Senate preparing Gay Marriage vote in July (right before Dem convention)

[WilliamPitt]

http://www.rollcall.com/issues/1_1/breakingnews/5911-1.html

GOP Planning July Vote on Gay Marriage Amendment

By Mark Preston
Roll Call Staff

Tuesday, Jun. 15; 04:23pm

The Senate Republican leadership is aiming for a mid-July vote on a constitutional amendment that would ban gay marriage, forcing Democrats to take a stand on the controversial topic just before the party heads to Boston for its presidential nominating convention.

Republican Conference Chairman Rick Santorum (Pa.) said the GOP leaders are not yet prepared to make an official announcement on a specific date, but confirmed that they are scouting for a July vote.

“We are sort of running the traps on this right now, and sort of seeing what kind of response we are getting,” Santorum said following Tuesday’s Republican policy lunch. “We are talking about it. I think there are a couple of meetings to be had yet before any official announcement is made.”

The issue was not discussed with all 51 Republican Senators at the Tuesday meeting, but a handful of senior Senators and leaders “discussed the issue at length” Monday night, several GOP Senators and aides said. There was not unanimity in that chairmen’s meeting about whether the GOP should pursue the issue in this election year, but there appears to be a strong majority within the Republican Conference to at least force a vote.

“I think it needs to come up and we need to vote on it one way or another,” said Judiciary Chairman Orrin Hatch (R-Utah).

...more, subscriptioon required...

[Waverley_Hills_Hiker]

1. Dont they need 2/3rds majority?

This is like DOMA all over again.

[PepSky]

3. Unfortunately I fear they have the votes

there are enough dems that will probably go along with it.

Also - they may have enough states. Count up all the states with a state DOMA passed in to law. The last I heard it comes up one short of being sufficient to pass the amendment (one can imagine states that passed their own DOMA would pass this amendment).... it's going to be VERY close if the dems let it out of congress. The senate dems MUST vote against it - otherwise the states will probably pass it.

[Waverley_Hills_Hiker]

8. Maybe they should just get it over with......

vote it to the states and let the states amend the Constitution.

Lets face it, the lesbian/gay vote is pretty small, so the Dems dont really need it, unless theres a real close election. And the lesbian/gay vote isnt monolithic.

Maybe this should quickly work its way through the process and be off the table as an issue.

[PepSky]

13. Fuck that

I hear the black vote is pretty small when compared to the white vote. So I guess we don't need em. Fuck them then. Let's repeal the 15th, 16th, and 17th amendment and us white folks can have an easy life with our new slave class doing all the work.

With all due respect - people with positions like yours make me sick. Thank GOD the democratic party is not comprised of people who are willing to destroy the rights of any minority that doesn't give us a truck load of votes. I hope you realize just how big a turn off to the party your position is.

A democratic nation that does not protect the minority can not survive, and if it does it can not claim to be a just nation.

[MallRat]

16. Funny. I thought Waverly was being facetious.

Maybe I'm wrong.

-MR

[Waverley_Hills_Hiker]

19. no your not wrong

Im being coldly bitter and ironic here.

[Sapphocrat]

48. WHH...

Next time, could you please, please, please make it clear you're being coldly bitter and ironic? You scared the shit out me with that post.

[HFishbine]

52. Oh

Well, see those posts from me below? Nevermind.

[malachibk]

32. There are a MILLION LOG CABINS

There are probably 10 times as many gay Dems.

Plus, there are hundreds of thousands of GLBT in Miami. That's Florida.

Don't be so quick to marginalize.

It's time for dems to take a fucking stand and say "Don't rewrite my Constitution to include hate and discrimination." I think Bush'll lose even worse if Kerry just takes a motherfucking stand on something.

[ulysses]

45. ah yes.

The Democratic Party - now with added "fuck the little guy" flavoring!

:puke"

[HFishbine]

50. Ummm

It's not just the gay and lesbian vote that is against this. There are those of us who care about equal protection under the law who have some interest as well.

