2012 Minnesota Amendment 1
{{Short description|none}}
{{Use mdy dates|date=September 2023}}
{{Infobox referendum
| country = Minnesota
| flag_year = 1983
| name = Minnesota Amendment 1
| notes= Sources: [https://electionresults.sos.mn.gov/Results/AmendmentResultsStatewide?ersElectionId=1&scenario=state Results for Constitutional Amendments 2012 Minnesota][https://www.sos.state.mn.us/election-administration-campaigns/data-maps/historical-voter-turnout-statistics/ Historical Voter Turnout Statistics]
| title = Minnesota Marriage Amendment
| yes = 1,399,916
| no = 1,510,434
| blank = 40,430
| invalid =
| total = 2,910,350
| turnoutpct = 76.42
| map = {{switcher |300px |County results |300px |Congressional district results |250px |State house district results |300px |Precinct results |default=1}}
| mapdivision = County
| mapcaption =
{{col-begin}}
{{col-3}}
Yes
{{legend|#2B2457|90–100% |border=1px #AAAAAA solid}}
{{legend|#28497C|80–90% |border=1px #AAAAAA solid}}
{{legend|#47729E|70–80% |border=1px #AAAAAA solid}}
{{legend|#7D9CBB|60–70% |border=1px #AAAAAA solid}}
{{legend|#B6C8D9|50–60% |border=1px #AAAAAA solid}}
{{col-3}}
No
{{legend|#32320C|90–100% |border=1px #AAAAAA solid}}
{{legend|#5D5D2D|80–90% |border=1px #AAAAAA solid}}
{{legend|#8B8B54|70–80% |border=1px #AAAAAA solid}}
{{legend|#BCBC83|60–70% |border=1px #AAAAAA solid}}
{{legend|#DEDEBD|50–60% |border=1px #AAAAAA solid}}
{{col-3}}
Other
{{legend|#EBEEED|Tie |border=1px #AAAAAA solid}}
{{legend|#808080|No data |border=1px #AAAAAA solid}}
{{col-end}}
|date=November 6, 2012
}}
{{ElectionsMN}}
Minnesota Amendment 1 (also called Minnesota Marriage Amendment{{cite web|url=https://www.huffingtonpost.com/alexander-zachary/weathering-the-storms-of-the-minnesota-marriage-amendment_b_1934295.html|title=Weathering the Storms of the Minnesota Marriage Amendment|first=Alexander|last=Zachary|date=3 October 2012|publisher=HuffPost|access-date=24 February 2019}} or Minnesota Gay Marriage Amendment{{cite news|url=https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/sep/30/minnesota-to-vote-on-gay-marriage-ban/|title=Minnesota to vote on gay-marriage ban|newspaper=The Washington Times|access-date=24 February 2019}}) 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.{{cite web|url = http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/state.php?fips=27&year=2012&f=0&off=50&elect=0|title = 2012 Referendum General Election Results|website=Uselectionatlas.org|date = November 7, 2012}}
Legislative approval
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.{{cite news|title=Voters to determine the future of marriage, House decides|date=May 22, 2011|newspaper=Star Tribune|url=http://www.startribune.com/politics/statelocal/122401039.html}} The proposed amendment was on the ballot on November 6, 2012.{{cite web|url=https://www.revisor.mn.gov/revisor/pages/search_status/status_detail.php?b=Senate&f=SF1308&ssn=0&y=2011 |title=SF1308 Status in Senate for Legislative Session 87: Constitutional amendment to recognize marriage solely between one man and one woman |publisher=Minnesota State Legislature |access-date=June 10, 2012}} 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.{{cite web|url=https://www.sos.state.mn.us/home/?page=1719|title=Minnesota Secretary Of State - Home|website=Sos.state.mn.us|access-date=24 February 2019}} 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?"
