RALEIGH — For six months they wrangled over budgets, redistricting, guns, abortion, obesity, tort reform, and charter schools. Now, lawmakers in the state’s capital are poised to take another dip into the partisan maelstrom during a mid-September session devoted to constitutional amendments.

Wielding their newfound majority clout, Republicans have a rare opportunity to incorporate their values into the state’s highest governing document, and they only need a smattering of Democratic support — plus a majority vote of North Carolinians — to do it. The three amendments most likely to surface when the legislature reconvenes Sept. 12 address eminent domain, traditional marriage, and term limits for top legislative leaders.

Those “have been the most discussed among our members,” said Ray Martin, press secretary for Republican Senate leader Phil Berger of Rockingham County. “That doesn’t mean they necessarily will be considered during the session, nor does it mean additional amendments won’t be considered.”

Other proposed changes to the constitution cover the spectrum of political issues: monetary policy, election law, redistricting, and government transparency.

Amendments must be passed by a three-fifths majority of both legislative chambers — that’s 72 out of 120 votes in the House and 30 votes out of 50 votes in the Senate. Although the governor can’t veto amendments, another hurdle is that they must gain a simple majority approval by voters in 2012 before becoming part of the constitution.

Republicans need the support of at least four Democrats in the House to pass an amendment, while the GOP Senate caucus has enough members to pass one in that chamber without Democrats.

It’s also unclear how long the September session will last. Rumors circulated late last week that the General Assembly might be in session for only one or two days, making a lengthy agenda problematic.

Since voters ratified the current state constitution in 1971, the legislature has tried to enact amendments 36 times, 29 of which were successful, according to the secretary of state’s office. During that period, amendments have given the governor veto power, required the state to run a balanced budget, and allowed voters to elect the governor and lieutenant governor to two consecutive terms.

Voters have shot down seven amendments, including one that would have extended terms for state senators and representatives to four-year, rather than two-year, terms.

The majority party has additional power because it frames how the amendment question appears on the ballot, giving it a favorable or negative tone, said Bob Orr, a former N.C. Supreme Court justice and current director of the N.C. Institute for Constitutional Law.

“The actual amendment itself does not appear on the ballot,” Orr said, “so the ability of the drafters of the proposed amendment to, shall we say, ‘cook the books’ with a favorably worded issue is something that needs to be carefully looked at in the whole process.”

Marriage tussle

Debate over an amendment defining marriage as between one man and one woman could be among the most heated, and the battle lines already have been drawn. A rally behind the Legislative Building in May drew thousands of traditional-marriage supporters, while three homosexual-rights protesters were arrested in June as they ran onto the House floor during session, yelling.

North Carolina is the only state in the Southeast without a marriage amendment. Nationwide, 30 states have amended their constitutions to protect traditional marriage and ban same-sex marriage, typically by two-thirds margins. Six states have legalized same-sex marriage, half of those through judicial ruling and the other half through their legislatures.

Statutory law in North Carolina already defines marriage as a male-female relationship and bans same-sex unions, but an amendment would prevent state courts from striking those laws down.

A pressing question is which amendment — the House or Senate version — will be considered. The House bill addresses marriage only, while the Senate bill goes a step further and could ban civil unions and domestic partner benefits for the same-sex partners of government workers.

Tami Fitzgerald, director of the N.C. Values Coalition, stressed that the Senate version wouldn’t prohibit private businesses from handing out domestic partner benefits for same-sex couples. It only bans state and local governments from recognizing those relationships, she said.

“The amendment is about promoting strong, healthy families so they can produce stable, healthy, balanced, and successful children that will fuel our future workforce and our state’s economic growth,” Fitzgerald said.

Groups in favor of same-sex marriage say the amendment is a distraction. “The legislature was sent to Raleigh to tackle jobs, the economy, and the state budget, not to advance a divisive social agenda,” Equality N.C.’s website states.

Martin said that leaders haven’t decided which specific versions of amendments will be considered. Jordan Shaw, a spokesman for Republican House Speaker Thom Tillis of Mecklenburg County, said they were still looking at the details of the marriage amendment. “I’m not aware if a decision has been made on the finer points of either,” he said.

‘Eminent’ battle

Another measure tentatively on the agenda calls for an amendment to prevent local governments from taking private property for nonpublic uses, such as to increase tax revenue. It also would require just compensation in eminent domain takings, and give property owners the right to have a jury set compensation.

The amendment counters a U.S. Supreme Court ruling in 2005 that OK’d the constitutionality of a local government taking property for economic development purposes. The decision was an interpretation of the “takings clause” in the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that guides when government can condemn property for a public use.

The state House passed the bill 98-18 in April, but the Senate didn’t take it up.

Although supportive of the idea overall, property-rights advocates are concerned that the amendment doesn’t go far enough. “It’s too general,” said Daren Bakst, director of legal and regulatory studies at the John Locke Foundation, which publishes Carolina Journal. “The language doesn’t provide any additional protection beyond what’s already defined in the U.S. Constitution.”

The Senate version of the amendment specifies that a public use “does not include the taking of property in order to convey an interest in the property for economic development,” which could better frame the issue to protect property rights.

Dynasty killer

A third amendment likely to crop up would term-limit top leaders in both chambers of the legislature to no more than two sessions. The objective is to prevent too much power from being concentrated in one individual legislator for too long.

After rigorous debate, the House passed the measure, 72-46, in April. Four Democrats — Reps. Bill Faison of Orange County, Jean Farmer-Butterfield of Wilson County, Susi Hamilton of New Hanover, and Dewey Hill of Columbus County — joined all 68 Republicans in the House in voting for the amendment.

Democrats said that a straightforward change to the legislature’s rules, rather than a wholesale change to the state constitution, would be a better option.

“Not everything that’s a good idea needs to be in the constitution,” said House Minority Leader Joe Hackney, D-Orange, on the House floor in April.

Republicans disagreed. “The people want things like this. The people like turnover among their public officials,” said Rep. Johnathan Rhyne, R-Lincoln.

Sidelined amendments

Lawmakers might debate a handful of other amendments, but votes in either chamber are less likely. Among them is a “sunshine” amendment that would strengthen North Carolina’s open-records law by putting it in the constitution.

During the long session earlier this year, sponsors mounted three unsuccessful attempts to pass the measure, first as a constitutional amendment, then as a statute. The bill made it to the House floor but was abandoned when Democrats and some Republicans objected.

Two other amendments also are in the running:

• House Bill 188, Taxpayer Bill of Rights: Commonly known as TABOR, the amendment would require new General Fund expenditures to correlate with population plus inflation. A two-thirds majority vote of the General Assembly would be needed to exceed the expenditure limit.

• Senate Bill 139, Gubernatorial Team Ticket Implementing: The amendment requires that the governor and lieutenant governor run on the same ticket, as the U.S. president and vice president do. The change wouldn’t go into effect until the 2016 gubernatorial election.

David N. Bass is an associate editor of Carolina Journal.