[radwriter0555]

64. This is all nothing more than WAG THE FAG.. it's gets people's

dander up, gets em all worried so they neglect real issues.

[WilliamPitt]

30. No, they just need to make it a national issue

Remember 1988? The big issue was flag-burning.

[iconoclastic cat]

2. Doesn't the GOP understand that about 15% actually gives a crap?

This will flop and make them look like bigots.

[Political_Junkie]

4. They are bigots.

n/t

[VelmaD]

5. Gee boys and girls...

can you say naked politics.

I really hope this backfires and people see it for the ridiculous political ploy that it is. This they can waste time on while the economy and the "war on terra" go to pot.

[Waverley_Hills_Hiker]

6. Its DOMA again. But if the Dems vote for it they just lose some gay votes.

So, from a strict political calculation, its a no-brainer for the Dems, as the gay vote is not that big, and not all gays & lesbians will bolt because of it....they have no place to go, really, except to the third party wilderness.

I think the best way to neutralize this for the Dems to vote for it, then it becomes a non-issue.

[PepSky]

7. So just gays care?

GLBT people have friends, family, and others that will not appreciate support of DOMA.

I wonder what your position would have been when it got a little too hot for you back in the civil rights movement.

[Waverley_Hills_Hiker]

9. Personally I dont think straights care one way or another.

There are family, true, but I really think this is not a big issue for most people.

[PepSky]

20. Apathy

It's nice you only put your self and those whose groups you fit in to first.

First they came for the Communists,
and I didn’t speak up,
because I wasn’t a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn’t speak up,
because I wasn’t a Jew.
Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn’t speak up,
because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me,
and by that time there was no one
left to speak up for me.

Make no mistake Waverley - if you are not white, christian, heterosexual, wealthy, and can pass as a fascist if the need arises you are on these peoples hit list. Once they are done with putting down GLBT people they'll move on to the next group.

[Waverley_Hills_Hiker]

26. hah...Im just nominally American.

thats the way I see it. I expect the worst from my fellow "citizens".....

The GLBT community are to this country what the Jews where to Europe.

[Bjornsdotter]

46. I disagree!

Hi,

I'm straight, everyone in my family (to my knowledge is straight)and I do care; it is a BIG issue for me. I don't believe in discrimination and to me this is blatant discrimination.

Cheers,
Kim

[SheepyMcSheepster]

53. it's a big issue for this straight person.

there is no reason for this amdendment.

[VelmaD]

10. Voting for it is NOT the answer...

because then it goes out to the States and lord knows my State government is full of right-wing crackpots who'll ratify the damn thing. I don't even want it out there as an option.

My solution...fillibuster the damn thing and never let it come up for a vote.

[Waverley_Hills_Hiker]

12. So what if the amendment passes....?

gay marriage goes off the table as a national issue. That would actually be good for the Democrats as it removes a hot-button social issue that can be used against them.

[VelmaD]

17. It doesn't go off the table as a national issue...

What happens is that we get spread thin having to work in every state to stop it instead of being able to focus our attention on the national level.

[Waverley_Hills_Hiker]

22. Well...thats the idea, isnt it?

To litmus test vote state-level Dems on the issue. Its a real clever move on the part ot the GOP...

If this does go to the states, I think the GLBT movement needs to write off alot of states, and concnetrate on a few.

I think this will be a losing battle. But thats America....the good guys rarely win.

[PepSky]

25. Good guys rarely win?

Thank god Martin Luther King didn't have that attitude.

[Waverley_Hills_Hiker]

29. ALOT more sympathy for Black civil rights than for GBLT folks.

...there is alot diffferent between the situation of GLBT folks and the situation of African Americans....different legal environment, different political circumstances, different communitys, etc. Too long to go into, but the African American civil rights fight in the postwar period is not relevant here.