Support and opposition
{{expand section|date=October 2012}}
File:2012-0619-Bond-Dayton.jpg 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.{{cite news|last1=French|first1=Rose |last2=Helgeson|first2=Baird |title=Marriage amendment: The archbishop draws the line |url=http://www.startribune.com/local/172975931.html |access-date=25 October 2012|newspaper=Star-Tribune|date=7 October 2012}} 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.{{cite news |last=Helgeson |first=Baird |title=Minnesota's marriage amendment fight funded by Catholics across U.S. |url=http://www.startribune.com/politics/statelocal/174875371.html |access-date=25 October 2012|newspaper=Star Tribune|date=18 October 2012}}
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.{{cite web|url=https://www.mprnews.org/story/2012/11/09/marriage-how|title=EIGHTEEN MONTHS TO HISTORY: How the Minnesota marriage amendment was defeated -- money, passion, allies|first1=Eric|last1=Ringham|first2=Sasha|last2=Aslanian|website=Mprnews.org|date=November 9, 2012 |access-date=24 February 2019}} 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.{{cite web|url=https://www.mprnews.org/story/2012/06/14/politics/general-mills-opposes-marriageamendment|title=General Mills opposes marriage amendment|first=Martin|last=Moylan|website=Mprnews.org|date=June 14, 2012 |access-date=24 February 2019}}{{cite web|url=http://www.startribune.com/businesses-drawn-into-fight-over-marriage-amendment/165812836/|title=Businesses drawn into fight over marriage amendment|website=Star Tribune|date=September 3, 2012 |access-date=24 February 2019}} The board and staff of the campaign reflected the same kind of diversity as its coalition partners and even included prominent Republicans. 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.{{cite web|url=https://www.minnpost.com/community-voices/2012/11/what-happened-here-three-observations-about-minnesotas-marriage-vote/|title=What happened here? Three observations about Minnesota's marriage vote|date=26 November 2012|website=MinnPost.com|access-date=24 February 2019}}
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. 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. 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{{cite web|url=http://www.startribune.com/minnesota-lawmakers-won-t-be-rushed-on-gay-marriage/191468771/|title=OPINION EXCHANGE - Minnesota lawmakers won't be rushed on gay marriage|website=Star Tribune|date=February 17, 2013 |access-date=24 February 2019}}
The Minnesota arm of President Obama's presidential re-election campaign announced his opposition to this proposed constitutional amendment in April.{{cite news|last=Louwagie|first=Pam|title=Obama weighs in against Minnesota's marriage ballot|url=http://www.startribune.com/politics/146746145.html|access-date=25 October 2012|newspaper=Star Tribune|date=9 April 2012|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130127012951/http://www.startribune.com/politics/146746145.html|archive-date=27 January 2013}} Advertisements in opposition to the amendment also featured Minnesota Vikings football player Chris Kluwe.{{cite news|last=Gervino|first=Tony|title=The Punter Makes His Point|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/20/sports/football/punter-chris-kluwes-voice-is-heard-in-same-sex-marriage-debate.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0|access-date=25 October 2012|newspaper=New York Times|date=19 October 2012}}
Opinion polls
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.
| class="wikitable"
! Date of opinion poll ! Conducted by ! width=5% | For amendment ! Against amendment ! Undecided/Other ! Question |
| nowrap | May 2–5, 2011[http://www.startribune.com/politics/121725399.html Minnesota Poll: Majority oppose gay marriage ban] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120818234202/http://www.startribune.com/politics/121725399.html |date=2012-08-18 }}
| 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." |
| nowrap | May 23–24, 2011{{cite web|url=http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=be72dc6c-d8fe-4da2-ab5d-07ce56bc7bee|title=SurveyUSA News Poll #18243|website=Surveyusa.com|access-date=24 February 2019}}
| SurveyUSA | 552 RV | 51% | 40% | 2% not sure | ±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?" |
| nowrap | May 27–30, 2011{{cite web|url=http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_MN_06011118.pdf|title=Minnesotans like Dayton, split on gay marriage|website=Publicpolicypolling.com|access-date=24 February 2019}}
| 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?" |
| nowrap | October 17–26, 2011{{cite web|url=http://media1.stcloudstate.edu/slideshows/report_SCSUSurveyFindingsFall2011.pdf|title=Annual Minnesota Statewide Survey Fall 2011 – Findings Report|website=Media1.stcloudstate.edu|access-date=24 February 2019}}
| 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?" |
