With a slew of challenges and huge problems on his plate, President George Bush will soon turn to an issue that millions of Americans are talking about at the 7-Eleven, at water-coolers, over their kitchen tables — an issue that makes Americans wake up at night filled with preoccupation…and issue on which they demand immediate action and the allocation of his and Congress’ valuable time.
Well, maybe not. But it IS a good wedge-issue to define the Democrats and arouse passions:
President Bush will promote a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage on Monday, the eve of a scheduled Senate vote on the cause that is dear to his conservative backers.
The amendment would prohibit states from recognizing same-sex marriages. To become law, the proposal would need two-thirds support in the Senate and House, and then be ratified by at least 38 state legislatures.
It stands little chance of passing the 100-member Senate, where proponents are struggling to get even 50 votes. Several Republicans oppose the measure, and so far only one Democrat — Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska — says he will vote for it.
The Senate Judiciary Committee approved the amendment on May 18 along party lines after a shouting match between a Democrat and the chairman, Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa. He bid Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., “good riddance” after Feingold declared his opposition to the amendment and his intention to leave the meeting.
Bush aides said he would be making his remarks on the subject Monday.
A slim majority of Americans oppose gay marriage, according to a poll by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press from March. But the poll also showed attitudes are changing: 63% opposed gay marriage in February 2004.
Those poll results don’t reflect how people might feel about amending the Constitution to ban gay marriage.
The intent and timing of this is clear: to fulfill a promise to his base and to stir up a divisive controversy during an election year. It’ll be one way to “define” Democrats who vote against it (you can just see the hit pieces and TV ads now about defending the institution of marriage). Once again from this administration, it’s an “us versus them” issue — yet another sign of a President who history will indeed proclaim “a divider not a uniter.”
At this point the issues he chooses are almost irrelevant; the style is what is consistent on seemingly issue after issue after issue. Divide ’em and pick up the majority pieces.
Joe Gandelman is a former fulltime journalist who freelanced in India, Spain, Bangladesh and Cypress writing for publications such as the Christian Science Monitor and Newsweek. He also did radio reports from Madrid for NPR’s All Things Considered. He has worked on two U.S. newspapers and quit the news biz in 1990 to go into entertainment. He also has written for The Week and several online publications, did a column for Cagle Cartoons Syndicate and has appeared on CNN.