[PepSky]

33. Wrong

During Kings time and before non-white americans were in an ENTIRELY different boat than they are now. Much closer to where GLBT people are today. Most states didn't even allow a non-white person to marry a white person.

I hope GLBT people will make the same progress racial minorities made.

[Waverley_Hills_Hiker]

39. GLBT community is in a more precarious place.

For one, the African Americans didnt have the majority of Christian denominations arrayed against them, the way they are against us, to one degree or another.

For another, back when the Civil Rights legislation was passed, there was a coalition of Republicans and Democrats behind it, plus the legislation was pushed as sort of a legislative "monument" to honor the recently assasinated JFK.

And for another, there was alot of Federal support, to the point of using the military or national gaurd, to enforce desegregation decisions.

And for yet another, the main battles where in parts of the South where the African American community had signifigant minority or even in some cases majority populations, where large mass boycotts (like the Montg. Bus Boycott) could be organized to put economic pressure to desegregate.

Very different context.

The GLBT community does not have the same level of legal, institutional, and national political backing, nor leadership like MLK. Harvey Milk could have been one, I think, but hes long gone.

[PepSky]

21. NOT just marriage

once this is in the constitution god help us if they get any more judges especially on the SCOTUS. This can interpreted to deny GLBT far more rights than simply marriage if the right bush appointed judge is reading it...

[Waverley_Hills_Hiker]

24. thatll happen anyway.

Sure, I think a right-wing judiciary would be pretty dangerous, but I think they could find other ways of screwing over the GLBT community.

[brainoverload]

11. yeah, that's right

screw the gays... they're a small minority, so there's no harm in Democrats voting to write their second class status into the constitution

[Waverley_Hills_Hiker]

18. I dont think people care one way or another about gays...

and most polls Ive seen said the majority are opposed to gay marriage, so, from a strictly politcal standpoint, it makes sense for Democrats to oppose it too.

Wether this is right or fair is another question. But since when are Americans right or fair...they dont seem to be too bothered by this torture thing, so why should they be bothered by writing discrimination into the Constitution?

[tedzbear]

36. I think you're wrong.

My older brother is a Repug and he supports gay rights. He might vote for Bush, but at the same time he would vote against an anti-gay state referendum. There are various degrees of Repugs just like there are various degrees of us.
As far as gay rights and the ethics of torture, I get the feeling half of the country doesn't think they're important issues, but the other half does. The half that does will vote for gay rights and against the use of torture.

Once Americans turn their back on ethics, that is when they will be condoning the complete surrender to our fascist oligarchy. Get ready to say, "Heil Bush!" when that day comes.

:kick:

[Sapphocrat]

49. And I think you're going through...

...some sort of major defeatist episode. Why?

WHH, you're not normally like this -- ready to just say, "Forget the blindfold and just SHOOT me already!"

Is it a culmination of much too much for far too long?

Or did something happen?

I'm sincerely concerned. I mean it.

[Political_Junkie]

14. So it's o.k. to further

isolate a minority? :wtf:

[Missy Vixen]

35. Okay, let me get this straight

>its a no-brainer for the Dems, as the gay vote is not that big, and not all gays & lesbians will bolt because of it....they have no place to go, really, except to the third party wilderness.<

In other words, those gay people just don't matter. Neither does anyone else who is discriminated against because of race, religion, gender, disability or sexual orientation. Maybe they should just sit down and shut up for another four, eight, sixteen years.

It's too bad that the "strict political calculation" didn't include the following: The swing vote in the United States is now estimated to be less than ten percent of the population. The estimated population of GLBT people in the United States is ten percent.

Sorry, I'm not willing to consign those who deserve to have their unions recognized by state and country to "the third party wilderness". Also, a country in which a heterosexual can get married for 55 hours, or marry a complete stranger on a game show, should extend the benefits of marriage to gay and lesbian adults.

