|
|
"A comprehensive, collaborative elections resource."
|
'Federal Marriage Amendment' as political theater
|
|---|
| Parent(s) |
Issue
|
| Contributor | ArmyDem |
| Last Edited | ArmyDem Apr 12, 2006 11:53am |
| Logged |
0
|
| Category | Blog Entry |
| News Date | Wednesday, April 12, 2006 05:00:00 PM UTC0:0 |
| Description | Posted 11:16 am | Printer Friendly
I'm not quite sure why, but some conservative Republicans seem excited about the fact that that their constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage will lose this year, but by a smaller margin than last year.
A majority of the Senate this year will support the Federal Marriage Amendment, an outcome that both the left and the right say will energize their respective bases in November.
In the summer of 2004, the effort to define marriage as between a man and a woman failed in the Senate, on a 48-50 vote. Now that Republicans have increased their majority, the amendment has collected more support. If all senators vote the way they did in 2004 and the freshmen vote as expected, the bill will attract 52 votes — well short of the 67 needed to amend the Constitution.
First-term Sens. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), Mel Martinez (R-Fla.), John Thune (R-S.D.) and David Vitter (R-La.) have all co-sponsored the amendment. These four legislators replaced Democrats who voted against the amendment in 2004. Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.), who won the seat vacated by Sen. John Edwards (D-N.C.), has also co-sponsored the new legislation.
Bill Frist has already promised the base a vote in June on the so-called Federal Marriage Amendment (FMA), and everyone knows it's not only going to lose, but it's not even going to be close. Proponents don't even have the votes for cloture.
In this sense, the vote on the FMA will just be political theater. But who, exactly, are the theatrics for? |
| Share |
|
|
2¢
|
|
| Article | Read Full Article |
|
| Date |
Category |
Headline |
Article |
Contributor |
|
|