| nowrap | November 2–3, 2011[http://www.startribune.com/politics/133367088.html Minnesota Poll results: Marriage Amendment] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121108092820/http://www.startribune.com/politics/133367088.html |date=2012-11-08 }}
| 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?" |
| nowrap | November 2–7, 2011{{cite web|url=http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReportEmail.aspx?g=98e06008-a002-4bda-b2dc-d5093903734a|title=Results of SurveyUSA Election Poll #18726|website=Surveyusa.com|access-date=24 February 2019}}
| SurveyUSA | 543 RV | 46% | 40% | 4% not sure | ±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?" |
| nowrap | January 21–22, 2012{{cite web|url=http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_MN_012712.pdf|title=Dayton Sees Strong Approval in Minnesota|website=Publicpolicypolling.com|access-date=24 February 2019}}
| 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?" |
| nowrap | January 31 – February 2, 2012{{cite web|url=http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=2911f444-ad7c-40e3-8060-4a9a7b185cc2|title=SurveyUSA News Poll #18953|website=Surveyusa.com|access-date=24 February 2019}}
| SurveyUSA | 542 RV | 47% | 39% | 4% not sure | ±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?" |
| nowrap | May 31 – June 3, 2012{{cite web|url=http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2012/06/minnesotans-opposition-to-marriage-amendment-growing.html|title=Minnesotans' opposition to marriage amendment growing|website=Publicpolicypolling.com|date=June 5, 2012 |access-date=24 February 2019}}
| 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?" |
| nowrap | July 17–19, 2012{{cite web|url=http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=7eeab57a-eb71-47e3-aed7-5cab8493d94f|title=SurveyUSA Election Poll #19394|website=Surveyusa.com|access-date=24 February 2019}}
| SurveyUSA | 552 LV | 52% | 37% | 6% not sure | ±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?" |
| nowrap | September 6–9, 2012{{cite web|url=http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=221d9460-d4ad-4427-a0d1-f4eee62a9e2a|title=SurveyUSA Election Poll #19612|website=Surveyusa.com|access-date=24 February 2019}}
| 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?" |
| nowrap | September 10–11, 2012{{cite web|url=http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2012/09/minnesota-split-on-marriage-amendment.html|title=Minnesota split on marriage amendment|website=Publicpolicypolling.com|date=September 12, 2012 |access-date=24 February 2019}}
| 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?" |
| nowrap | September 17–19, 2012{{cite web|url=http://www.startribune.com/minnesota-poll-results-marriage-amendment/170564076/|title=MINNESOTA POLL RESULTS: Marriage amendment|website=Star Tribune|date=September 23, 2012 |access-date=24 February 2019}}
| 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." |
| nowrap | October 5–8, 2012{{cite web|url=http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_MN_1008.pdf|title=Minnesota marriage amendment narrowly trails|website=Publicpolicypolling.com|access-date=24 February 2019}}
| Public Policy Polling | 937 LV | 46% | 49% | 5% not sure | ±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?" |
| nowrap | October 12–14, 2012{{cite web|url=http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=2c5df6fe-ac56-44ec-ba5b-73fdf4769eab|title=SurveyUSA Election Poll #19873|website=Surveyusa.com|access-date=24 February 2019}}
| 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?" |
| nowrap | October 15–21, 2012{{cite web|url=https://www.minnpost.com/politics-policy/2012/10/st-cloud-state-poll-shows-slender-lead-opponents-marriage-amendment/|title=St. Cloud State poll shows slender lead for opponents of marriage amendment|date=26 October 2012|website=MinnPost.com|access-date=24 February 2019}}{{cite web|url=http://www.minnpost.com/sites/default/files/attachments/saint-cloud-amendment-survey-methodology.pdf|title=FALL STATEWIDE SURVEY OCTOBER, 2012|website=Minnpost.com|access-date=24 February 2019}}
| 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?" |
| nowrap | October 23–25, 2012{{cite web|url=http://www.startribune.com/breakdown-of-poll-findings-on-marriage-amendment/176007971/|title=Breakdown of poll findings on marriage amendment|website=Star Tribune|date=October 28, 2012 |access-date=24 February 2019}}{{cite web|url=http://www.startribune.com/how-the-poll-was-conducted/176113051/|title=How the poll was conducted|website=Star Tribune|date=October 28, 2012 |access-date=24 February 2019}}
| 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" |
| nowrap | October 26–28, 2012{{cite web|url=http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=d67b9051-ae5f-4d9b-890a-eca249f45000|title=SurveyUSA Election Poll #20056|website=Surveyusa.com|access-date=24 February 2019}}
| 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?" |