Julie

[Waverley_Hills_Hiker]

37. It is a pretty good wedge issue, isnt it?

I don't see how the GOP can lose with this issue, even if they do lose the Senate vote.

[David__77]

38. Sorry, it will SERIOUSLY hurt the Democrats if they don't stop it.

I'm gay. I have a lot of friends who are not gay who care very deeply about this issue. I have a Republican friends who will not vote for Bush again because of his pushing this amendment.

Further, there is not the support for the amendment. Several Republicans also have stood against this. We can certainly have 34 votes against it--easily, but only with the courageous stand of our national leadership.

Shitting on the lesbian/gay community will very seriously impact the emergence of any progressive majority. Thousands will NOT work to elect Democratic candidates, will NOT donate money to them and will even remain home if they twiddle their thumbs and let this happen.

LUCKILY, the DNC, Sen. Daschle and Leader Pelosi have been very clear and straight-forward in strongly opposing this measure.

[Waverley_Hills_Hiker]

41. I hope you are right.

I am so pessimistic about GLBT issues, but that could be because I live in a pretty homophobic part of the USA, and might be getting a distorted picture.

[David__77]

42. Well, I live in California.

And the GOP really is on the defensive on these issues because they know that in the long term it's a losing issue. If you look at public opinion on marriage equality, there is an extremely SHARP generational divide. Young people (under 30) are pretty strongly for marriage equality and a large majority have no time for anti-gay politics. As I said, I have a right-leaning friend that won't vote for Bush because of this specific issue. There are many other libertarian conservatives who feel likewise. Those over 65 are probably 4-to-1 against marriage equality because it seems so strange to them, but they won't vote on that, not after we open their eyes to the truth about Social Security and a Medicare prescription benefit.

The problems coming up from this issue are dealable. The damage to our coalition from weakness would be quite great. Don't assume that gays won't go Republican either. A lot of them voted for Bush when he tried to appear "moderate." Democrats have to stand up for human rights for ALL.

[HFishbine]

51. "hey just lose some gay votes."

Wrong. Any dem who votes for this loses my vote too. And if enough dems climb on board in order for this to pass, Kerry loses my vote as well. The dems must realize that shifting to the right has consequences.

[VC of reason]

62. gay votes?? what gay votes?

...you know Kerry will not support it and probably vote against it. He is deathly afraid of alienating the 'larger' base of fence sitters (undecided voters) than he is of supporting a defense of gay rights. He is more concerned about trying to pull dissatisfied republicans and independents than honoring the faithful.

sorry to say, but that is how I read the tea leaves.

[killbotfactory]

15. Ahh... the "Look at them dirty homos!" card.

Bush '04 - 'Cause those homos are dirty.

[MallRat]

23. Dems' counterattack: DEFENDERS OF THE CONSTITUTION!

A big winning angle the Democrats can take on this issue: defenders of the sanctity of THE CONSTITUTION.

Don't even argue this ridiculous vote on the basis of gay marriage and its merits. This is WAY different from Defense of Marriage Act.

All you have to say is, "The Republicans are taking a big, steaming dump on the Constitution to feed their own petty political ambitions. Democrats have the utmost reverence for the founding document of our Nation, and we will fight to the death to protect it."

This argument is going to resonate with your typical independent voter... I see a major backlash against the GOP.

-MR

[Cleita]

27. Maybe I'm naive, but why can't the Dems in the Senate refuse to

meet on it until after the Convention?

[PepSky]

28. Because the GOP is the majority

You can't just "refuse to meet" what do you mean by that? As a minority (with enough defectors to vote it perhaps) there is little that can be done. Even a filibuster could possibly be ended with a cloture vote. I'd imagine they have 60 votes...

[ulysses]

31. can't possibly surprise you, Will.

It'd be nice to see the Kerry campaign take this on preemptively.

[PepSky]

34. They have to an extent

The Kerry campaign has been sending out a lot of info specfic to GLBT rights to people who are interested. I don't think Kerry him self has focused as much on it, but he has said he is against this amendment.

