Unique gay-marriage plan draws lukewarm response

Unique gay-marriage plan draws lukewarm response
By THOMAS BEAUMONT
REGISTER STAFF WRITER


October 1, 2007




Republican presidential candidate Fred Thompson should expect intense scrutiny of his gay-marriage position from Iowa's social conservatives as he resumes his campaign for the state's leadoff caucuses today.

His proposal to limit judges' power is unique among the 2008 GOP field and at odds with Iowa's Christian right, which sees a simple constitutional ban as a crucial litmus test.

Constitutional scholars call Thompson's two-part alternative amendment ground-breaking and pragmatic, if confusing and politically unrealistic.

"This would be a very strange constitutional amendment, unlike any other on record," said Donald Downs, a University of Wisconsin constitutional law professor.

Thompson has discussed an amendment that would bar a judge in one state from recognizing a court ruling from another state allowing gay marriage.

"My concern ... under the (Constitution's) Full Faith and Credit Clause is that some court in the second state is going to say that you are going to have to recognize that marriage," Thompson said in Sioux City last month. "That should not be the case."

In other words, Thompson supports exempting gay marriage from Article IV of the Constitution, which says "full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state."

Thompson's two-part amendment proposal would also block a judge from declaring gay marriage legal in states where there is no law recognizing gay marriage.

Such an amendment would be the first to put limits on something that could be considered a right, Downs said.

Likewise, no previous amendment has limited a state's power to expand rights, he said.

Steve Scheffler, president of the Iowa Christian Alliance, said that he would give Thompson's approach a fair hearing, but also that Iowa's GOP base sees little room for nuance.

"We can't dillydally around while 50 states figure out what they are going to do," Scheffler said.

The Iowa Christian Alliance is a leading social advocacy group that represents thousands of politically active Christian conservatives in the leadoff caucus state.

Thompson made an appearance at the group's fall banquet in Clive Saturday. He shook hands with many of the roughly 800 people who attended from all over the state, but did not address the audience.

Sioux City Republican Steve Carlson, who was in the audience, has watched Thompson closely on the issue of gay marriage. The former Tennessee senator's position will weigh heavily with undecided caucusgoers like himself, Carlson said.

"This issue is an integral part of the decision-making process, as in whether we would or would not support him," Carlson said. "His position doesn't automatically disqualify him, but it ranks right up there in importance with abortion."

Johns Hopkins University constitutional law professor Joel Grossman said Thompson seems to be hedging by supporting a constitutional amendment, albeit not the one most social conservatives support.

"I would describe Thompson's statement as symbolic gibberish," Grossman said. "It is, at best, a weak effort to cover his flanks."

The issue has provided a potential rallying point for Iowa's GOP base, with the caucuses a little more than three months away.

In August, Polk County District Court Judge Robert Hanson ruled that Iowa's gay marriage ban is unconstitutional and ordered county officials to begin applying state marriage rules as "gender neutral."

Under Thompson's proposed amendment, Hanson's order would be blocked because Iowa has not enacted legislation to allow same-sex marriage. No states have enacted such legislation.

Hanson's decision sparked a drive to impeach him and a renewed effort by some Iowa clergy to put a state constitutional amendment back on the Iowa Legislature's agenda.

Twenty-seven states have amendments defining marriage as between a man and a woman. Iowa is not among them, but is among 45 states that have enacted legislation defining marriage as between a man and a woman.

Gay marriage is legal only in Massachusetts, the result of a court decision.

Thompson's proposal mirrors key provisions of the federal Defense of Marriage Act, enacted in 1996 with Thompson's support. The constitutional amendment he describes would make those provisions irreversible.

Most of the Republican presidential candidates have said they support a constitutional ban on gay marriage.

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, Kansas Sen. Sam Brownback, U.S. Rep. Duncan Hunter of California, U.S. Rep. Tom Tancredo of Colorado and former Ambassador Alan Keyes have said they support the constitutional ban.

Arizona Sen. John McCain, former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani and U.S. Rep. Ron Paul of Texas have said flat-out that they oppose an amendment to the U.S. Constitution banning gay marriage.

Drake University constitutional law professor Larry Pope said Thompson's proposal makes sense, but isn't likely to generate adequate support. A change to the Constitution requires passage by Congress and ratification by three-quarters of the nation's state legislatures.

Pope, a Des Moines Republican, is backing McCain and opposes a constitutional ban on gay marriage.

Still, he said Thompson deserves credit for "intellectual honesty."

"He's not going to pander to the people who want the amendment," Pope said. "He's opposed to it, but he's trying to work out some sort of other amendment that would deal with it in a different way."

Reporter Thomas Beaumont can be reached at (515) 286-2532 or tbeaumont@dmreg.com