Anna Marie Smith,
"Sex Scandals, 'Responsible Fatherhood' and the 2008 Election Campaign:
When 'Sex Talk' Trumps Race and Class"
(page 5 of 7)
Triangulation, from Clinton to Obama, on Sexual Morality
The Harold Ford / Willie Horton legacy created enormous hurdles that
President Obama had to overcome in the 2008 primaries and election. This
tradition also creates extraordinarily cramped conditions that give the
Obama administration relatively little room for political maneuver. Will
we see courageous policy positions being taken by President Obama
leadership where AIDS and homosexuality are concerned? Or will Obama
feel compelled to play it safe? Will he borrow a page from Bill Clinton
by "triangulating": stealing a pet issue from the right-wing, claiming
that he could stake out a centrist position on that issue, and
masterfully staging a political showdown with his own leftist critics,
such that he can burnish his bi-partisan credentials? Will Obama conjure
up mythical threats, like teen pregnancy (recall Clinton's baseless
remarks in the lead up to welfare reform) or masturbation (recall the
senseless firing of Surgeon General Jocelyn Elders), only to set up a
moral victory: the courageous turn against the mighty tide of
permissiveness, the daring and deeply principled reach across party
lines for moral allies, and the building of a national consensus in
favor of patriotic family values?
Writing in December 2008, I would have to say that the early
indications from the Obama team are not entirely positive. On the one
hand, there are some important feminist gains that have been made
through Obama's appointments. Sen. Clinton will bring her moderate yet
pronounced concerns about women's equality to her State Department
agenda. Vice President Joe Biden has a solid leadership record with
respect to the campaign against violence against women. Eric Holder
seems poised to re-energize the Civil Rights division of the Justice
Department, and Hilda Solis will, in all likelihood, draw upon her solid
background in the labor movement in her leadership of the Labor
Department. At the same time, feminist critics expressed disappointment
when it became clear that only five of the twenty Secretary-level posts
would go to women.[16]
LGBT advocates were stunned when the Obama transition team announced
that Rev. Rick Warren would deliver the invocation at the January 2009
inauguration. Warren, pastor of the Saddleback Church in California, has
opposed reproductive rights and championed the subordination of wives to
their husbands. Arguing that the divorce revolution has gone too far,
Warren supports divorce reform legislation that would only allow for the
dissolution of marriage in cases of abandonment and infidelity; domestic
violence and child abuse do not appear on this remarkably short list.
When asked about his opinions about same-sex marriage, he quickly
reached for analogies with incest, polygamy, and
pedophilia.[17]
Since Rev. Warren had openly affirmed these views, the Obama team
must have known exactly what it was getting into when they tapped him
for the invocation. Is President Obama taking his feminist and LGBT
supporters for granted, on the theory that they have nowhere else to go,
while he scores points with evangelical centrists by reaching out to
Warren? Did he deliberately seek to provoke a bit of criticism from the
left, albeit on a carefully chosen symbolic issue with no serious policy
consequences, in order to solidify his bipartisan reputation? Will he
make moral issues his favorite political site to play the Clintonite
triangulation game, and will women and the LGBT community be asked to
pay the price, again and again?
There are several sites where feminist and LGBT advocates will be
concentrating their lobbying efforts during the Obama administration.
The American foreign aid prohibitions for agencies that offer abortion
services could be immediately eliminated through an executive order. As
Secretary of State, Sen. Hillary Clinton could rally support in the
Senate for a U.S. signature to, and ratification of, the international
human rights agreement relating to gender justice: the Convention to
Eliminate Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). Strong legislation is
needed to rebuild reproductive rights. The Obama administration, with
the assistance of an almost filibuster-proof Congress, should be able to
rescind the Hyde Amendment that blocks the federal government from
spending Medicaid funds on abortion. Where the Bush administration
created a situation in which medical personnel, such as pharmacists,
enjoy the authority to stop women from obtaining contraception,
President Obama could make it clear that the health care system ought to
empower women to control their bodies. As always, every single one of
Obama's judicial appointments will be closely scrutinized with respect
to his or her positions on reproductive rights and LGBT equality. On
gender justice in the workplace, the Obama administration could
prioritize the passage of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act and
legislation establishing comparable worth standards.
On LGBT rights, the Obama administration should compensate for its
opposition to same-sex marriage by rallying Congress to repeal the
Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). In one sense, DOMA is little more than
homophobic symbolism. And repealing DOMA should be palatable to Obama
insofar as DOMA merely underlines the states' existing constitutional
authority to establish their own family codes. DOMA grants each state
the right to disregard the legal status of the marriages for same-sex
couples that are conducted in other states. Although this part of DOMA
has yet to be put to the test in court, it is arguably redundant since
the states already have the constitutional authority to deviate from
their standard Full Faith and Credit obligation on public policy
grounds. It seems likely that the most important developments on
same-sex marriage will take place in the state courts and
legislatures.
The repeal of DOMA would nevertheless stir up controversy. Although
brute bigotry against homosexual equality is on the
decline,[18] even
a symbolic gesture by the Obama administration and the Democratic
Congressional leadership would be met with stiff opposition from the
Republican Party. In addition, DOMA is not entirely symbolic. It also
defines marriage as the union of one man and one woman for the purposes
of interpreting all federal laws. In other words, lesbian and gay male
couples who seek to protect or to enforce the same rights that married
heterosexual couples enjoy under various federal laws, such as
immigration and naturalization laws, bankruptcy procedures, and income
tax rules, lack the power to do so.
Where the House of Representatives under the leadership of Speaker
Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) failed to pass the Employment Non-Discrimination Act
(ENDA) in the fall of 2008, both chambers could make the passage of a
new version a top priority. ENDA originally provided protection in the
workforce for both homosexuals and transgender persons, yet in a futile
attempt to round up votes, leading House Democrats stripped all
references to gender identity from the bill. Speaker Pelosi could ensure
that the new ENDA provides adequate protection for transgender
Americans—and Speaker Pelosi and House Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NE)
could also work closely with the Obama administration to repeal the
notorious "don't ask, don't tell" prohibition against homosexuals in the
military.
Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7
Next page
|