| nowrap | November 1–3, 2012{{cite web|url=http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=f3948b22-4bf4-4dcc-9fd1-7f9f5a4dd7f9|title=SurveyUSA Election Poll #20105|website=Surveyusa.com|access-date=24 February 2019}}
| 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?" |
| nowrap | November 2–3, 2012{{cite web|url=http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_MN_1103.pdf|title=Obama up 8 in Minnesota, amendments trail for passage|website=Publicpolicypolling.com|access-date=24 February 2019}}
| Public Policy Polling | 1,164 LV | 45% | 52% | 3% 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?" |
Results
{{Referendum
| title = Constitutional Amendment 1
Recognition of Marriage
Solely Between One Man and One Woman
| yes = 1,399,675
| yespct = 47.44
| no = 1,510,366
| nopct = 51.19
| valid =
| validpct =
| invalid = 40,398
| invalidpct = 1.37
| total = 2,950,780
| turnoutpct = Precincts Reporting - 100
}}
=County breakdown=
| style="width:50%;" class="wikitable sortable collapsible collapsed" |
| style="background:lightgrey;"
! style="width:21%;"| County ! style="width:10%;"| No ! style="width:10%;"| Votes ! style="width:10%;"| Yes ! style="width:10%;"| Votes |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Aitkin
| style="text-align:center;"|38.2% | style="text-align:center;"|3,428 | style="text-align:center;"|61.8% | style="text-align:center;"|5,699 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Anoka
| style="text-align:center;"|49.4% | style="text-align:center;"|90,468 | style="text-align:center;"|50.6% | style="text-align:center;"|94,690 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Becker
| style="text-align:center;"|37.1% | style="text-align:center;"|5,848 | style="text-align:center;"|62.9% | style="text-align:center;"|10,364 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Beltrami
| style="text-align:center;"|48.9% | style="text-align:center;"|10,563 | style="text-align:center;"|51.1% | style="text-align:center;"|11,334 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Benton
| style="text-align:center;"|44.6% | style="text-align:center;"|8,606 | style="text-align:center;"|55.4% | style="text-align:center;"|10,943 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Big Stone
| style="text-align:center;"|32.9% | style="text-align:center;"|887 | style="text-align:center;"|67.1% | style="text-align:center;"|1,888 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#ffc8c8;"|Blue Earth
| style="text-align:center;"|54.2% | style="text-align:center;"|18,291 | style="text-align:center;"|45.8% | style="text-align:center;"|15,796 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Brown
| style="text-align:center;"|33.6% | style="text-align:center;"|4,604 | style="text-align:center;"|66.4% | style="text-align:center;"|9,312 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Carlton
| style="text-align:center;"|48.1% | style="text-align:center;"|8,758 | style="text-align:center;"|51.9% | style="text-align:center;"|9,632 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Carver
| style="text-align:center;"|49.9% | style="text-align:center;"|25,953 | style="text-align:center;"|50.1% | style="text-align:center;"|26,552 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Cass
| style="text-align:center;"|38.1% | style="text-align:center;"|5,996 | style="text-align:center;"|61.9% | style="text-align:center;"|10,041 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Chippewa
| style="text-align:center;"|36.9% | style="text-align:center;"|2,252 | style="text-align:center;"|63.1% | style="text-align:center;"|3,944 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Chisago
| style="text-align:center;"|43.1% | style="text-align:center;"|12,459 | style="text-align:center;"|56.9% | style="text-align:center;"|16,815 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Clay
| style="text-align:center;"|49.5% | style="text-align:center;"|13,903 | style="text-align:center;"|50.5% | style="text-align:center;"|14,652 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Clearwater
| style="text-align:center;"|29.1% | style="text-align:center;"|1,168 | style="text-align:center;"|70.9% | style="text-align:center;"|3,000 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#ffc8c8;"|Cook
| style="text-align:center;"|60.1% | style="text-align:center;"|1,978 | style="text-align:center;"|39.9% | style="text-align:center;"|1,334 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Cottonwood
| style="text-align:center;"|30.0% | style="text-align:center;"|1,759 | style="text-align:center;"|70.0% | style="text-align:center;"|4,143 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Crow Wing
| style="text-align:center;"|40.2% | style="text-align:center;"|13,770 | style="text-align:center;"|59.8% | style="text-align:center;"|20,954 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#ffc8c8;"|Dakota
| style="text-align:center;"|55.4% | style="text-align:center;"|125,705 | style="text-align:center;"|44.6% | style="text-align:center;"|103,250 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Dodge
