Leave a Comment Sagesse
Looking back at DOMA and President Clinton
July 22, 2011
By Adam Bink
I noticed a comment over at The Advocate’s summary of “don’t miss” moments from the DOMA hearing, from Frank Erdman in Austin:
I love Bill Clinton. Always have. Always will. But history I think will record that his biggest mistake was not personal indiscretions, but rather was this unconstitutional federal power grab over the states that was DOMA. Ethics and equality issues aside, DOMA was as unconstitutional as it gets. That he signed this into law constitutes in my opinion the single biggest mistake in what was otherwise a great Presidency. Everyone makes mistakes. I would like to see President Clinton apologize for this one, and I say this as someone who loves and admires him very much.
I go back to two of the oral histories I posted a few months ago (here and here), both from Eric Marcus’ book Making Gay History. Elizabeth Birch:
The legislation got packaged up and delivered out in time for the 1996 election. And the only real strategic error they made was picking Congressman Bob Barr from Georgia as their champion; he had been married three times. So that led to the only happy moment in this battle for me. Bob Barr and I were on the Newshour on PBS. We were debating the merits of the bill and I said, “You know, there’s some confusion out there, Congressman Barr. Which marriage are you defending? Your first? Your second? Or your third?” The cameraman started laughing so hard that I thought the camera was shaking.
Dick Morris, who was President Clinton’s chief political strategist at hte time, said to the president, “You need to take this out of play and you need to announce now that you’ll sign it.” So Bill Clinton announced that if the Defense of Marriage Act reached his desk, he’d sign it. I was absolutely enraged.
I had the chance to passionately make a case to Vice President Gore that Part “A” of the Defense of Marriage Act was unconstitutional because it violated the Constitution’s Full Faith and Credit clause, which requires that official acts and proceedings of each state be recognized by the other states. I was making a very Republican argument.
I also said that I thought that when the president was ninety years old and looked back he would be proud of having stood on the right side of history.
[...]
It didn’t happen with “Don’t ask, don’t tell.” The president could have simply issued the executive order banning discrimination in the military. He would have acted decisively and been done with it. Yes, Congress would have overturned it, but again, he would have been on the right side of history. And with the Defense of Marriage Act I thought he was secure enough in the election cycle to withstand the test of acting decisively. It would have been magnificent if he had simply vetoed it, said it was about discrimination, not about marriage.
Vice President Gore was very, very moved by what I said. He is an extremely good man and cares a great deal about our community. He said, “I will take it up with the president.” And I’m sure he did, but the president signed the bill into law in the middle of the night on September 21, 1996.
And Al Gore:
I felt that President Clinton’s judgement about the political factors was understandable given the complete impossibility of persuading more than a small percentage of Americans at that time that the other view was correct. I don’t feel good about that, but I think that was pretty much where I was.
I’d have to say I did not make the same fight on the Defense of Marriage Act as I did on “Don’t ask, don’t tell.” I don’t think that I had the vocabulary then to articulate the kind of alternative that I now strongly support. I feel that the right outcome would be to have a legally recognized civil union by some name that differentiated it from the marriage right that is so deeply interwoven with the expectations of what marriage is all about and give it the same legal protections and the same rights and responsibilities.
I sort of saw it that way then, but it wasn’t to the point where I could really express it well, and therefore it seemd like a binary choice. I did feel that it was really a hard push for the president; both he and I come from Southern states, the Bible Belt. And there were more than a few gays and lesbians who said, “Look, we understand.” That was also a factor. A number of people had said to him, “You don’t have to take this bullet.”
I recall being at the Netroots Nation conference in Austin a few years ago, when people angrily shouted at President Clinton (who was the keynote speaker) for agreeing to Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell and the Defense of Marriage Act. What I recall most was President Clinton shouting back “well, you didn’t get me the support I needed in the Congress!” For him, and others, there is enough blame to go around — some of it being simply the environment of where the country was, and other parts being that, it’s true, if Clinton is to blame, so is the entire community for not mobilizing the support around this. On the other hand, in many was this community was nascent and still very young. I note all this simply because a lot of people are looking back at the history of DOMA, and it’s worth considering what lessons we might learn.
