While the rest of the state has been buzzing about movement on marriage equality in Pennsylvania, the one man who has a tremendous stake in the conversation — and who will be a key player as it moves forward — has been remarkably silent.
Gov. Tom Corbett’s office issued PGN a trite statement that the governor was aware of the legal challenge filed last week by the American Civil Liberties Union, but provided no further clarification — nor were they seemingly forthcoming with other media outlets. Since Attorney General Kathleen Kane declined last week to defend against the lawsuit, as she said she found the state’s ban on marriage equality to be “wholly unconstitutional,” the issue will now be punted to Corbett’s attorneys.
While at an event in Northeastern Pennsylvania on Monday, Corbett told a reporter for WNEP 16 who questioned him about Kane’s decision: “We have a difference of opinion as to the role of Attorney General in something like this. We are taking a look at what we need to do and we’ll let you know what we’re going to do in this issue.”
We already know that Corbett is anti-marriage equality, and we know he’s not done much since taking the helm of the state to advance equality for LGBT people. So it’s not a stretch to assume that his office will summarily take up the defense of the state’s ban on same-sex marriage. But, his roundabout response is Exhibit A as to why this governor needs to hit the road. Perhaps the guv recognizes the losing battle he will be tasked with leading, especially coming up to election season, but his distancing himself from an issue that his office will play a central role in demonstrates the lack of leadership and action that Pennsylvanians are coming to expect from Corbett.
His silence is in stark contrast to Kane’s buoyant pronouncement that she refused to back the ban at the National Constitution Center. Kane deserves massive props for, first, staying true to her campaign pledges of supporting the LGBT community and not being swayed by potential fallout. And once she did decide to stand with the community and the Constitution, she could have made the move in a press release or taken another low-key tactic to minimize publicity for a decision that would clearly not be welcomed by all Pennsylvanians. But, she chose to come out in front of the issue and address it loudly and publicly.
And that’s how this conversation needs to be had.