| style="text-align:center;"|41.4% | style="text-align:center;"|4,199 | style="text-align:center;"|58.6% | style="text-align:center;"|6,096 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Douglas
| style="text-align:center;"|36.4% | style="text-align:center;"|7,474 | style="text-align:center;"|63.6% | style="text-align:center;"|13,436 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Faribault
| style="text-align:center;"|35.1% | style="text-align:center;"|2,668 | style="text-align:center;"|64.9% | style="text-align:center;"|5,046 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Fillmore
| style="text-align:center;"|43.4% | style="text-align:center;"|4,609 | style="text-align:center;"|56.6% | style="text-align:center;"|6,196 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Freeborn
| style="text-align:center;"|40.0% | style="text-align:center;"|6,518 | style="text-align:center;"|60.0% | style="text-align:center;"|10,097 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Goodhue
| style="text-align:center;"|47.6% | style="text-align:center;"|12,079 | style="text-align:center;"|52.4% | style="text-align:center;"|13,583 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Grant
| style="text-align:center;"|36.1% | style="text-align:center;"|1,226 | style="text-align:center;"|63.9% | style="text-align:center;"|2,241 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#ffc8c8;"|Hennepin
| style="text-align:center;"|65.3% | style="text-align:center;"|433,803 | style="text-align:center;"|34.7% | style="text-align:center;"|237,084 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Houston
| style="text-align:center;"|42.3% | style="text-align:center;"|4,256 | style="text-align:center;"|57.7% | style="text-align:center;"|6,066 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Hubbard
| style="text-align:center;"|38.1% | style="text-align:center;"|4,310 | style="text-align:center;"|61.9% | style="text-align:center;"|7,185 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Isanti
| style="text-align:center;"|39.0% | style="text-align:center;"|7,742 | style="text-align:center;"|61.0% | style="text-align:center;"|12,391 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Itasca
| style="text-align:center;"|44.3% | style="text-align:center;"|10,412 | style="text-align:center;"|55.7% | style="text-align:center;"|13,392 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Jackson
| style="text-align:center;"|31.2% | style="text-align:center;"|1,665 | style="text-align:center;"|68.8% | style="text-align:center;"|3,785 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Kanabec
| style="text-align:center;"|35.5% | style="text-align:center;"|2,828 | style="text-align:center;"|64.5% | style="text-align:center;"|5,281 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Kandiyohi
| style="text-align:center;"|37.2% | style="text-align:center;"|7,774 | style="text-align:center;"|62.8% | style="text-align:center;"|13,523 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Kittson
| style="text-align:center;"|33.6% | style="text-align:center;"|780 | style="text-align:center;"|66.4% | style="text-align:center;"|1,629 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Koochiching
| style="text-align:center;"|46.2% | style="text-align:center;"|2,910 | style="text-align:center;"|53.8% | style="text-align:center;"|3,504 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Lac qui Parle
| style="text-align:center;"|32.3% | style="text-align:center;"|1,257 | style="text-align:center;"|67.7% | style="text-align:center;"|2,711 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Lake
| style="text-align:center;"|49.0% | style="text-align:center;"|3,268 | style="text-align:center;"|51.0% | style="text-align:center;"|3,496 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Lake of the Woods
| style="text-align:center;"|36.1% | style="text-align:center;"|769 | style="text-align:center;"|63.9% | style="text-align:center;"|1,436 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Le Sueur
| style="text-align:center;"|42.4% | style="text-align:center;"|6,163 | style="text-align:center;"|57.6% | style="text-align:center;"|8,559 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Lincoln
| style="text-align:center;"|29.8% | style="text-align:center;"|879 | style="text-align:center;"|70.2% | style="text-align:center;"|2,211 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Lyon
| style="text-align:center;"|38.0% | style="text-align:center;"|4,628 | style="text-align:center;"|62.0% | style="text-align:center;"|7,725 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|McLeod
| style="text-align:center;"|34.3% | style="text-align:center;"|6,218 | style="text-align:center;"|65.7% | style="text-align:center;"|12,253 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Mahnomen
