Ousted state Senate Republican insider Michael Brodkorb says GOP leaders put the proposed marriage amendment on the Minnesota ballot this fall not to protect family values but to drive social conservatives to the polls.

The former chief spokesman for the Senate GOP was fired in December after his affair with then-Majority Leader Amy Koch became public. Brodkorb has since sued the state, the Senate and others for alleged discrimination and defamation, saying he was treated differently than female staffers who had affairs with male legislators.

In an interview Tuesday, Oct. 16, Brodkorb said that when Republicans took control of the Legislature two years ago, leaders discussed how to ensure high conservative voter turnout in 2012 so they could retain the majority.

Supporters of the amendment deny Brodkorb’s claims, noting it has been in the works since 2004.

“Preposterous,” said Chuck Darrell, spokesman for Minnesota for Marriage.

“Mr. Brodkorb is simply incorrect, and his memory is lacking,” said Sen. Warren Limmer, R-Maple Grove, who sponsored the amendment bill.

The ballot question was submitted to prevent courts from legalizing same-sex marriage, Limmer said, adding there was no direct conversation about the effect on turnout in any Republican caucus meeting.

There might have been informal talk to that effect, he said, but “it certainly wasn’t a motivation of mine.”

Jason Adkins, executive director of the Minnesota Catholic Conference, said heard concerns at the time it could hurt Republicans, especially in the suburbs, because amendment proponents would be working to turn out traditionally Democratic voters who support the amendment.

But Sen. Scott Dibble, DFL-Minneapolis, said Brodkorb’s assessment rings true.

Dibble, who is gay, said several GOP senators told him they voted for the amendment for political reasons, not personal beliefs, and some even asked for his forgiveness.

“They have violated their own conscience for political reasons while claiming to be standing on principle,” Dibble said.

Pollster Bill Morris, who chaired the state Republican Party three decades ago, said that for any political insider, it’s no surprise that the marriage amendment could have been put on the ballot to drive voter turnout.

“In many states, a constitutional amendment is put out there for precisely that reason. Both Democrats and Republicans do it. We’re just not used to it here in Minnesota,” Morris said.

State legislators voted in 2011 to put the proposed amendment — which would define marriage as for opposite sex couples only — on the ballot, after Republicans took control of the House and Senate for the first time in almost 40 years. Democratic Gov. Mark Dayton has veto power over legislation, but not constitutional amendments.

Similar previous proposals made little headway under a DFL-controlled Legislature.

Same-sex marriage already is banned under a decades-old Minnesota law upheld by the state Supreme Court, so the amendment, if passed, would have no practical effect on anyone.

But opponents say it’s still hurtful — and disappointing to hear it may have been pushed solely for political gain.

“This amendment doesn’t represent our Minnesota values or what is best for our future, and we believe that Minnesotans will reject it,” said Kate Brickman, spokeswoman for Minnesotans United for All Families, the main group organizing opposition to the amendment.

Brodkorb, who said he plans to vote against the amendment, wouldn’t say if he regretted helping to orchestrate that strategy for Senate leaders.

“If it’s about providing Minnesotans a voice on the issue, then great,” he said. “But I’m voting no. And a lot of my Republican friends are voting no. That’s just a reality.”

Brodkorb said the GOP strategy could backfire, especially for legislators in suburbs such as Edina, a traditionally Republican area where the city council has backed a resolution opposing the marriage amendment.

A better strategy for Republicans would have been to focus on the proposed voter ID amendment, Morris said. His polling always showed high support for it and that it would be the biggest driver of voter turnout of any ballot measure, he said.

But he added, “the Senate is going to rue the day they put those amendments on,” noting that foes are waging an effective campaign. “Because if they both go down, a lot of incumbent senators will go down with them.”

Brodkorb is talking now after the judge in his lawsuit lifted a gag order last week at his request on all parties. He said senators and other staff repeatedly violate the order anyway.

And Brodkorb maintained that events that led to his firing and Koch’s resignation from her leadership role were ultimately a “power grab” from a group of senators, and they used the affair to do so.

“I accept responsibility for decisions I’ve made in my personal life. And I’m very sorry for the pain I’ve caused my family, my friends,” Brodkorb said.