President Clinton has actually come out in support of the Respect for Marriage Act to repeal DOMA, and let’s hope he continues to be vocal in his support for repealing what he did 15 years ago.
Having technical problems? E-mail equalityontrial AT couragecampaign DOT org for assistance!
43 Comments Leave a Comment
1.
scottsteaux63 | July 22, 2011 at 6:49 am
"I would like to see President Clinton apologize for this one, and I say this as someone who loves and admires him very much."
I, too, love and admire the man very much. I think his Presidency, scandals and all, will nonetheless go down in history as one of the great ones. However, I have a distinct memory of him saying some time ago that signing DOMA was the worst mistake he ever made and he pledged at the time to work hard to undo that mistake. He didn't exactly use the words "I'm sorry," but it sounded like an apology to me, and he did it with his usual grace and good nature.
2.
LCH | July 22, 2011 at 7:03 am
♀♀=♂♂=♀♂=∑♡
3.
Ronnie | July 22, 2011 at 7:05 am
Subscribing & sharing…………. <3…Ronnie:
Keith Olbermann & Evan Wolfson On Obama Backing "Respect For Marriage Act"
[youtube LWAEaxr39o4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LWAEaxr39o4 youtube]
4.
Ronnie | July 22, 2011 at 7:28 am
New York Senator Mark Grisanti on "New York Now" ……….<3…Ronnie:
[youtube E0R5Dnu5bPo http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0R5Dnu5bPo youtube]
5.
Fluffyskunk | July 22, 2011 at 7:55 am
"I feel that the right outcome would be to have a legally recognized civil union by some name that differentiated it from the marriage right that is so deeply interwoven with the expectations of what marriage is all about," says Mr. Gore. Can I spray him? Please? Pretty please with sugar on top?
6.
Ann S. | July 22, 2011 at 9:18 am
You have my permission.
7.
Alan_Eckert | July 22, 2011 at 9:26 am
∞
8.
Glenn I | July 22, 2011 at 9:32 am
Yeah. I remember when I was bullied in school. I was told it was my fault. I should have stood up for myself. You know, punched that bully in the nose. Except when I did fight back I got suspended. So, yeah, Adam, I totally see your point about how it was the gay community's fault Clinton signed the Denial of Marriage Act and the Military Only Loves Liars Act.
9.
Steve | July 22, 2011 at 10:02 am
More or less the same here. When I fought back was often the time for a teacher to turn around and enter the room. Of course it was me who got punished although they knew what went on and what led to it. But fighting was worse than bullying to them.
10.
Regan | July 22, 2011 at 10:25 am
When I look back on the implementation of DOMA, all I remember is a thrice divorced Senator wrote and sponsored it, and an adulterer signed it.
Defense of Marriage my ass is what I was thinking.
Feel me?
11.
Ronnie | July 22, 2011 at 10:29 am
MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell looks at the Minnesota School District Under Investigation for Perpetuating Anti-LGBT Bullying http://www.towleroad.com/2011/07/minn.html
<3…Ronnie:
[youtube cGBqbLc8z28 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cGBqbLc8z28 youtube]
12.
MarcosLB | July 22, 2011 at 10:46 am
Not sure if this was posted previously. This man is being robbed by those opposing the repeal of DOMA.
Ron Wallen testified at the Respect For Marriage hearing and had to sit next to that evil lying man from Focus on The Family, something I could not have done without punching him.
[youtube XHeyjY2pJCY http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XHeyjY2pJCY youtube]
13.
Sheryl_Carver | July 22, 2011 at 10:46 am
OT, but I saw a reference to this over at Pam's House Blend, & followed a couple of links to get closer to the actual study on "ex-gays":
New study: Sexual behavior changes but not sexual orientation
http://wthrockmorton.com/2011/07/15/new-study-sex…
One of the "intermediate" links I tried caused my browser to freeze, but this one seems OK.
