 |
| Originally Aired: June 5, 2006 |
 |
|
 |
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
President Calls for Amendment to Ban Gay Marriage |
 |
 |
| President Bush said Monday he was proud to back the supporters of a constitutional amendment that would ban gay marriage. Political analysts consider the Republican drive to adopt the amendment and the possible role it may play in mid-term elections. |
 |
 |


 |
 |
| On June 7, the Senate rejected the amendment. |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
       |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
GWEN IFILL, NewsHour Correspondent: Over the weekend and
again today, President Bush turned the nation's attention to an issue that
energizes many social conservatives: using the Constitution to ban same sex
marriage.
GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States: You are here because
you strongly support a constitutional amendment that defines marriage as the
union of a man and a woman. And I am proud to stand with you.
GWEN IFILL: During his re-election campaign, the president
pledged to push for such an amendment, a promise some of his supporters say he
has made little effort to keep.
Today, Mr. bush said activist judges are undermining the
will of the people in states that have acted on the issue.
GEORGE W. BUSH: Decisions about a fundamental social
institution as marriage should be made by the people.
GWEN IFILL: White House officials said that the president is
speaking up now because the Senate is launching its own marriage debate.
SEN. SAM BROWNBACK (R), Kansas:
It's about who is going to define marriage in America. It's not whether marriage
is going to be defined, it's about who is going to define marriage in America.
GWEN IFILL: The amendment, which would require a two-thirds
vote of the Senate and House and ratification by the states, would bar judges
from granting same-sex couples the same legal rights as married couples, and it
would define marriage as a union between a man and a woman.
Today, advocates and opponents of the amendment held dueling
protests and press conferences.
MATT DANIELS, Alliance
for Marriage: Americans are committed to seeing our laws send a positive
message about marriage to children, to their children and grandchildren.
They believe it's common sense that marriage is a man and
woman and they want that reinforced under our laws.
But as we stand here today, courts in nine states are
actively seeking to strike down our marriage laws. Some of these court cases in
New Jersey, New York
and Washington
state, are poised to lead to the end of marriage as we have known it in this
country for hundreds of years.
LAWANA SLACK-MAYFIELD, Human Rights Campaign: And if you
open a door to putting discrimination against gay people in the Constitution,
what's to say we won't discriminate against another group down the line? Who
will be next? Women? African-Americans?
This amendment is a cynical political ploy, and we won't be
bamboozled or lose focus on what's truly important.
GWEN IFILL: The Senate has scheduled a vote on the amendment
for Wednesday.
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Kellyanne Conway
The Polling Company |
 |
 |
I'm not sure that this is a great political move for the president. I think it's based on policy. |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
Politics vs. policy
GWEN IFILL: Democrats argued today that the timing of this
latest marriage debate is being driven by politics. Republicans say the debate
is long overdue. Who's right?
For that, we turn to two pollsters who have been following
the issue. Geoff Garin is the president of Peter Hart Research Associates -- he
polls mostly for Democrats; and Kellyanne Conway, CEO and president of the
Polling Company, works mostly for Republicans.
Geoff Garin, is this a political debate we're seeing here
unfold or policy debate?
GEOFFREY GARIN, Peter Hart Research Associates: Well,
ultimately, both I think the motivations are political, but the fact of the
matter is Americans are not sitting at home tonight waiting with baited breath
for the Congress to take this up.
They think that there are lots of really important and
pressing issues facing the country -- Iraq, the economy, gas prices -- and,
frankly, when they hear about or read about the Senate debating this issue now,
it confirms their worst views of the Senate, that it's all about politics, it's
not about getting real things done, it's not about taking on the priorities of
the American people.
I think this ends up being a black eye for the Republican
leadership.
GWEN IFILL: Kellyanne Conway, if Geoff Garin is even a
little bit right, why now?
KELLYANNE CONWAY, The Polling Group: Well, if Geoff's right,
then I don't know what he's afraid of. In other words, then I can see him and
his candidates using this against the president and his Republican Party
majority this fall in ads.
In other words, why were your priorities so askew?
I think what Geoff very wisely -- his party's fear is that
they have to run Democratic candidates this year who also support traditional
marriage, and that those people are going to have a very difficult time staring
down the folks at home who ultimately decide whether they keep their jobs.
Seventy-one percent of the people in the 19 states who have
voted on protecting traditional marriage have voted for protecting the
traditional marriage. So we know this is a very popular issue when put to the
people.
And I must say that this move is actually fraught with
tremendous political risks for the president, because there are at least three
constituencies with whom he performed very well in 2004 -- Catholics, Hispanics
and women -- who are not necessarily so enthused about the issue.
Hispanics are a bit more enthused than Caucasians. And
African-Americans, traditionally, are very against homosexual marriage in
defense of regular marriage.
But there are constituencies like these women and these
independents that President Bush performed well within 2004 -- he's not doing
well with them now in the polls -- who can very well be angry about this.
So, I'm not sure that this is a great political move for the
president. I think it's based on policy. |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Geoffrey Garin
Peter Hart Research Associates |
 |
 |
If you ask people, "Would you prefer to do this through the Constitution or leave it up to the states," a majority of Americans would prefer to leave it up to the states. |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
|
Leave it up to the states
GWEN IFILL: But Geoff Garin, is it a move which is driven by
-- or are these results you're seeing in people you talk to, people you poll,
is it driven by people who think that marriage is threatened or people who
think that a constitutional amendment is a solution to that problem?
GEOFFREY GARIN: Well, really, I think that this is driven by
internal Republican politics, frankly, that the base of the Republican Party is
unhappy right now. They think that the party is failing them on fiscal
responsibility, lots of conservative Republicans are as angry as everybody else
about gas prices.
