WASHINGTON — Driving across the flatlands of Illinois with Barack Obama during the Senate race of 2004, Kevin Thompson sometimes found himself tutoring the candidate on gay rights.

Mr. Thompson, then a traveling aide, recalls long conversations about topics like the 1969 Stonewall Rebellion that sparked the gay rights movement, gay adoption — Mr. Obama once volunteered that Mr. Thompson and his partner would make “great parents,” Mr. Thompson recalled — and same-sex marriage, which Mr. Obama has in the past opposed.

Mr. Thompson, an Obama supporter, is skeptical about that. “To this day,” he said, “I don’t think Barack Obama has any issue with two people of the same gender getting married.”

Now President Obama says his views on same-sex marriage are “evolving,” and as he runs for re-election he is seeking support from gay donors who want to know where he stands.

This week, he will headline a $1,250-a-plate “Gala with the Gay Community” in Manhattan, his first such event as president; on June 29, he will host a Gay Pride reception at the White House. He is doing so at time when the New York Legislature is considering whether to make same-sex marriage legal — a vote that the president will no doubt be asked about while in New York.

The White House would not comment on whether Mr. Obama was ready to endorse same-sex marriage. But one Democratic strategist close to the White House, speaking only on the condition of anonymity, said some senior advisers “are looking at the tactics of how this might be done if the president chose to do it.”

And Representative Barney Frank, a Massachusetts Democrat who is gay, said in an interview that a top adviser to Mr. Obama, whom he would not name, asked him this year, “What would be the effect if he came out for same-sex marriage?”

“My own view is that I look at President Obama’s record, he was probably inclined to think that same-sex marriage was legitimate, but as a candidate for president in 2008 that would have been an unwise thing to say,” Mr. Frank said. “And I don’t mean that he’s being hypocritical. I mean that if you live in a democratic society, it is a mix of what you think the voters want and what you think is doable.”

Many gay leaders say because the president has a strong record on issues they care about — prodding Congress to repeal the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy, which barred openly gay men and lesbians from serving in the military, and withdrawing legal support for the Defense of Marriage Act, which defines marriage as between a man and a woman — he is not under intense pressure to announce a change in his position before the 2012 election.

But with the political climate around gay rights changing drastically — a handful of recent polls show that Americans, by a slim majority, now support same-sex marriage — some strategists see little political cost to a shift in position. And a review of Mr. Obama’s record, dating to when he first ran for public office, suggests that he may have been for same-sex marriage before he was against it.

In 1996, as a candidate for the State Senate in Illinois, Mr. Obama responded to a questionnaire from a gay newspaper. “I favor legalizing same-sex marriages,” Mr. Obama wrote, “and would fight efforts to prohibit such marriages.”

White House officials have said Mr. Obama was really referring to civil unions, which he does support. (On Friday, Mr. Obama’s communications director, Dan Pfieffer, caused a brief kerfuffle by telling a conference of bloggers that Mr. Obama had not filled out the forms himself; the White House later said he was mistaken.)

By the time Mr. Obama ran for the United States Senate in 2004, his position had become more nuanced.

Jackie Kaplan, a Chicago Democrat who was co-chairwoman of a committee of gays and lesbians supporting Mr. Obama, said he raised practical objections and made the case this way: “Why spend a lot of time on an issue that is not going to happen? The Defense of Marriage law is on the books, we’re not going to overturn that, let’s talk about how we can build more equality.”

Tracy Baim, a gay journalist in Chicago who interviewed Mr. Obama in 2004, remembers the candidate asking her to turn off her tape recorder so they could have a candid conversation on same-sex marriage. She said his objections were based on what he saw as realistic considerations: “I know what you want, I know what you can get.”

But when his Senate campaign moved into the general election against Alan Keyes, Mr. Obama told an interviewer for a black-owned radio station that religion was a factor.

Ms. Kaplan said she felt that Mr. Obama was either “pandering to Alan Keyes” or setting himself up to run for higher office; Ms. Baim, who said Mr. Obama had not cited his religious beliefs to her, viewed it as “a political maneuver.”