14.
Martin Pal | July 22, 2011 at 10:46 am
Sorry, I’ve never been all touchy feely about Bill Clinton’s presidency. He stood before gay groups in 1992 while running for President and emphatically stated (lied) he’d sign the executive order to ban glbt discrimination in the military. He did not. And, Adam, you are giving him a pass by saying that “Congress would’ve overturned it anyway.” You don’t know that anything of the sort would’ve happened. Clinton’s DADT and DOMA signatures were acts of a friend? And he shouts that it’s our fault because we didn’t get him the support for it? That’s a profile in courage isn’t it?
And at the time, concerning the military, two people the furthest apart on the political spectrum as you can get told him to just do it–Barry Goldwater and Jimmy Carter. Those two bill signings were a gut punch that our community has lived every day for the last 15+ years. No, Bill Clinton I do not love and admire very much.
15.
Ann S. | July 22, 2011 at 10:48 am
DOMA was passed with a veto-proof majority. Clinton could have made a personal stand by vetoing it, but Congress would have passed it over his veto. What then? We'd have been in the same position, but with a president further weakened by using up some of his political capital to try to turn back the ocean.
Yeah, maybe we'd feel better about it, but the law would still be on the books.
16.
Sheryl_Carver | July 22, 2011 at 10:53 am
Couldn't help myself – I posted it over at NOMblog, too. Don't know how long it will stay up, but it's there at the moment.
17.
Sagesse | July 22, 2011 at 10:58 am
Thank you Ann. This point is often overlooked.
18.
Bob | July 22, 2011 at 11:15 am
wow, that's bang on Regan,,,, would be cool to make a t.v. ad, that really exposes this truth,,,,,
and re Adam's point about the rainbow people not stopping the enactment of DOMA,, I think the point is that it's important for us to understand our inaction at the time,,, not to put blame,,, but to appreciate how much we have evolved over this time,,,, and the importance of maintaining our VOICE and presence into the future…
there's no stopping us now….. we are making the world a better place for ALL
19.
Mark M. (Seattle) | July 22, 2011 at 11:33 am
I have always admired him as a President and humanitarian but it is to bad he chose to do what was politically 'safe' than what was RIGHT.
20.
Reformed | July 22, 2011 at 11:36 am
As my name here may indicate, Reformed, I remember clearly how much I hated that "slick willy" won the election. Oh, and those two liberal senators from California, Feinstein and Boxer, not to mention Nancy Pelosie, well. . . . Voted for George Bush enthusiastically both times too. Katherine Harris . . .
I was a Republican from Central Ohio. I was born that way.
So, people enlighten overtime. I don't think they regress in many cases. So, appologies and hope you find this encouraging. Reformed, "rage(ing) liberal.
Well,
21.
Bob | July 22, 2011 at 11:38 am
any news on the signing off on repeal of DADT?????
22.
Ann S. | July 22, 2011 at 11:39 am
They're probably just fine with sexual behavior changing but not orientation, though.
23.
Sheryl_Carver | July 22, 2011 at 11:54 am
You're probably right, Ann, but even disregarding NOMers' opinion,, a study by someone on THEIR side has added more evidence to the findings that orientation is immutable. Which I think is one of the components for the courts to rule that LGBTs should be considered a suspect class, right?
24.
Bill | July 22, 2011 at 12:03 pm
The repeal of DADT will, I think, be the death knell of DOMA. Death benefits for the spouse and kids of one mom or dad killed in the line of duty but not for the family of another (gay) mom or dad killed in the line of duty. That makes sense, right? I think that would repulse even the Republicans and Roman Catholic and Mormon hierarchies.
25.
