President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Kamala Harris

(R) Donald Trump

80%↑

20%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) V. Archuleta

98%

2%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Marshall Dawson

95%

5%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Hurd

(D) Adam Frisch

52%↑

48%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(D) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank

(D) River Gassen

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) John Fabbricatore

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen

(R) Sergei Matveyuk

90%

10%

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

52%↑

48%↓

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
August 11, 2005 08:00 AM UTC

Musgrave Backs Off Gay Marriage

  • 41 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

The Denver Post reports today that Congresswoman Marilyn Musgrave is backing off her efforts to ban gay marriage.

Rep. Marilyn Musgrave’s proposed constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage vaulted her to fast fame shortly after she arrived on Capitol Hill two years ago, but it also made the Fort Morgan Republican a national target. Although she’s a second-term incumbent in a solidly Republican district, Musgrave is considered one of the most-endangered House Republicans.

Amid the attacks, she hasn’t been as quick to lead the charge against gay marriage. After coming to Congress in 2003, she introduced the Federal Marriage Amendment by the end of May. This year, Musgrave has yet to introduce it at all.

With only four weeks of work left on the calendar after the House returns from its long August recess, that makes it unlikely that any movement could be made on the measure this year. And in an interview reported Wednesday by The Associated Press, she confirmed that she’s holding off on the legislation for the time being while states and the courts battle over the issue at the state level.

“We’re kind of waiting to see what happens,” she told AP. “There is overwhelming support for marriage to be defined as the union between a man and woman. We’ll see what happens before I run it up again.”

Musgrave’s spokesman was quick to say that her hesitation on revisiting the issue is “not necessarily a retreat,” but there’s really no way to call it anything else. Musgrave nearly lost to Democrat Stan Matsunaka in 2004 after gay rights groups threw hundreds of thousands of dollars into Matsunaka’s campaign, and she’s again on the list of the most vulnerable Republicans in 2006. She can’t keep holding off challengers forever if they are well-funded by gay rights groups, so it makes good sense for Musgrave to slow down on the gay marriage issue for now.

Trying to ban gay marriage helped Musgrave make a name for herself in Congress, but she may be taking a hint from watching fellow Colorado Republican Tom Tancredo as he takes his pet issue – immigration – and carries it so far that he is risking losing his seat in 2006. The question for Musgrave is whether this is too little, too late: will it be enough to cause gay rights groups to be less aggressive in their support of a Democratic challenger in 2006? If it means the difference between $400k and $300k for her opponent, it might be enough for her to keep her seat.

Tweet
Share

Comments

41 thoughts on “Musgrave Backs Off Gay Marriage”

  2. Of course you left out this part of the article:

    But Democrats say her hesitation has more to do with political vulnerability than with legislative timing.

    “It’s quite convenient, considering that she might have a challenger in ’06 who might give her a run for her money,” said state Rep. Angie Paccione, D-Fort Collins, who is considered the most likely Democrat to mount such a challenge. “It’s politically expedient to come across as someone who cares about more than the marriage amendment, but that’s been her signature piece of legislation.”

    Musgrave came to Congress just before the gay marriage issue heated up nationally.

    She introduced her amendment to little attention, but when Massachusetts’ highest court ordered that gay marriage be legalized, President Bush took up the cause and endorsed Musgrave’s approach, giving her instant stature.

    So,  after three years MM has decided to work on something other than the marriage amendment…good timing,  I’d say.

  3. MM and her handlers are already trying to re-define her….Steve Johonson wrote a letter (Coloradoan) posted on her behalf…according to Steve she has been misunderstood and is in there fighting for the little guy.  New web site,  new image…sounds like a perscription for a new Congresswoman in ’06….If the Dem’s can get their act together and get up and running before MM has even more time to re-define herself.

    And, of course, Marilyn won’t go back to the old Marilyn if she is re-elected?

  7. Marilyn “Mad-Cow” Musgrave trying to change is like putting lipstick on a pig (literally)–it is still a pig.  And she is still a hateful cow.

  9. This is an opportunity for Democrats. They should let her back off, and then call her a flip-flopper (conservatives favorite term). That will force her to either show that she is a flip-flopper or go back to her politically risky position. Either way, Dems should keep her on the defensive…of course, these are the Dems we are talking about, they will probably find a way to screw it up..

  10. This is an opportunity for Democrats. They should let her back off, and then call her a flip-flopper (conservatives favorite term). That will force her to either show that she is a flip-flopper or go back to her politically risky position. Either way, Dems should keep her on the defensive…of course, these are the Dems we are talking about, they will probably find a way to screw it up..

