Gillibrand Inches Leftward, Now Supports Gay Marriage

[babylonsister]

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/01/gillibrand-inches-leftward-now-supports-gay-marriage.php

Gillibrand Inches Leftward, Now Supports Gay Marriage
By Eric Kleefeld - January 23, 2009, 11:20AM


Here's another interesting wrinkle from Rep. Kirsten Gillibrand's (D-NY) imminent promotion to the Senate: She appears to have switched her position on gay marriage from a standard "safe" Democratic stance, to now being a full supporter.

Empire State Pride Agenda has put out a press release saying that Gillibrand has spoken to them, and they are glad to say that New York will have its first Senator who endorses full marriage equality. This is a big change for Gillibrand, who previously had a conventional Democratic position of endorsing civil unions and non-discrimination laws, but not being for gay marriage.

To be sure, Gillibrand's voting record on gay rights was not anything that could be called bad. There weren't too many votes on gay issues in the last two years, but she did vote for the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, as well as the hate crimes bill.

Gillibrand's House district voted twice for George W. Bush, then narrowly flipped to Barack Obama in 2008. So one can see why Gillibrand was less than willing to support gay marriage. But if we're looking at this from the assumption of political opportunism, this in turn gives us a new realization: We are now in a world in which endorsing gay marriage can actually be a politically beneficial choice in a statewide setting.

[BrklynLiberal]

1. Whatever it takes to have her in the liberal/progressive corner is fine.

[babylonsister]

4. Maybe, living in a conservative area, she just needed an opportunity.

Now she has one.

[TimesSquareCowboy]

2. This puts her ahead of Schumer and Clinton on this issue.

[onehandle]

3. Good. nt

[TheWraith]

5. The "flip flop" narrative is a bit misleading.

She didn't really switch, she was asked to elaborate on her position and she did, which is that there should be a stong federal civil union law, and that states should decide whether to use the word "marriage" to describe it, because some people are uncomfortable with the use of the word "marriage" even though they may be supportive of equality, and they need to be given time to adjust. As the article notes, the issue has simply never come up for her before.

In any event, we've got a kick-ass new Senator.

[DevonRex]

6. Change is what we all want, so I'm happy about this. Sure, we can

keep a tiny bit of skepticism in the back of our minds. BUT, since this is one time when she did NOT have to say or do anything in order to get elected, I'm inclined to believe that this is her true stance on the issue. Before, she may have had to tapdance around it in order to get her house seat. Now she can say what she thinks.

When she has to run again, she will have proven her merit on a host of issues and will be the incumbent. So her stand on gay marriage won't hurt her with her constituents who may tend to be anti-gay anything, but who aren't single issue voters.

[jmg257]

7. Good for her. I am liking this choice more and more. nt