Exclusive: John McCain Comes Out Against NH Civil Unions

by Ryan Sager
Fri, 27 Apr 2007 at 3:56 PM
updated Fri, 27 Apr 2007 at 4:05 PM

Send

RSS

In my column this morning, I discussed Rudy Giuliani's coming out against the civil unions bill just passed in New Hampshire. All of the Democrats supported the bill (well, at least Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and John Edwards), Mitt Romney opposed it, and Mr. Giuliani opposed it. The outlier was John McCain, whose campaign would only say that Mr. McCain was a "federalist," who "recognizes the right of the state of New Hampshire to regulate the institution of marriage and to pass civil union laws."

I asked again yesterday whether Mr. McCain supported or opposed the New Hampshire bill, but was referred back to his statement. Well, today Mr. McCain held another blogger conference call, and I was able to put the question to him directly...

In the past, Mr. McCain has been very hard to pin down on civil unions.

But today, he was clear: "I am opposed to that legislation."

While he reiterated his commitment to federalism, Mr. McCain further stated, "If I were a citizen of New Hampshire, I would oppose it. ... Anything that impinges or impacts the sanctity of the marriage between men and women, I'm opposed to it."

UPDATE (4:23): I was blogging in real time while still on the McCain conference call, so let me add a little bit to this. I say that Mr. McCain's position on civil unions has been hard to pin down because, well, it has been. Take this exchange from ABC's "This Week," from November 19, 2006:

STEPHANOPOULOS: You say you believe that marriage should be reserved for between a man --

McCAIN: Yes.

STEPHANOPOULOS: -- and a woman. You voted for an initiative in Arizona that went beyond that and actually denied any government benefits to civil unions or domestic partnerships. Are you against civil unions for gay couples?

McCAIN: No, I'm not. But the -- that initiative I think was misinterpreted. I think that initiative did allow for people to join in legal agreements such as power of attorney and others. I think there was a -- I think that there was a difference of opinion on the interpretation of that constitutional amendment in Arizona.

STEPHANOPOULOS: So you're for civil unions?

McCAIN: No. I am for ability of two -- I do not believe gay marriage should be legal. I do not believe gay marriage should be legal. But I do believe that people ought to be able to enter into contracts, exchange powers of attorney, other ways that people who have relationships can enter into.

Got that? Are you for civil unions? "No." Are you against them? "No." I've heard no clearer statement than this from the senator in the past — though, if anyone has one, I'm happy to post it.

Essentially, he's said he's against gay marriage and for the rights of individuals to set up contracts with each other (how generous). So, that left his position on civil unions, as such, a question mark. Given the anti-gay-marriage constitutional amendment he supported in Arizona in 2006 (that could have been construed as also banning civil unions), it seemed he was leaning (or at least being forced) toward opposition, without wanting to come right out and say it.

Now, however, this New Hampshire civil union bill has forced all of the major candidates — the Big Three in each party — to take public positions. And the somewhat surprising result is that all three Democrats support it and all three Republicans oppose it. This is surprising because the Republican primary field is supposedly so socially liberal. And it may well be. But Messrs. Giuliani and McCain seem to have decided that that's not going to fly in the GOP primary.

It's not a crazy calculation. But when your images are A) straight talker and B) take-no-prisoners tough guy, it's hard to reconcile with such clear pandering.

Latest Politics Homepage