So I think this is really about trying to reassure the base,
but this time, I think, doing it at some cost compared to two years ago or
previously when the Republicans have brought this up. It seems more transparent
to the American people, that this is really about politics.
And it comes at a moment when we're really dealing with --
Americans feel we're dealing with really big things in the country, and they
don't think that we need a constitutional amendment to solve this problem to
the extent that it's a problem.
If you ask people, "Would you prefer to do this through
the Constitution or leave it up to the states," a majority of Americans
would prefer to leave it up to the states.
And you know, in terms of the election, I'd like senators
like Rick Santorum to say why this is so pressing right now that it's more
important than voting on the minimum wage or voting on taking back the tax
breaks for the oil companies or voting on a host of other things.
I think in a post-Terri Schiavo world, I think Americans are
much more sensitive to this kind of intrusive politics by the Republican Party,
and I think it's out of step with where people are at in terms of their
priorities. |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Kellyanne Conway
The Polling Company |
 |
 |
Even in states like Oregon, which was not a very politically contested state -- it went for John Kerry handily -- they passed defense of marriage. |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
|
Not a rallying issue
GWEN IFILL: Kellyanne Conway, Matt Dowd, the president's
pollster from 2004 and 2000 who's now working for Arnold Schwarzenegger in California was quoted in
Newsweek this weekend as saying the idea that gay marriage amendments brought
people to the polls in these last couple of elections is an urban myth, that it
actually doesn't stir up the base.
What's your response to that? What do you think?
KELLYANNE CONWAY:
Well, he's correct in that you certainly had higher turnout in some of the
states, but the fact is that you have higher turnout in states where there is
more political activity. And as we all know, those are the swing states, the
seven, eight key states -- when you really get down to it, three or four
towards the end.
To the extent that the states also had marriage initiatives,
it's tough to say it's causation or coincidence. But even in states like Oregon, which was not a
very politically contested state -- it went for John Kerry handily -- they
passed defense of marriage.
Oregon
was a state in this country that passed the first assisted suicide law. So
you're talking about some pretty loyal blue states defending marriage.
But Matt is correct on that, and even the polls today, Gwen,
show that -- as Geoffrey has said -- even though a majority supports
traditional marriage as between one man and one woman, majorities oppose a
constitutional amendment as the correct prescription.
And even more importantly, especially among younger voters,
they are not saying that a particular candidate's position on this issue is
going to be wrought with any type of political currency.
That statistic actually breaks with senior voters. Voters
aged in 55-plus say that they are more likely to vote for a candidate this fall
based on his or her issue on defense of marriage than not, but that's really
the only age group where it see it spike. |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Geoffrey Garin
Peter Hart Research Associates |
 |
 |
People know that this amendment has no chance of passing in the Congress. I mean, it won't even get a majority to proceed to the debate. And so it's just political gamesmanship. |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
|
What pushes people's buttons?
GWEN IFILL: Well you both agree, Geoff Garin, that there's
not a clear political benefit necessarily in pushing for a constitutional
amendment.
But the president said several times in his remarks today
that his goal was to get activist judges to get out of interfering with the
will of the people.
Is that something that presses buttons, talking about judges
replacing their judgment for individuals?
GEOFFREY GARIN: It really doesn't -- or at least not right
now.
That, you know, Kellyanne talked about all of the referenda
that were held in the states -- people all across America feel that they have
the ability to deal with this problem in their state legislatures, in their
state constitutions.
They don't really feel like they need Congress butting in in
these kinds of questions, and that if you go through a list of priorities --
that is, when you talk about people's buttons, people's buttons are pushed by
trying to keep up with the cost of living and this terrible situation we have
in Iraq and by what's happening with energy prices. And those are what matter
to people.
They wish like crazy that Congress would deal with those
kinds of issues in a serious way.
People know that this amendment has no chance of passing in
the Congress. I mean, it won't even get a majority to proceed to the debate. And
so it's just political gamesmanship. It really is what has led so many
Americans to be so disdainful of the current Congress, and it's why people are
looking for change.
GWEN IFILL: So, Kellyanne Conway, what is the point of
bringing this up if, indeed, it's not going to pass the House or the Senate,
get the two-thirds vote that's necessary, if it is in some cases angering some
of the president's conservative base who don't think he's gone far enough, why
have this debate now at all?
KELLYANNE CONWAY:
Well first of all, judicial activism is seen as a clear and present danger to
many conservatives inside and outside of the president's base. I would say that
is the one phrase that really connects the fiscal conservatives, the social
conservatives and moral conservatives.
And when you started to rip "God" out of the
Pledge of Allegiance, when there have been suggestions to take "God"
out of our nation's currency, that's the kind of excessive overreach that
really does bind many in the base together -- whereas there's disagreement on
immigration within the base, there's disagreement on spending within the base,
there's disagreement on some of these other moral issues like abortion and stem
cell research within the base.
This is the one phrase, judicial activism, that gets everybody
on their hind legs. And I will say that, because of judicial activism, the base
and the president have a pretty nice time of getting two of his more
conservative United States Supreme Court justices confirmed with very little
opposition, in Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito.
And much of that stems from the Republicans but really the
conservative base being able to conduct themselves together, put aside these
differences from other major issues and rally behind these two nominees to the
bench.
So this is the one theme -- not really an issue, Gwen, but a
theme -- judicial activism, that does get the base moving.
GWEN IFILL: Well, we'll be watching for all of that.
Kellyanne Conway, Geoff Garin, thank you very much.
GEOFFREY GARIN: Thank you.
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
|
|