Kathleen | July 22, 2011 at 12:13 pm
UPDATE: LCR v. USA (DADT case)
Government's reply in support of its emergency motion for reconsideration of the order lifting the stay.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/60659094
26.
rocketeer500 | July 22, 2011 at 12:30 pm
Off topic, but our old friend, Louis Marinelli has launched the National Organization for Marriage Equality (NOME).
http://advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2011/07/22/Ex…
Way to go Louis!!
27.
Ann S. | July 22, 2011 at 12:35 pm
That's a good point. You're right about immutability being a requirement for a suspect class.
28.
d_ott_1 | July 22, 2011 at 12:37 pm
This is COMPLETELY off subject but I discovered this website. The most extreme religious website I have ever seen. Even more so than NOM's website. I can't believe what I am reading here. http://christwire.org/
This stuff is INSANE.
29.
Ann S. | July 22, 2011 at 12:44 pm
I think that's a parody site. But it's so hard to tell these days, isn't it?
30.
Alan_Eckert | July 22, 2011 at 12:47 pm
Christwire is a Poe website (meaning it's fake but tries to come off as real)
31.
d_ott_1 | July 22, 2011 at 12:50 pm
I was wondering that as I read more and more awful things. Bah! It really is hard to tell what's fake and what's real when it comes to this sort of stuff. Satire? BAH!
32.
Steve | July 22, 2011 at 12:56 pm
That's the meaning of Poe's Law:
"Without a winking smiley or other blatant display of humor, it is impossible to create a parody of fundamentalism that someone won't mistake for the real thing."
The corollary is also true: it's sometimes impossible to tell if religious nutjobs are real or a parody
33.
Sheryl_Carver | July 22, 2011 at 1:12 pm
Before the Prop 8 trial, I doubt that I'd ever even read the word "immutability," much less knowing why it might be important to us. And I would have assumed that "suspect class" referred to a group suspected of spying or some such thing, and "heightened scrutiny" what the IRS did to those it thought were cheating on their taxes.
Now, thanks to you & all our other legal experts, I have learned so very much about how our judicial system works (or is supposed to), including that all 3 of the above terms are GOOD things when dealing with civil rights issues! Who knew???
34.
Mark M. (Seattle) | July 22, 2011 at 1:16 pm
Here is the link http://wearenome.org/
35.
Ann S. | July 22, 2011 at 1:17 pm
Good job! It is definitely hard to explain why those are all good things, especially being a "suspect class".
36.
Kathleen | July 22, 2011 at 1:20 pm
UPDATE: LCR v. USA (DADT case)
LCR v. USA. Government notification of DADT Repeal certification w/copies of relevant documents.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/60664679
37.
Sheryl_Carver | July 22, 2011 at 1:21 pm
And if he does a blog, he could name it "nomeblog.com" & drive Brian & Maggie crazy. As well as confuse NOMers who mistype.
38.
Kathleen | July 22, 2011 at 1:24 pm
The documents attached include a copy of the signed certification.
39.
Nyx | July 22, 2011 at 1:28 pm
Here is Wikipedia's take on christwire.org:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christwire
40.
Seth from Maryland | July 22, 2011 at 1:29 pm
http://www.towleroad.com/2011/07/maryland-governo…
41.
rocketeer500 | July 22, 2011 at 1:58 pm
Sorry, another off topic comment….
President Obama just signed DADT Repeal Certification
http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2011/07/obama-certif…
42.
Chris in Lathrop | July 22, 2011 at 3:35 pm
Reminds me of http://www.landoverbaptist.org/, which seems derelict as of late. Will have to look into ChristWire for some giggles!
43.
Rhie | July 22, 2011 at 4:31 pm
Actually, I would draw a link to Clinton's personal life and his signing of DOMA. After all the drama surrounding him and his failure (in the GOP's eyes) to live up to the sort of family values a politician is expected to have he HAD to sign DOMA. The pressure from the opposition Congress was just simply too overwhelming.
People's sex lives in government shouldn't matter but they do unfortunately.
Leave a Comment
XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
TrackBack URL | RSS feed for comments on this post.