June 07, 2006

The Anti-Gay Marriage Constitutional Amendment, The Democratic Support

So just because it can't pass the Senate, doesn't mean the US House won't also take up the measure. They are expected to vote on it in July. And in the reading I've done on that vote, I've noticed something that's too often overlooked in US politics. The people who are going to vote for the measure are mostly Republicans (like our own Rep. Capito), but there are a lot of Democrats supporting it too. Saying that you probably think I mean the Blue Dogs, the moderate/conservative white Democrats from the South. And yes, a lot of them are planning to vote for it - people like Ben Chandler who might well be the next governor of Kentucky, Chet Edwards, Charlie Melancon, Jim Cooper, John Tanner, Jim Marshall, Marion Berry and quite possibly every other member of that crowd in the Democratic caucus. There are also other white guys from the general area who might be viewed as more moderate or moderate/liberal than conservative (Rick Boucher from SW Virginia, Nick Joe Rahall from Southern WV) who will be voting for it too. As will the odd non-Southern Democrat who has a terrible voting record on gay rights issues (with Tony Hall and Lipinski the elder no longer in the House, I guess the leader of that set might be Collin Peterson of Minnesota) and Democrats like Stephanie Herseth who represent non-Southern, blood-red areas. But there's one other noticeable block supporting the amendment as well - a chunk of the black Democrats from the South. Men like Harold Ford of Tennessee (why people are excited about his Senate race perplexes me), Reps. Scott and Bishop of Georgia, Jefferson of Louisiana (I guess the entire Louisiana delegation will be voting for this) and Thompson of Mississippi (who was the more liberal candidate in yesterday's primary). Too many people forget that a lot of black Americans view the civil rights battles for gays to be quite different than the civil rights fights for blacks. And of course the influence of churches in those communities must not be forgotten. In other words, the voting patterns on this matter in the House aren't going to fall entirely along the ideological lines some might expect. And there are a few black Democrats in the House who are much more conservative than many people realize.

Posted by armand at June 7, 2006 04:08 PM | TrackBack | Posted to Politics


Comments

Via a link on Wonkette I see that the Washington Post website also has some demographic breakdowns on how the vote went in the Senate. Republicans were more likely to favor of course as were men (female senators voted 11-3 against it) pre-baby boomers (as opposed to baby boomers), Southerners (most were for it, all but 1 Northeasterns were against it and the Midwest and West were split down the middle), and ...Taurans, Geminis and Cancers also mostly backed it. I'm not making this up. The demographics on the Washington Post website include a breakdown by astrological sign! Proportionally Librans and Sagitarians were the most opposed to the amendment. Oddly (if you believe in that stuff) there aren't many Leos in the Senate - but there are several Pisces, Scorpios, Taurans and people born under Aquarius. Who would have thought that almost a third of senators would be water signs - and what the hell is that bit of trivia doing in the Post's vote analysis?

Posted by: Armand at June 7, 2006 11:05 PM | PERMALINK
Post a comment









Remember personal info?