| style="text-align:center;"|38.6% | style="text-align:center;"|807 | style="text-align:center;"|61.4% | style="text-align:center;"|1,350 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Marshall
| style="text-align:center;"|28.2% | style="text-align:center;"|1,119 | style="text-align:center;"|71.8% | style="text-align:center;"|3,541 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Martin
| style="text-align:center;"|32.4% | style="text-align:center;"|3,466 | style="text-align:center;"|67.6% | style="text-align:center;"|7,465 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Meeker
| style="text-align:center;"|35.5% | style="text-align:center;"|4,264 | style="text-align:center;"|64.5% | style="text-align:center;"|7,937 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Mille Lacs
| style="text-align:center;"|39.3% | style="text-align:center;"|5,053 | style="text-align:center;"|60.7% | style="text-align:center;"|8,004 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Morrison
| style="text-align:center;"|32.1% | style="text-align:center;"|5,228 | style="text-align:center;"|67.9% | style="text-align:center;"|11,424 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Mower
| style="text-align:center;"|43.2% | style="text-align:center;"|7,818 | style="text-align:center;"|56.8% | style="text-align:center;"|10,603 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Murray
| style="text-align:center;"|29.0% | style="text-align:center;"|1,337 | style="text-align:center;"|71.0% | style="text-align:center;"|3,419 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#ffc8c8;"|Nicollet
| style="text-align:center;"|53.0% | style="text-align:center;"|9,595 | style="text-align:center;"|47.0% | style="text-align:center;"|8,670 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Nobles
| style="text-align:center;"|25.7% | style="text-align:center;"|2,035 | style="text-align:center;"|74.3% | style="text-align:center;"|6,393 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Norman
| style="text-align:center;"|37.0% | style="text-align:center;"|1,132 | style="text-align:center;"|63.0% | style="text-align:center;"|2,050 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#ffc8c8;"|Olmsted
| style="text-align:center;"|51.0% | style="text-align:center;"|39,053 | style="text-align:center;"|49.0% | style="text-align:center;"|38,525 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Otter Tail
| style="text-align:center;"|33.5% | style="text-align:center;"|10,202 | style="text-align:center;"|66.5% | style="text-align:center;"|21,180 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Pennington
| style="text-align:center;"|38.6% | style="text-align:center;"|2,444 | style="text-align:center;"|61.4% | style="text-align:center;"|4,030 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Pine
| style="text-align:center;"|37.8% | style="text-align:center;"|5,216 | style="text-align:center;"|62.2% | style="text-align:center;"|8,756 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Pipestone
| style="text-align:center;"|24.4% | style="text-align:center;"|1,092 | style="text-align:center;"|75.6% | style="text-align:center;"|3,539 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Polk
| style="text-align:center;"|35.4% | style="text-align:center;"|4,951 | style="text-align:center;"|64.6% | style="text-align:center;"|9,547 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Pope
| style="text-align:center;"|36.5% | style="text-align:center;"|2,242 | style="text-align:center;"|63.5% | style="text-align:center;"|3,991 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#ffc8c8;"|Ramsey
| style="text-align:center;"|63.5% | style="text-align:center;"|172,197 | style="text-align:center;"|36.5% | style="text-align:center;"|102,069 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Red Lake
| style="text-align:center;"|32.3% | style="text-align:center;"|617 | style="text-align:center;"|67.7% | style="text-align:center;"|1,356 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Redwood
| style="text-align:center;"|30.5% | style="text-align:center;"|2,330 | style="text-align:center;"|69.5% | style="text-align:center;"|5,455 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Renville
| style="text-align:center;"|33.7% | style="text-align:center;"|2,549 | style="text-align:center;"|66.3% | style="text-align:center;"|5,145 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#ffc8c8;"|Rice
| style="text-align:center;"|53.7% | style="text-align:center;"|17,025 | style="text-align:center;"|46.3% | style="text-align:center;"|15,010 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Rock
| style="text-align:center;"|26.6% | style="text-align:center;"|1,218 | style="text-align:center;"|73.4% | style="text-align:center;"|3,579 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Roseau
| style="text-align:center;"|30.1% | style="text-align:center;"|2,115 | style="text-align:center;"|69.9% | style="text-align:center;"|5,185 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#ffc8c8;"|Scott
