WASHINGTON — The campaign against gay marriage is scheduled to get the full White House treatment on Monday -- words from President Bush in front of assembled VIPs and a bank of television cameras.
Such a carefully staged production aims to confer the grandeur of the office on the push for a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. But even before administration officials announced the event, some invitees denounced it as a sham.
"I'm going to go and hear what he says, but we already know it is a ruse," said Joe Glover, president of the Family Policy Network, which opposes gay marriage. "We're not buying it. We're going to go and watch the dog-and-pony show, [but] it's too little, too late."
Such comments have raised the prospect that the debate over gay marriage -- designed to galvanize one of Bush's most important constituencies, social conservatives -- could instead exacerbate the president's political headaches.
The White House event will serve as a prelude to the Senate debate next week on the proposed constitutional amendment.
Supporters acknowledge they have little hope of reaching the two-thirds threshold -- 67 votes -- the measure would need to pass in the 100-member Senate. They probably won't get the 60 votes needed to shut off debate and force an up-or-down vote on the proposal.
Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.), adhering to a pledge he made months ago, is bringing up the proposed amendment for debate anyway. Many Republicans on Capitol Hill contend that even if its short-term prospects appear bleak, spotlighting its merits could lay the groundwork for eventual passage.
Democrats say the reason for the push is to rally conservative activists in advance of this year's congressional elections.
"Our country faces great challenges: record high gas prices, skyrocketing healthcare costs and an intractable war in Iraq," Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said. "Yet instead of addressing these issues, Sen. Frist has chosen to put the politics of division ahead of real progress by pushing for a debate on a divisive amendment that will write discrimination into the Constitution."
But if pleasing a key element of the Republican Party is the aim, the effort doesn't appear to be working.
"Social conservatives are disappointed that there hasn't been more action on the issues that were highlighted in the 2004 election," said Gary Glenn, head of the American Family Assn. of Michigan.
