GOP Still Plans to Advocate for Ban on Same-Sex Marriage

A group of Republican lawmakers Monday renewed their push for a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage, even though hope for its passage appears to have dimmed, even among some of its main supporters.

The measure fell far short of the mark in key votes in the House and Senate last year. Those defeats prompted President Bush to question recently whether he should aggressively lobby for it, given his other priorities, such as overhauling Social Security.

And while some religious groups with clout within the Republican Party have made the amendment a top goal, it was not on the list of top 10 legislative priorities unveiled by Senate GOP leaders Monday.

Still, Sen. Wayne Allard (R-Colo.) introduced the Marriage Protection Amendment on Monday and expressed hope that it would stand a better chance of passage after November’s election, increased the Republican majority in Congress. Also, voters in 11 states approved state constitutional amendments banning gay marriage.

“I think that we’re going to have more support than we’ve had in past years because I think members of the Senate have looked at what happened in this election and fully understand how popular this particular vision is with the American people,” Allard said at a Capitol Hill news conference.

Allard was joined by Republican Sen. John Thune of South Dakota, a supporter of the amendment who in November defeated then-Democratic Senate leader Tom Daschle. Among the issues Thune raised against Daschle was his support for the Democratic-led Senate filibuster that blocked a vote on the measure last year.

But there was no sign that Democrats were backing off on their opposition to the measure.

“The only reason Washington Republicans would introduce a measure that has already failed is to appease a small group of right-wing extremists who are now running their party,” Democratic National Committee Chairman Terry McAuliffe said in a statement.

Some Republican senators, including John McCain of Arizona, also have opposed the amendment, calling it an unnecessary federal intrusion into states’ rights.

Momentum for the amendment built last year after a wave of same-sex marriages in San Francisco, Massachusetts and elsewhere. But in most of these locales, including California, courts have halted same-sex marriages.

As of Monday, Allard had lined up 24 cosponsors to his measure, all Republicans. That’s fewer than half of the 55 Republicans in the Senate. But his staff said he had only begun his new effort.

Amending the U.S. Constitution, which has been amended just 17 times since the Bill of Rights was adopted, is difficult. The amendments must be approved by a two-thirds vote of both congressional chambers and then ratified by three-fourths of the state legislatures.

Bush’s comments in an interview with the Washington Post this month raised doubts about how hard he would press for amendment. He noted that many senators have questioned the need for it unless the courts strike down the 1996 federal Defense of Marriage Act, which says no state is required to recognize a same-sex marriage allowed by another state.

“Senators have made it clear that so long as [the marriage act] is deemed constitutional, nothing will happen. I’d take their admonition seriously,” Bush said. “Until that changes, nothing will happen in the Senate.”

His remarks upset some social conservatives who believe their causes -- and Bush’s embrace of them -- played a major role in his reelection.

White House officials responded by saying Bush was referring only to the “legislative realities” of trying to overcome a Senate filibuster and would continue to push for the amendment.

Tom Minnery, vice president of public policy at Focus on the Family, a Christian advocacy group in Colorado, said Monday that while he was disappointed by Bush’s comments, he anticipated the president would “rise to the occasion” and work hard to pass the amendment “when the vote nears.”

Republican congressional leaders were vague about when that might be.

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.), in response to a question, insisted the measure remained a key GOP goal, despite its absence from the list of legislative priorities he released Monday.

He said the proposed amendment would be brought to the Senate floor for a vote, though he did not say when.

When the measure came before the Senate in July, 48 senators -- 45 Republicans and three Democrats -- voted to cut off debate, well short of the 60 required to break a filibuster.

In the House, the proposed amendment fell 49 votes short of the two-thirds majority required.

The amendment would define marriage as “the union of a man and a woman.”

The split between the parties on the need for the amendment is just one of many divides on Capitol Hill. Senate Democrats made clear Monday that they don’t agree with Bush and GOP congressional leaders on the key domestic issues that should be addressed, let alone the solutions.

An agenda unveiled by Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) included none of Bush’s priorities: no overhaul of Social Security, the legal system, immigration law or the tax code.

Reid questioned Bush’s assertion that the 2004 election results gave him “political capital” to aggressively pursue his agenda.

“Let’s not get carried away with the ‘mandate’ of President Bush,” Reid said. “There is no mandate.”

Democrats, seeking to reshape themselves after last year’s election defeats, put new emphasis on improving domestic security. But they also said they would continue to push for an increase in the minimum wage and increased funding for education and veterans’ benefits.

The Senate Republican agenda that Frist released, not surprisingly, placed restructuring Social Society at the top of the list.

Frist also said the first bill to come before the Senate would be a measure to force many class-action lawsuits out of state courts, often considered friendly to plaintiffs, and into federal courts that corporate defendants generally prefer.

One of the few subjects on the agenda for both parties was increased funding for the war on terrorism.