| style="text-align:center;"|51.1% | style="text-align:center;"|35,951 | style="text-align:center;"|48.9% | style="text-align:center;"|35,212 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Sherburne
| style="text-align:center;"|43.7% | style="text-align:center;"|19,953 | style="text-align:center;"|56.3% | style="text-align:center;"|26,306 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Sibley
| style="text-align:center;"|31.3% | style="text-align:center;"|2,379 | style="text-align:center;"|68.7% | style="text-align:center;"|5,404 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#ffc8c8;"|St. Louis
| style="text-align:center;"|55.9% | style="text-align:center;"|63,663 | style="text-align:center;"|44.1% | style="text-align:center;"|51,272 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Stearns
| style="text-align:center;"|47.0% | style="text-align:center;"|36,309 | style="text-align:center;"|53.0% | style="text-align:center;"|41,849 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Steele
| style="text-align:center;"|44.4% | style="text-align:center;"|8,339 | style="text-align:center;"|55.6% | style="text-align:center;"|10,685 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Stevens
| style="text-align:center;"|44.3% | style="text-align:center;"|2,463 | style="text-align:center;"|55.7% | style="text-align:center;"|3,163 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Swift
| style="text-align:center;"|39.1% | style="text-align:center;"|1,847 | style="text-align:center;"|60.9% | style="text-align:center;"|3,293 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Todd
| style="text-align:center;"|28.8% | style="text-align:center;"|3,311 | style="text-align:center;"|71.2% | style="text-align:center;"|8,448 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Traverse
| style="text-align:center;"|33.8% | style="text-align:center;"|602 | style="text-align:center;"|66.2% | style="text-align:center;"|1,238 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Wabasha
| style="text-align:center;"|40.8% | style="text-align:center;"|4,698 | style="text-align:center;"|59.2% | style="text-align:center;"|7,011 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Wadena
| style="text-align:center;"|30.4% | style="text-align:center;"|1,981 | style="text-align:center;"|69.6% | style="text-align:center;"|4,769 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Waseca
| style="text-align:center;"|40.2% | style="text-align:center;"|3,873 | style="text-align:center;"|59.8% | style="text-align:center;"|5,877 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#ffc8c8;"|Washington
| style="text-align:center;"|55.3% | style="text-align:center;"|77,108 | style="text-align:center;"|44.7% | style="text-align:center;"|63,767 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Watonwan
| style="text-align:center;"|36.4% | style="text-align:center;"|1,828 | style="text-align:center;"|63.6% | style="text-align:center;"|3,295 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Wilkin
| style="text-align:center;"|31.4% | style="text-align:center;"|967 | style="text-align:center;"|68.6% | style="text-align:center;"|2,222 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#ffc8c8"|Winona
| style="text-align:center;"|53.0% | style="text-align:center;"|14,132 | style="text-align:center;"|47.0% | style="text-align:center;"|12,884 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Wright
| style="text-align:center;"|44.0% | style="text-align:center;"|29,259 | style="text-align:center;"|56.0% | style="text-align:center;"|38,157 |
| style="text-align:center; background:#c8ffc8;"|Yellow Medicine
| style="text-align:center;"|34.5% | style="text-align:center;"|1,835 | style="text-align:center;"|65.5% | style="text-align:center;"|3,572 |
See also
{{Portal|Law|LGBTQ|United States}}
References
{{Reflist}}
External links
- [https://www.revisor.mn.gov/revisor/pages/search_status/status_detail.php?b=Senate&f=SF1308&ssn=0&y=2011 SF1308: Constitutional amendment to recognize marriage solely between one man and one woman]
- [https://web.archive.org/web/20121024174732/http://mnunited.org/ Minnesotans United for All Families] (opposition)
- [http://www.minnesotaformarriage.com/ Minnesota For Marriage] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121112095252/http://www.minnesotaformarriage.com/ |date=2012-11-12 }} (support)
- [http://www.minnpost.com/data/2012/10/who-funding-marriage-amendment-fight Who is funding the marriage amendment fight?], MinnPost
- [http://www.mnopedia.org/thing/minnesota-amendment-1 MNopedia: Minnesota Amendment 1]
{{Minnesota elections}}
{{U.S. same-sex unions ballot measures}}
{{Same-sex marriage in the United States}}
Category:LGBTQ rights in Minnesota
Category:2012 in LGBTQ history
Category:Same-sex marriage ballot measures in the United States
Category:2012 Minnesota elections
Category:2012 ballot measures in the United States
Category:Minnesota ballot measures