The black church has historically taken a dim view of same-sex marriage; the church Mr. Obama attended in Chicago, Trinity United Church of Christ, takes no official stance. Yet Trinity’s parent church is progressive; in 2005, its general synod passed a resolution supporting marriage equality for gay couples.

Once in the Senate, Mr. Obama maintained the position that his opposition was based on his religious views. Jimmy Creech, a former Methodist minister who advocates for same-sex marriage, recalls meeting with Mr. Obama’s top Senate aides in 2005. He thought Mr. Obama, the son of an interracial couple whose marriage would have been illegal in some states, would be sympathetic.

But he said the conversation turned frosty when same-sex marriage came up. “We talked about this as an expression of bigotry, using religion to justify discrimination,” Mr. Creech said. “They did not like that; the word ‘bigotry’ was inflammatory to them.”

As a presidential candidate, Mr. Obama’s position hardened. In 2008, he visited the Saddleback Church in Orange County, Calif., where the pastor Rick Warren asked him to define marriage. “I believe that marriage is between a man and a woman,” Mr. Obama said. “For me, as a Christian, it is also a sacred union.”

Three years later, Mr. Obama has said his views are evolving, in part because he has “very close friends who are married gay and lesbian couples.”

But the Democrat who had strategy discussions with the White House on same-sex marriage said Mr. Obama seemed to be considering his place in history and was moved by the argument of Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who cast the repeal of “don’t ask, don’t tell” as a moral issue.

“This is clearly a president who is interested in making big historical changes,” the strategist said. “I think this issue has moved into that context for him.”

For at least 10 years, the State College teachers’ union has wanted the inclusion of same-gender domestic-partner benefits in school-district employee contracts, union President Holli Jo Warner said Monday.

In fact, Warner said the union — the State College Area Education Association — has asked the State College school district for that policy addition in the last two rounds of contract talks — one about five years ago, the other a decade ago.

“Through the negotiations process, we did not achieve that goal,” Warner told StateCollege.com. ” … We are currently in the process of negotiations (again) … and I’m sure it will be talked about again.”

StateCollege.com approached Warner about the subject in light of a federal lawsuit filed against the district last week.

In the case, district employee Kerry Wiessmann and her partner, Beth G. Resko, have targeted the district policy that prevents workers’ same-gender domestic partners from qualifying for the same benefits made available for opposite-gender domestic partners.

That policy, according to their complaint, violates Wiessmann and Resko’s First and 14th Amendment rights under the U.S. Constitution. The women are seeking a change in the policy.

The school district is expected to respond formally in court. But in a preliminary statement released to reporters on Friday, the district administration indicated that the benefits policy in question stems from the collective-bargaining process.

“The district is precluded from making changes unilaterally for any member of the (State College Area Education Association) without discussion through” the collective-bargaining process, the statement reads.

“When and if this issue raised in this suit is brought to the bargaining table by the association, the district will consider it, just as it considers every other issue that is raised during the collective-bargaining process,” the statement goes on.

But Warner was unequivocal when reached by a reporter Monday:

Same-gender domestic-partner benefits were “definitely on the table” in past contract negotiations, she said. “The association brought it to the table as something we would like to achieve.”

Warner said the union’s objective is for same-gender domestic partners to qualify for “all the same benefits that an (opposite-gender) spouse receives.”
Just a few blocks away from the school-district offices, she noted, Penn State’s employee-benefits policy already includes that provision.

StateCollege.com approached the school-district administration Monday about Warner’s comments and is awaiting a reply.

Asked why the district had not granted the union’s request for same-gender partner benefits, Warner said she understood the district’s concern to be financial.

Expanding health coverage to include same-gender domestic partners would cost the district more money — likely to the tune of some $6,000 annually per additional person, Warner estimated.

It also would cost the district more money through paid bereavement leave, she said.

Right now, district policy allows employees one paid bereavement day for the death of a close friend, Warner said. For the death of a husband or a wife, though, the policy allows for five paid bereavement days.

Extending that benefit to cover same-gender domestic partnerships would mean more in the way of substitute-teacher expenses, Warner said.

She very roughly estimated that perhaps a dozen current district workers — and their same-gender domestic partners — would be directly affected by the policy change now sought in federal court.

