Senate halts marriage amendment

The Senate yesterday killed a constitutional amendment that would have defined marriage as the union of one man and one woman, dealing a setback to President Bush and Republican leaders, who had pushed the proposal forward to energize their base.

Although the defeat wasn’t a surprise, the 49-48 procedural vote fell far short of the 60 votes needed to force an up-or-down vote on the measure. Seven Republicans joined Democrats to block it, and two Democrats — both facing re-election in November — supported it.

The White House and Republican leaders, facing sagging poll numbers and a restless Republican base, had insisted on the measure, which is a top goal of social conservative groups. Constitutional amendments require a two-thirds vote to pass.

Yesterday, amendment supporters tried to put a positive spin on the vote, saying they would keep advocating the measure until it is approved, because courts are forcing same-sex “marriage” onto states, despite overwhelming public opposition.

“History has shown us that it can take several tries before an amendment builds the two-thirds support it needs in both houses of Congress,” Mr. Bush said after the defeat. “My position on this issue is clear: Marriage is the most fundamental institution of our society, and it should not be redefined by activist judges. The people must be heard on this issue.”

“We must continue fighting to ensure the Constitution is amended by the will of the people rather than by judicial activism,” said Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist.

The House is expected to vote on the measure soon.

Democrats said that the amendment is all about the November elections and that Congress should be considering more pressing problems.

“This week’s debate underscores the misplaced priorities of the Bush Republicans,” said Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat.

The amendment picked up one vote of support from last time around. In July 2004, 48 senators supported it and 50 opposed it.

Supporters had predicted about 52 votes this time , because the chamber’s Republican majority had increased by four seats after the 2004 election. But they lost the support of Republican Sens. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania and Judd Gregg of New Hampshire, both of whom switched from “yes” in 2004 to “no” yesterday. And Sen. Chuck Hagel, a Nebraska Republican who supported the amendment last time, wasn’t present to vote yesterday.

But over time, supporters said, the vote will grow and Congress will catch up to the states, 45 of which have state constitutional amendments or state laws defending traditional marriage.

“I do think we will get there,” said Sen. David Vitter, Louisiana Republican.

“It was a disappointment,” said Sen. Jeff Sessions, Alabama Republican. “The American people have a right to expect Congress to respond.”

Nine states are facing legal challenges to their traditional marriage laws, and Nebraska is awaiting an appeal after a federal court last year struck down that state’s constitutional marriage amendment. Amendment supporters say state supreme courts in Washington, New Jersey, and New York are poised to strike down traditional marriage.

Story Continues →