Pawlenty Rejects Family Leader Pledge

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/gageskidmore/5449124569/sizes/m/in/photostream/">Gage Skidmor</a>/Flickr

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.


If the Iowa conservative group “The Family Leader” succeeded at one thing by issuing its “Marriage Vow,” it was in making life a little more difficult for GOP presidential contenders. By the sheer virtue of the vow’s existence, candidates were compelled to either sign or not sign—and on Wednesday, former Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty officially became part of the latter category.

In a statement, Pawlenty said he “respectfully” declined to sign the pledge because he would “prefer to choose [his] own words, especially seeking to show compassion to those who are in broken families through no fault of their own.” He made no mention of the controversial portions of the pledge comparing gay marriage to polygamy, banning Sharia law, and rejecting pornography. (By the time Pawlenty made his announcement, the Family Leader had already dropped a line from the pledge suggesting black families were perhaps better off during slavery.)

In rejecting the pledge, Pawlenty joins former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, who said Tuesday he would not sign the vow because it contains “references and provisions that were undignified and inappropriate for a presidential campaign.”

Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) and Rick Santorum signed the marriage pledge soon after it was released. But Romney and Pawlenty both decided to wait out the initial media coverage before choosing to abstain. The delay highlights the awkward situation the pledge created for the two ex-governors. They both want to win the GOP presidential primary. That requires a certain amount of pandering to the far right. But they also want to win the presidency, and they realize that the more controversial aspects of the pledge aren’t going to help them on that front. Then again, neither of them actually wants to identify which parts of the pledge they think were problematic for fear of further alienating the parts of the base that agree with those parts of the vow. How awkward!

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest