort Wayne, was not in the legislature is 2011. Declined to say how he would vote but expects amendment to make it to the House floor.

• Rep. Richard Hamm, R-Richmond, was not in the legislature is 2011. Says he is leaning toward voting yes this year but hasn't made a final decision.

• Rep. Holli Sullivan, R-Evansville, was not in the legislature 2011. Says she hasn't made a final decision.

• Rep. John Bartlett, D-Indianapolis, voted against the amendment in 2011 and has said he will vote against it this year.

• Rep. Philip GiaQuinta, D-Fort Wayne, voted against the amendment in 2011 and has said he will vote no again this year.

• Rep. Kreg Battles, D-Vincennes, voted for the amendment in 2011. Says he hasn't made a final decision.

• Rep. Terry Goodin, D-Austin, voted for the amendment in 2011. Says he hasn't made a final decision.