[ulysses]

43. against a PR coup like the repugs are planning,

that's not much. It's not as if they don't know that it's coming. They need to be proactive, talk relentlessly about how the GOP wants to restrict the rights of a whole lot of perfectly decent Americans and get everyone on the same page. Otherwise, they're only going to pin us against our own fear of the center and keep kicking.

[David__77]

40. The Democrats should do a lot of speechifying on this.

I see a large placard of Matthew Shepard--killed by homophobes--and a fiery speech by Sen. Boxer. We have 34 safe incumbants. If the Democrats allow this to pass, it will be due to weakness--a weakness that will invite only further attacks from the right. They must hold the line, attack the extremist anti-choice, bedroom-police bigots and sharpen the rhetoric as much as possible so that it becomes a question of theocratic fascism versus our democratic republic.

[Duncan Grant]

55. Sounds like the perfect strategy to me but...

why do I have this sinking feeling that 'my' political party will race to the right? I can hear the arguments now among Democrats:

- We can't alienate the swing vote.
- We can't 'force' this issue.
- Why can't you gays quiet down about this, it's bad for the party.
- You gays should sacrifice yourselves for President Kerry.
- What?! You think you'll do better under *?
- and so on, and so on, and so on.

You got to hand it to the pukes; they are merciless opportunists - and quiet strategic in their thinking. I hope Boxer, Daschle, Schumer, etc. will follow your reasoning David_77. From your lips to God's ears. :hi:

[Sapphocrat]

57. That sinking feeling...

...is deja vu from the Iraq war-resolution vote. Most of those are the arguments used to defend the Dems who voted in favor of giving Bush* carte blanche for his unprovoked invasion.

Di-Fi lost my vote for good over that one.

[TexasSissy]

44. I wish the Dems and activists would drop this issue.

For now. I think it might interfere with the other, huge issues out there and sway some undecideds against the Dems. And gay rights won't have a chance w/Bush in the W.H. In fact, there will probably be a constitutional amendment against marriage if he gets re-elected.

[K-W]

56. Its certainly bad timing, but that cant really be helped.

The republicans would have found thier issue somewhere. If it wasnt marriage, maybe it would be flag burning or somethings else.

Its a wedge issue, it forces all democratic politicians to either side with or alienate a certain interest group. If they side with them they open themselves up to attacks of extremism.

[Sapphocrat]

58. Here we go again...

Once more, with feeling:

We KNOW it's bad timing. We didn't ASK for ss marriage to take center stage this year. The R-e-p-u-b-l-i-c-a-n-s made it an election-year issue, not us.

Now that it's right here in front of our collective face, there's no running away from it. Are we going to do what's right, or what's supposedly "safe" -- and sell out our principles to the Repukes AGAIN, and let them have their way with the bloody Constitution?

It's your call. I may lose a lot more than my rights over this, but I'm not backing down. Not now, not ever. They'll have to kill me first. And if nobody stands up for us, and too many people chicken out and let them steamroll what little ground we hold, that is exactly what they may do.

Never think "It can't happen here." That's just when it does.

[Duncan Grant]

59. Careful, Sapph.

(in a hushed whisper) People may accuse us GLBT folks of hyperbole. :grr:

Aw, hell with 'em.

What you say is absolute truth. Pity that so few see the danger - except for Martin Niemöller of course.

edit: sp

[Sapphocrat]

63. Oh, yeah, hyperbole!

Right, right, I forgot! Nobody would actually let us homos be killed for the sake of maintaining denial or anything... would they? Nahhhhh!

(Psssssssst! SF, of just the two, which do you think should be required viewing for those who don't see the danger: "And the Band Played On" or "Paragraph 175"? Oh, wait, then there's "The Laramie Project"... Damn, so many choices...)