  11. i am very glad to see the gay-marriage amendment getting pushed to the back burner.  amending the constitution of the USA for something like this has to be one of the most absurd initiatives undertaken in recent memory, possibly ever.  let’s hope the whole thing, in both the House and Senate, dies the death it so deserves.

  12. It isn’t going to go away in Colorado.  Next session there should be the usual input by the usual legislators.  Then the “citizens” initiative popping up sometime before the deadline.

  13. It isn’t going to go away in Colorado.  Next session there should be the usual input by the usual legislators.  Then the “citizens” initiative popping up sometime before the deadline.

  14. It isn’t trying to sneak away from the gay marriage issue that will take Marilyn down–it’s her voting record:  the bankruptcy bill, the energy bill, CAFTA, disproportionate tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans, lack of financial support for military families and wounded veterans. Not to mention being bonded at the hip to Tom DeLay.  Her constituents–I am one–deserve far better.

  15. “So what would you have said yellowdog?”

    I would have said something with some conviction instead of prefacing each sentence with a wishy-washy “might”.

  16. Just what I figued.  You just know what she shouldn’t say?….So you are basically saying that she should just declare that she is a candidate and take on MM’s million dollar machine whether AP has any funding or not?

    That would sure show ’em.

  17. What am I, her speech writer? She should come out aggresively against Musgrave, state unequivocally that she’s in the race.

    If AP doesn’t have any funding right now then she’s not going to be able to run anyway.

  18. No you aren’t her speech writer…it’s easy to say what someone else should do.  It isn’t that easy when it is you doing it.  That’s all.

    Most people have been knocking her becasue she is starting to early…now you are becasue she won’t start sooner….hard to win in politics…guess that’s why we aren’t running for anything.  Hang in there.

  19. If she’s going to run around and make comments like that then, in my opinion, she should just take the gloves off and get in the race.

    and fwiw – I don’t think money will be a problem for Angie at all.

  20. fyi Yellowdog…that article was on MM…and from the Washington beureau of the Denver Post..which means that they called Angie for a comment…she was not likely running around making comments like that….they probably called her without notice and asked for a comment.  She may have made several, of which they choose that one….go figure!

      btw, I hope she runs.

  21. Yellowdog:

    Angie Paccione is less than inspiring.  Looks like she has lots of problems and needs to get her personal financial house in order before she asks the voting public to trust her with their money.

    She’s a baffoon!

  22. Grr,  that’s old news.  Got anything new?…she has been hit on that debt stuff since 2002 and she has won everytime.  She is up front about her debt and hasn’t tried to hide anything…including when  Mister Ed,  the talking Republican  brought up her late homeowner assoc. dues…and she hasn’t taken a dime from public trust…..the people in HD53 trust her and the people in the 4th will too.

  23. “they probably called her without notice and asked for a comment”

    Holy s***!!!!  How dare they do that to a prospective congressional candidate.  Anybody besides me getting tired of people making excuses for Angie Paccione? 

    But all in all, I don’t think that one was all that bad.  Could she have been more afirmative? YES.  But she got her point across.  No big whop there.  It was good of Angie to call out MM because I think the GOP strategy is more or less going to be to put a muzzel her and hope Ms. Musgrave flies under the radar.  If that happens…MM wins.  The Dems need to do all they can to provoke MM to open her mouth.

  24. gl,  you are not paying attention obviously as well as you think you are….I don’t think there was an excuse in there..I was simply explaining to the other dude/dudette that you don’t ‘run around making comments like that’  when a newpaper calls you answer. And Angie’s answer was appropriate and on target.  They are trying to re-define MM early on…and Angie is not letting them.  As far as she can,  not being in the race at this time.  So lighten up.  I sure don’t see anyone else out there working toward removing MM.  Do you?

  26. HEY BLOGGER – HOW IS IT THAT MUSGRAVE ALMOST LOST TO TAXUNAKA?? WHAT A JOKE!! 51-44 is not “almost” the loonie left threw everything they had at her, and that won’t happen again. Marriage amendments passed by landslides in 11 states, so why should she make herself a target?  MOre wishfukl thinking on the part of an ideologically bankrupt Left.

  27. Agreed with much of what has been said here.  It should be remembered that CO is at its core a conservative, tradition-minded state.  After all, if a gay-marriage ban to the state constitution were to ever be put on the ballot (when the GOP retakes the legislature in 2006) it would pass overwhelmingly.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

51 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!