christian grantham
Christian Grantham was a student activist in the late 90s and later was a consultant to domestic policy forums for the Clinton Administration as well as events for HRC and GLAAD.
	latest posts   U.K. Free Speech in Peril   Communism Is So Gay   Sunday Read   Virginia Republicans Priority 1: Discrimination   I Love New York

January 18, 2005

On Sunday, President Bush used the lack of votes in the Senate to suggest a constitutional amendment defining marriage isn't going anywhere. The next day, the White House was busy spinning like a top, defying legislative realities on whip count and pledging to spend "a lot of political capital on getting that initiative moving." Today, they are still making that pledge.

QUESTION: In a newspaper interview this weekend, the President said that he would not be pushing the Senate this year to pass a constitutional marriage amendment, uhm, because the votes aren't there. Uh, I think it can be argued that the votes aren't there yet either for Social Security and immigration reform. Why is he abandoning...

MCCLELLAN: Lemme, Lemme, lemme make clear what the President said. The President, uhm, and what the President believes. Uh, the President will continue to advocate the need for a constitutional amendment to protect the sanctity of marriage. It is something he believes very strongly in. In fact, he has already spent a lot of political capital on getting that initiative moving. Uh, but he's also, in his interview, he also talked about the legislative reality in the Senate. Uh, there really needs to be more of an openness in the Senate to be able to spend more capital on moving it forward, but the President is going to continue to make his views known and continue to talk about it and make clear, uh, why he believes it's necessary.

Remember, in the Senate you have to have 67 votes to move a constitutional amendment forward, there are a number of members of the Senate that have said that they're not open to it until the Defense of Marriage Act, uh, faces a serious legal challenge. So that's just talking about the legislative reality, but he remains firmly committed to protecting the sanctity of marriage and moving forward on a constitutional amendment.

QUESTION: But the legislative reality last year when he announced his support for the amendment was that there were fewer Republicans in the Senate than there are today, and presumably less support for the initiative. So, did he not think he had the support last year?

MCCLELLAN: I just said that he's going to continue to advocate the need for a constitutional amendment. It's something he believes very strongly in.

QUESTION: Where the votes there in the Senate last year, did the President believe?

MCCLELLAN: Well, that was the beginning of getting the process moving and talking about the need for a constitutional amendment. Since that time there were many members of the Senate who have made clear their views and their lack of an openness to moving on it at this time, but we're going to continue to encourage them to move forward on it, and I think it's important for those who support this effort in the country to make it clear that they want to take this step to protect the sanctity of marriage as well and make those views known to members of Congress, too.
[White House Press Briefing - White House - 01-18-05]

There is a very important lesson of leadership here for the Human Rights Campaign. Despite the legislative reality, and whether you agree with them or not, the White House is demonstrating leadership in pledging to push for a consitutional amendment "protecting the sanctity of marriage."

If HRC is serious about their recently repeated call for the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell via a press release, they'll actually produce the language of a repeal, make it public and secure co-sponsors no matter what the whip-count is for a repeal. That's exactly how the Federal Marriage Amendment came into being, and I was there at their first press conference in Washington, D.C. laughing with other HRC staff at how foolish they were. Who's laughing now?

Year after year, those who have drafted and supported the Federal Marriage Amendment have done so in outright defiance of whip count on such an amendment. The results have placed supporters of equal rights for gays and lesbians on the defense. Isn't it time Republicans are on the defense for prioritizing their radical agenda over national security?