Samantha Smoot of the Human Rights Campaign says voters want Congress to focus on issues like affordable health care and the Iraq war rather than spending time debating a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. (Photo by Harry Cabluck/AP)
Experts say N.C., Indiana results spell end of Clinton campaign
Va. woman, husband fought to overturn ban on interracial unions
Constitutional ban, high court ruling both in the works
Says call to withhold money no longer ‘relevant’
advertisement
advertisement
|
JOSHUA LYNSEN - ELIZABETH WEILL-GREENBERG
Thursday, May 11, 2006
A majority of Americans oppose the proposed federal constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage, according to a new poll commissioned by the Human Rights Campaign.
The poll, conducted by Peter D. Hart Research Associates and released May 9, also shows that voters believe Congress should consider the Marriage Protection Amendment only after it makes health care more affordable, deals with the war in Iraq and halts illegal immigration.
"Voters want Congress focused on fixing America’s challenges, not creating more," said Samantha Smoot, HRC’s political director.
The polling, conducted in April among 802 registered voters nationwide, showed that 49 percent of those questioned believe gay marriage should be a state issue. Only 33 percent of those questioned believed the issue should be decided by amending the U.S. Constitution. Another 18 percent were not sure how to handle the issue.
"The numbers show that Americans want Congress working on affordable health care, the ongoing war in Iraq and passing new ethics and lobbying laws, not changing the Constitution," Smoot said. "Senators and representatives should take these numbers as a sign that this political ploy will backfire at the polls."
The Marriage Protection Amendment, scheduled for a Senate vote the week of June 5, would ban marriage, civil unions and other forms of relationship recognition for same-sex couples.
The language of the proposed constitutional amendment states: "Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman. Neither this Constitution, nor the constitution of any state or federal law, shall be construed to require that marital status or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon unmarried couples or groups."
Gay rights advocates, Democratic party leaders, and others are working in public and private to stop Congress from passing the proposed amendment.
"We will call it what it is—an attempt to scapegoat people," said Democratic Party spokesperson Damien LaVera. "We won’t let the Republicans get away with it."
Conservative groups, meanwhile, are working just as hard to lobby Congress to pass the measure. The Family Research Council is hosting an online petition with a goal of obtaining 50,000 signatures in support of the gay marriage ban.
Vote expected to fall short
Previously called the Federal Marriage Amendment, a Senate vote on the proposal in 2004 failed 50-48.
Also at that time, the House voted 227-186 in favor of the proposal. The measure still needed 29 more votes in the House and 19 more votes in the Senate to reach the two-thirds majority required to pass a constitutional amendment.
In the 2004 vote, 36 House Democrats joined 191 Republicans voting for the amendment. Twenty-seven House Republicans and 158 House Democrats opposed the measure.
Political observers have forecasted this year’s Senate vote at 52-48 in favor of the measure, mostly due to Democratic seats won by the GOP in November 2004. Such a vote still would fall 17 votes shy of the necessary two-thirds majority.
Patrick Guerriero, president of Log Cabin Republicans, a gay partisan group, said Marriage Protection Amendment opponents have lost some ground.
"[We will] see a slight pick up in the Senate," he said, "but will hold pretty solid with the people with us last time.
"The far right will claim they’re making progress, when in reality they’re very far away from the majority," he said. "Their biggest chance was last time."
Guerriero said the measure likely will fail next month, but gay rights groups should still work to defeat the measure so as "not to let our opponents gain any real momentum."
Log Cabin has crafted a campaign to defeat the proposed amendment that is rooted in conservative values, like federalism and states’ rights, Guerriero said.
"A new wave of Republican voices are coming out against the [amendment]," he said. "You can be a good Republican and not want to write discrimination into the Constitution."
Log Cabin’s strategy will focus on grassroots organizing, and cost less than its 2004 campaign, when the group spent hundreds of thousands of dollars, Guerriero said.
"We’re not spending at the clip we did in 2004," he said. "We now have a real feel on who is with us and against us."
Democrats to filibuster?
The National Stonewall Democrats also are working on a grassroots campaign to fight the proposed amendment.
"We’re working with chapters around the country to talk to individual members of Congress, especially Democrats, regardless of their current position on the amendment," said John Marble of National Stonewall Democrats, a gay partisan group.
Marble said Stonewall Democrats also are asking Democratic National Committee leaders and members to meet with their respective members of Congress.
"It’s one thing to hear from us," he said. "Members of Congress need to be hearing from our straight allies as well."
In a May 8 telephone conference call for the media, Smoot said some Democratic senators have told HRC they’ll filibuster to attempt to derail the proposed amendment.
HRC spokesperson Jay Smith Brown said opposing senators will argue the amendment is unnecessary because many states already have—through the Defense of Marriage Act—the authority to refuse to recognize gay marriages from other states.
"That’s definitely the main argument in Congress against it," he said. "But there will be all kinds of arguments against it."
Smith Brown said more than 120 gay rights and civil liberty groups are working together to defeat the proposed amendment.
Earlier this month, HRC launched an advertising campaign urging gay and straight Americans to act against the amendment.
Among the campaign’s tools is an online video highlighting what HRC called "the radical right’s discriminatory campaign," print ads attacking Republican Senators Rick Santorum and Bill Frist, and e-mails asking amendment opponents to sign postcards that will be hand-delivered to Congress.
HRC President Joe Solmonese said the ad campaign’s tools "are just pieces of the puzzle" to defeat the proposed amendment.
"While we’re on Capitol Hill day in and day out lobbying against any effort to put discrimination in our Constitution, it’s vital that back home all fair-minded Americans are doing their part to make their voices heard," he said.
Some gay advocates have complained that at least some senators should base their opposition to the amendment on the argument that gay couples should have full marriage equality.
Smith Brown noted that Sen. Russell Feingold (D-Wis.) recently announced his full support for gay-marriage rights, and he is expected to present such arguments in the Senate. Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) previously argued in favor of equal marriage rights in 2004.
Guerriero said that gay rights advocates should focus on their commonality. He said Log Cabin is collaborating with HRC and other groups to defeat the amendment.
He said the groups are sharing information on polling results, politicians’ positions, and messages that go out to members.
Log Cabin hopes to mobilize constituents of Republican leaders who either oppose or are hesitant to support the amendment. Guerriero said targeted states include New Hampshire, Maine, Arizona and Pennsylvania.
|
