Obama’s Problem with Gay Marriage
Published in El Mundo
(Spain) on 26 June 2011
by Ricard Gonzalez (link to original)
In four years, the shift in the polls regarding gay marriage in the United States is such that President Obama has remained completely out of the game. The historic vote by the New York Senate that just legalized gay marriage presents a new dilemma for the White House incumbent’s 2012 reelection campaign.
In 2007, when then-Senator Obama presented himself to the nation, he expressed clearly and repeatedly his opposition to gay marriage. Obama the candidate did, however, support a the law that granted equal rights to same-sex couples via civil unions. The same rights, but a different name for their union.
His position was perfectly aligned with his political ambitions. According to the polls back then, a solid 55 percent of U.S. citizens were opposed to gay marriage while only 36 percent were in favor.
However, only four years after, the numbers have flipped. According to the last Gallup survey, 53 percent of citizens approve of gay marriage while 44 percent are opposed.
White House Press Secretary Jay Carney made a smooth change of direction in the first press conference after the New York vote. Carney reiterated that Obama believes in equal rights and left the decision of gay marriage in the hands of each state. “The states should determine for themselves how best to uphold the rights of their own citizens. The process in New York worked just as it should.”
That is to say, Obama doesn’t advocate for gay marriage, as Gov. Andrew Cuomo does, but he is not opposed to other states passing similar bills. At a cultural and political level, the position of granting the states larger jurisdiction is popular enough, as the breech between the two progressive coasts and the conservative center seems larger than ever.
Let’s not forget that, of the six states where gay marriage is recognized, five are on the East Coast. The sixth, Iowa, was not a political decision but rather judicial. The Iowa Supreme Court determined that a ban on gay marriage violated the Constitution.
For a president who has alienated his most progressive supporters with military escalation in Afghanistan and his inability to close Guantanamo or approve an immigration reform, remaining a step behind the majority of the population on such an important question could have a very high electoral cost in 2012.
Specifically, the gay and lesbian population, which supported him overwhelmingly in 2008, find themselves disappointed with the president. Among other things, the recognized norm of “don’t ask, don’t tell” (which prevents gay soldiers from being open about their sexual orientation) still hasn’t been taken care of.
If Obama doesn’t confront the issue of same-sex marriages soon, he risks losing the support of the homosexual community — as much their votes as their checks to finance his campaign. Now, a 180 degree turn also has its risks, as it would show that his decision wasn't based on his conscience but on a simple political calculation.
If Afghanistan and Libya weren’t enough, New York's legislation has presented Obama with a new political dilemma. His answer will be a clear guide to whether the president wants to cater to the same base that carried him into the White House in 2008 or sway toward the independents and moderates.
In 2007, when then-Senator Obama presented himself to the nation, he expressed clearly and repeatedly his opposition to gay marriage. Obama the candidate did, however, support a the law that granted equal rights to same-sex couples via civil unions. The same rights, but a different name for their union.
His position was perfectly aligned with his political ambitions. According to the polls back then, a solid 55 percent of U.S. citizens were opposed to gay marriage while only 36 percent were in favor.
However, only four years after, the numbers have flipped. According to the last Gallup survey, 53 percent of citizens approve of gay marriage while 44 percent are opposed.
White House Press Secretary Jay Carney made a smooth change of direction in the first press conference after the New York vote. Carney reiterated that Obama believes in equal rights and left the decision of gay marriage in the hands of each state. “The states should determine for themselves how best to uphold the rights of their own citizens. The process in New York worked just as it should.”
That is to say, Obama doesn’t advocate for gay marriage, as Gov. Andrew Cuomo does, but he is not opposed to other states passing similar bills. At a cultural and political level, the position of granting the states larger jurisdiction is popular enough, as the breech between the two progressive coasts and the conservative center seems larger than ever.
Let’s not forget that, of the six states where gay marriage is recognized, five are on the East Coast. The sixth, Iowa, was not a political decision but rather judicial. The Iowa Supreme Court determined that a ban on gay marriage violated the Constitution.
For a president who has alienated his most progressive supporters with military escalation in Afghanistan and his inability to close Guantanamo or approve an immigration reform, remaining a step behind the majority of the population on such an important question could have a very high electoral cost in 2012.
Specifically, the gay and lesbian population, which supported him overwhelmingly in 2008, find themselves disappointed with the president. Among other things, the recognized norm of “don’t ask, don’t tell” (which prevents gay soldiers from being open about their sexual orientation) still hasn’t been taken care of.
If Obama doesn’t confront the issue of same-sex marriages soon, he risks losing the support of the homosexual community — as much their votes as their checks to finance his campaign. Now, a 180 degree turn also has its risks, as it would show that his decision wasn't based on his conscience but on a simple political calculation.
If Afghanistan and Libya weren’t enough, New York's legislation has presented Obama with a new political dilemma. His answer will be a clear guide to whether the president wants to cater to the same base that carried him into the White House in 2008 or sway toward the independents and moderates.
Next article![]( "Europe, the Military Pygmy")
