President Bush has suddenly decided to give a few speeches on behalf of the proposed constitutional amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman, and he has prevailed upon the Senate to debate the issue this week. Despite six years in the White House, the present spasm of pro-marriage amendment activity represents the biggest effort yet by the Bush administration on behalf of a measure widely supported by the conservative majority of the GOP and, according to numerous surveys, by most Americans generally, irrespective of their ideological orientation.
But conservatives in Congress and elsewhere shouldn’t waste an ounce of treasure or energy on the amendment this week for two reasons: First, a two-thirds majority is required in both the Senate and House to send the amendment to the states for ratification. Three-fourths of the states would have to adopt the amendment for it to become part of the Constitution. Bush, his political strategist Karl Rove and the Senate GOP leadership know full well the amendment stands no chance of passage in the Senate, in part because only one Democrat — Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb. — supports the measure, even though 45 states have adopted either similar constitutional provisions or regular statutes.
Knowing it isn’t going anywhere in Congress, Bush and the Senate GOP leadership feel secure in cynically using the doomed marriage amendment to “rile up the base” just in time for those elections in November. The day after the election, of course, it’s doubtful the phrase “marriage amendment” will ever again be heard in the Bush White House. If there were a reasonable chance of passage, things might well be different, but the political reality is that expending any effort on behalf of the proposal now is literally a fool’s errand. Conservatives in Congress and beyond the Washington Beltway should ask themselves if they really want to play the fool yet again for the GOP’s national leadership.
The second reason is that allowing the proposal to go forward to a certain defeat now will do more damage to the prospects for eventual passage than demanding that Bush ask Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist to withdraw the measure from the Senate calendar without a vote. If Bush wants to bring the amendment proposal back after the election and devote a significant portion of whatever remaining political capital he has to seeking its approval, then it will be easier for everybody concerned to believe he is genuinely committed to protecting traditional marriage.
By bringing up the proposal now, when it is certain to be defeated, and making it clear in comments to the media that they are doing it only to “bring out the base” in November, Bush, Rove and company are also laying the groundwork for permanently shelving the initiative after the ballots are counted. Let the marriage amendment fail now and odds are overwhelming that there will be many other “more winnable” goals for Bush and the GOP leadership to push. The marriage amendment will then languish or fade away as the Balanced Budget Amendment did. Such cynical political calculation is the acid eating away at Washington’s credibility.
