6 Reasons for Hillary Clinton's Gay-Marriage Move

Hint: None of them have to do with a potential presidential campaign.

Updated: March 18, 2013 | 1:25 p.m.
March 18, 2013 | 12:38 p.m.

(AP Photo/Kevin Lamarque, Pool)

Sometimes a video is just a video.

I vowed in print (in pixels?) about six weeks ago that I would not write about the odds of a Hillary Clinton presidential candidacy for six months. So here are six reasons for the timing of her Human Rights Campaign video in support of gay marriage that have nothing to do with a White House bid.

1. As reported by National Journal’s Elahe Izadi, Clinton wanted her voice out there before the Supreme Court weighs the issue later this month.

2. Views and laws on gay marriage have evolved rapidly in the past few years. Clinton’s 2008 campaign was not the right time for her to make a stand on gay marriage.

3. As secretary of State for four years, Clinton was the top U.S. envoy to ultraconservative nations where, in some cases, homosexuality is punishable by death. It would have been inappropriate and destructive for her to announce support for gay marriage during her tenure.

4. Clinton didn’t want to get out ahead of her husband. The former president signed the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act that, for the purposes of federal and state recognition, limited the definition of marriage to a man and a woman. He did not publicly announce a change of heart until earlier this month, when he said in a Washington Post op-ed that he now believes the law is discriminatory and incompatible with the Constitution.

5. Clinton didn’t want to fall too far behind Rob Portman. The Republican senator from Ohio disclosed Friday that he has a gay son and that he now backs same-sex marriage. That puts him in the forefront of an issue that is rapidly gaining support among young Americans but is still anathema to most GOP conservatives.

6. It’s so long until the next presidential election, and such an obvious cause for Clinton to champion, that she didn’t think anybody would interpret this as positioning for a potential campaign.

Hah.

Get the latest news and analysis delivered to your inbox. Sign up for National Journal's morning alert, Wake-Up Call, and afternoon newsletter, The Edge. Subscribe here.


Leave A Comment
The National Journal Group has the right (but not the obligation) to monitor the comments and to remove any materials it deems inappropriate.
Comments powered by Disqus
Follow National Journal
Expert Opinions
Transportation Experts

Oops! Judge Slams Local Public-Private Deal

7:05 p.m.

Latest Response by Robert L. Darbelnet: Public Scrutiny Essential

Energy Experts

Should Washington Go Small on Energy and Climate Policy?

11:03 a.m.

Latest Response by Jack Gerard: Minor Policies, Major Consequences

Energy Experts

Should Washington Go Small on Energy and Climate Policy?

May 16, 2013

Latest Response by Jonathan Silver: Woefully Little, Better Than Nothing

More Expert Opinions »
Columns
Charlie Cook: The Cook Report

Republicans Should Go Easy on Obama, At Least in Public

May 16, 2013
As a tactical matter, a subterranean campaign will score more direct hits on the president.
Ronald Brownstein: Political Connections

How the White House Scandals Could Hurt Republicans, Too

May 16, 2013
By enraging the base and strengthening the faction least willing to compromise with Obama, the IRS and Benghazi affairs could hurt a GOP shot at the presidency.
Norm Ornstein: Washington Inside Out

Eric Cantor’s Caucus Thwarts His Push for an Alternative Agenda

May 16, 2013
Cantor has learned that the tea-party movement he helped foster won’t fall in line behind his efforts to push an alternative conservative agenda.
More Columns »