@lelandt: FALSE! At the time there was NO movement afoot to pass a constitutional amendment. That threat, in fact, came later. Clinton never said in public or in private, at that time, that this was the reason he signed it. In fact, he ran ads in the south boasting that he signed it in order to boost his creds there for the next election. The past president of HRC at the time confirms all this. Furthermore, Richard Socarides was the White House Gay and Lesbian Liaison, and he confirms that Clinton never consulted with him about signing DOMA at all. Obviously, if this was some part of a grand strategy to head off a constitutional amendment, you might want to confer with the very aid you have in place to ask his opinion if this is a good idea, how can they spin in it in the community and so on. No such conversations ever took place.
It is only recently that he is now claiming he did so to avoid a constitutional amendment. Furthermore, DOMA did not pass with the two thirds vote in the Senate. Any constitutional amendment would have required a vote of two-thirds of the Senate, so it would have been quite difficult to muster up enough votes at that time to make it even a credible threat.
Then from there, it needs to go to all the states, and you need a two thirds vote on that as well. IT’s a long process and a very difficult one, which is why there are so few amendments in our entire history. The vast majority of them fail, and everyone in Washington knows that. Clinton certainly was under no real threat that such an amendment was in the works. No one was even talking about it.
Please get your facts right — Clinton did not have to sign DOMA and did so for purely political reasons. He threw us under the bus.