The Manhattan Project
Controversy Over Rhee Now to Include Sex, Congress
Report: CCDC Split From UDC Is "Critical To Success"
Increased Urban Walkability For The Win
D.C. United Icon Ben Olsen To Retire
When legislation allowing the District to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states came to a first vote before the D.C. Council, it received unanimous support. On its second vote, Council member Marion Barry (D-Ward 8) -- a "moral politician," or so he called himself at the time -- switched sides and voted against it. Now as a battle heats up over a possible referendum on the issue and future legislation that would fully legalize same-sex marriage in the District, some members of the council are starting to waffle on whether to support the cause.
Council member Harry Thomas (D-Ward 5) was the first to show some discomfort with the issue. After a report in the Washington Blade stated that Thomas was fully on board with same-sex marriage in the District, both he and his spokeswomen rushed out to claim that the article's author had misunderstood Thomas' position. Not so, said the Blade, pointing out that Thomas had gone on record in 2006 supporting same-sex marriage. Mike DeBonis at City Desk had a chance to talk to Thomas about the waffling, and got this from him:
We’re going to have to make sure whatever we do passes the congressional smell test. And so I am looking at how we look at possible referendums and other options where we have a true voice of the people on this issue, to strengthen our position when we go forward.Sounds like a much more nuanced pronouncement than his past record would indicate, doesn't it? It makes sense, though. The Ward 5 Democrats are still the only Democratic committee to have voted against the council's endorsement of marriage equality, and plenty of the most fervent opposition seems to be rising from that part of town. Thomas seems to be playing safe politics.
Picture snapped by bSmithPhotoBlogDotOrg
As is Council member Yvette Alexander (D-Ward 7). In an article in the Post today on the possibility of a referendum on the council's vote, Alexander stated simply, "It needs to be brought to the people."
Though it may seem like Thomas and Alexander are abandoning their past positions for fear of political repercussions, their respective endorsements of a referendum looks like smart politics. Neither one has come out against marriage equality, but neither will they be marching in the Gay Pride Parade anytime soon. Backing a referendum provides them both with enough political cover to ride out the issue relatively unscathed, especially since they know that the referendum is still a distant possibility. (Not only must it be permitted by the D.C. Board of Elections and Ethics, but its organizers would be faced with the unenviable task of collecting 21,000 signatures by July.) Additionally, with the great majority of the council still favoring same-sex marriage, losing one or two won't prove to be devastating.
Of course, their waffling comes only in response to the city's move to recognize same-sex marriage performed elsewhere. Once legislation hits that would fully legalize the practice in the District, we may start seeing more defections on the council. Assuming Thomas and Alexander fold and Barry remains "moral," one or two more members might go with them.
But no one really knows. Polling on this issue is old and unreliable, and it's difficult to know whether out-of-state church groups and anti-marriage equality activists will be able to stir up enough local opposition to truly scare members of the council in switching sides. But as Thomas and Alexander make clear, local pols are watching the issue as carefully as they are their re-election campaigns.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
Marriage Equality Poses Difficulties for Members of Council
Oh, those poor, poor councilmembers! Boo f**king hoo! Whatever shall they do? It's a good thing they were hired to act as overpaid doubleparking notary publics instead of having to, y'know, make difficult decisions that they have to stand behind.
Come on, that is the beauty of the DC Council job. Being a one party town you NEVER have to make difficult decision. Just yell about Congress, yell about guns, say things like "We really need to get our schools in order." To make it seem like you are doing something, occasionally do something 'controversial' like introducing a plastic bag tax. Basically, emulate Marion Barry.
Martin, I disagree with your analysis sometimes, but you nailed this one. This is exactly how it is going to play out.
This headline might as well be: "Controversial Issue Poses Difficulty For Politician. In Other News, Sun Rises In East, Marion Barry Owes Back Taxes."
I wish local pols - heck, any pols - would simply grow a set and stand up for principles, rather than worry about re-election bids. Deferring the issue to a referendum (which would be driven entirely by the anti-equality coalition of preachers and 19th century holdouts) is waffling of the highest degree. Nuance my ass - it's just waffling, simply spineless.
At any rate, if the referendum folk come to bat, let's hope that any church that engages in supporting such legislation is held to task on their tax-exempt status. Of course, that would also wreck the DC political infrastructure - wait, that would be great!
While we are on the topic, I have a question for our gay common-taters, how come San Fran's straight, well-dressed, trim, metrosexual mayor has become a gay icon and our own straight, well-dressed, trim, metrosexual mayor has not?
I would have figured him to be total suit sex fantasy fodder. http://tinyurl.com/ksvpnl
great, are we going to propose putting everything political "touchy" to a referendum now? look how well that's going for california.
you're elected to lead, councilmembers, so LEAD!
So what if several members of the Council are waffling? The bill had its second and final reading. It's sitting in Congress now. Whether Thomas or Alexander are waffling has no effect on the current bill. Neither do they have a say in whether a referendum is conducted or not.
Now, their waffling would affect a bill for DC to allow same-sex marriages in the city (as opposed to the recently-enacted bill's recognition of same-sex marriages done in other states).
List of same-sex marriage supporters (non-waffle edition):
* Catania
* Graham
* Mendelson
* Cheh
* Evans
* Wells
* Gray
Total wafflers:
* Alexander
* Thomas
* Michael Brown
Likely anti-same sex marriage:
* Barry
Likely on the waffle fence:
* Kwame Brown
* Bowser
Assuming the non-waffles hold true to their name, that's 7 votes and enough to pass a same-sex marriage bill. The total wafflers are only in that position b/c either they're worried about the power of the non-resident churchgoers or they have mayoral aspirations.