There are two things everyone can agree on regarding the vote on the so-called “Federal Marriage Amendment”: a) it isn’t going to pass; and b) it’s a political stunt intended to influence the election.
The mechanics of it should be pretty simple, right? Schedule the time, hold a meaningless debate, hold a roll call vote, and let the games begin. That’s what would happen, if only the GOP could get its act together.
A split emerged among Senate Republicans on Monday over the wording of a proposed constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage.
[…]
To attract support for a proposal that both sides acknowledge is well short of the 67 votes needed to pass, Senate Republicans said they wanted a vote on a simpler version that would state just that marriage is the union of a man and a woman. The chief Republican proposal carries a second sentence that some interpret as prohibiting civil unions, as well.
“A group of us have an idea, but there are other ideas out there that should be considered when this very important issue is decided,” said Senator Rick Santorum, the Pennsylvania Republican who is a chief advocate of the ban on gay marriage.
This is just sad. The whole charade is a cheap stunt; minimal competence should be required to pull it off, especially when the perpetrators are running the show.
The amendment currently reads:
“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, shall be construed to require that marriage or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon any union other than the union of a man and a woman.”
But, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) acknowledged yesterday that there was “great interest” among Republicans for a streamlined amendment that simply reads: “Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman.”
The difference is utterly irrelevant, since neither has the votes to pass. Fortunately, however, the Senate will only consider one or the other, not both.
This is due to a very clever deal orchestrated by Tom Daschle (D-S.D.).
The push to bring more than one version of the amendment to the floor was resisted by Democrats, who had offered to allow an up-or-down vote on the proposal by midweek, as long as no efforts to alter it were permitted. The Senate Democratic leader, Tom Daschle of South Dakota, said that after the door had been opened to changes, senators could rush in with a flood of other pet constitutional amendments, citing one on campaign finance spending as an example.
Republicans went along, hoping for a clean vote without a lot of extraneous amendments. Now, however, they’re stuck fighting amongst themselves over which of the two pieces of constitutional pollution will lose on the Senate floor.
Frist will likely try to change the deal and allow both versions to reach the Senate floor. If he’s unsuccessful, the vote on some kind of FMA may be delayed until Republicans can reach some kind of conclusion about which one they want to see fail.
In either case, the GOP leadership is acting like the Keystone Kops as they attempt to tinker with constitutional stone.
Cheryl Jacques, president of the Human Rights Campaign, the nation’s largest gay political organization, said the last-minute effort to get votes on two different versions reflected a lack of care in drafting the amendment.
“I think it is outrageous and frankly surreal that at the 11th hour in this debate, they are literally rewriting the Constitution on the back of a napkin,” she said.
It’s hard to argue with that.
And don’t forget, Senate Republicans have already admitted they’re playing politics with the law.
The aim is to get gay-marriage opponents to the polls, says a Senate G.O.P. aide, “and while they’re in the booth, they’ll pull the trigger for Bush and Republicans.”
Shameless.