[silverpatronus]

71. so you advocate waiting for a politically expedient time to assert civil

rights? sounds like a load of hooey to me...you TAKE your civil rights or you don't get them. it's that simple. so sorry the timing is bad for you, but i'm sure that the gay population isn't particularly concerned that you would prefer for them to pipe down 'for now'. you know, arguments like this make me angry. 'it's not the right time'...please explain to me how any time is the 'wrong' time for standing up for your rights?

[LoZoccolo]

47. This will backfire big time.

Watch. People will see this as a distraction from a lot of other issues.

[SoCalDem]

54. Perhaps the Dem senators need to call a press conference

a few days before, and just say they refuse to participate in such a flagrant grandstanding effort on such an important issue, and that they are "going on sabbatical" until the repubes can behave in an appropriate manner :)

[Junkdrawer]

60. The GOP engaging in wedge politics - Shocked, I am shocked...

:eyes:

[MAlibdem]

61. BRING IT ON!!!!

I don't think they have the votes and this is going to blow up in their faces.

The GOP IS the party of intolerance, it's a campaign tool for them. People don't like their shit...and we're not going take it. Just show happy gay couples getting married in MA. Humanize the issue and we win easily.

[Razoor]

65. wasnt there a post few months back that said it would fail?

wasnt there a post few months ago when this was in the news alot about certain senators that said they would vote no on the amendment?
I hope it fails.

[candy331]

66. I wouldn't be shocked if it passed, I see this as nothing but the right

using their might to rule and damn to anyone who stands in the way and the poor Dems are too scared to speak up because they may get branded. Let's face it the nation is in total decline. The greatest man who ever lived(Jesus Christ) uttered these words "A house divided against itself cannot stand".

[fujiyama]

67. It won't matter

The votes simply aren't there...and neither is the public support.

Sure, a majority of people oppose gay marriage, but few want it codified in the constitution.

[DaveSZ]

68. Kerry better be on the Senate floor for this vote

I must admit it is a great wedge issue though.

Let's simply not let this pass the House.

We have enough Dems in there to kill this thing, right?

[DaveSZ]

69. Fundies to initiate letter-writing campaign:

Senate To Vote On Federal Marriage Amendment July 15

Democrats Support Homosexual Marriage, Vow To Kill Amendment
Help send 1,000,000 letters of support for President Bush's efforts!
Dear David,

The U.S. Senate will vote on The Federal Marriage Amendment on or about July 15. I urge you to respond to the call of President Bush for support by helping send one million letters to the Senate. This will be the most letters ever received by the Senate on any issue.

Democratic leaders in the Senate, including Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschale and Senators Charles Schumer (NY), Barbara Boxer (CA), and Debbie Stabenow (MI) have promised homosexual leaders they will kill the amendment. Their action would allow one liberal, activist Federal judge to overturn all marriage laws and make homosexual marriage legal in all 50 states.

Some have referred to this as the most important vote in the history of our nation. If the homosexual activists and the Senate Democrats are successful, homosexual marriage will radically reshape our society. They will force acceptance of their lifestyle on the rest of society.

TIME FOR ACTION

Click here to send an e-mail to your Senators. This is very important. It is time for action if we want to keep marriage legal only between one man and one woman. Time is short. July 15 is the date for the vote.

We cannot secure those one million letters of support for President Bush without your help. PLEASE FORWARD THIS MESSAGE TO EVERY PERSON ON YOUR E-MAIL LIST. We must expand our base of support to reach our goal!

After forwarding to your e-mail list, please print this letter and distribute to your Sunday school class, church, clubs, etc. They can participate by visiting www.afa.net. Help secure the one million letters!

Thanks for responding to President Bush's call for support.


Send your letter today!
Sincerely,

Donald E. Wildmon, Founder and Chairman
American Family Association

[DaveSZ]

70. I'd be proud of Daschle if he votes against this

He's been a bit disappointing, but it's understandable since he's from a conservative state.

Let's call and write letters to our reps to make sure they do the right thing on this.