Those in relationships accepted by the district as “domestic partnerships” are not “just roommates,” Warner emphasized. Rather, she said, they need to provide evidence of their committed partnerships through joint titles or other documentation.

Wiessmann and Resko share a home, financial obligations and parenting duties, their court filing shows. If they were in an opposite-gender domestic partnership, the filing says, they would qualify for the full complement of district benefits given to committed heterosexual couples.

STATE COLLEGE — Clad in green and blowing vuvuzelas, thousands of young people swarmed downtown State College on Saturday to celebrate State Patty’s Day, a student-created holiday centered on drinking.

Despite efforts by local officials to tamp down this year’s festivities, State College police Lt. Chris Fishel reported there were more people in town and more crime than last year’s event.

Police responded to more than 110 incidents in a 24-hour period through Saturday morning, about three times as many as a normal Friday night, Fishel said. During the entire State Patty’s Day weekend last year, State College police responded to about 365 calls related to the event, most of them alcohol-related.

Fights, false identification, and public urination and intoxication represented a majority of offenses committed by Saturday afternoon, Fishel said, adding that he expected the revelry to continue until about 4 a.m. today.

A spokeswoman for Mount Nittany Medical Center reported more than 40 people had been treated for alcohol-related injuries and conditions from 9 p.m. Thursday through 9 p.m. Saturday, some with severe injuries.

As with previous years’ festivities, many of those getting in trouble are not Penn State students. Fishel reported misdemeanors involving students from the University of Pittsburgh, St. Joseph’s University, Slippery Rock University, Virginia Tech and the University of West Virginia.

“It’s like a home football night game. People are partying right up to kickoff, except there’s no kickoff,” Fishel said.

Streets downtown began to see State Patty’s Day-related traffic by about 10 a.m. By 2 p.m., there were lines to get int bars, and the sidewalks were packed with revelers. The streets stayed crowded through the afternoon and into the night. At about 9:40 p.m., Indigo, a nightclub at 112 W. College Ave., shut down because of the large crowd that had lined up waiting to get inside, police said. The line stretched to South Fraser Street and was blocking traffic.

Earlier in the day, Andrew and Mark, two young men who wouldn’t give their last names, said they had come from Bucknell University and the University of Pittsburgh at Johnstown, respectively, for the party.

“There’s no party this size at Bucknell,” Andrew said.

A student from Bloomsburg University, waiting to get into the Gingerbread Man, said he came to State College to see what the hype was about.

“This town is really live,” he said. “It seems like State Patty’s is like a rite of passage for students, and the authorities trying to stop it just make it worse because we’re going to rage either way.”

One young man traveled 14 hours from Alabama to celebrate his first State Patty’s Day. After climbing atop a mound of snow in front of Five Guys Burgers and Fries and posing for pictures with a keg of beer, he expressed his excitement for the alcohol-fueled celebration.

“It’s a wonderful experience,” he said. “My best friend is a junior here, and he’s been trying to get me up here forever. He was recruiting a bunch of us for months. I don’t know any other place that has this much fun.”

When asked if he was drunk, he answered, “If you’re asking me if I’m having fun, my answer is yes.”

Police reported at least four citations that included hospitalization, three of them related to underage drinking:

•At 11:17 p.m. Friday, a 20-year-old man was seen by police falling down repeatedly while walking on McKee Street. After he was brought to Mount Nittany Medical Center for treatment, he became disorderly and had to be restrained and sedated. He will be charged with disorderly conduct.

•A drunken 19-year-old was found trying to enter a house on the 400 block of Martin Terrace at around 11:30 p.m. on Friday. He was also taken to Mount Nittany Medical Center.

•A 16-year-old boy was found intoxicated, lying down and throwing up on the sidewalk on the 500 block of South Pugh Street at 12:52 a.m. Saturday. He was hospitalized and will be charged with providing false information to police.

•A man who passed out drunk in the lobby of the Days Inn at 240 S. Pugh St. at 3:31 a.m. Saturday also took a trip to the hospital.

Not everyone out on the streets downtown Saturday was out to party. A few local churches had a stand set up on McAllister Street and were handing out free hot chocolate and water.

“We’re just trying to keep people hydrated and keep some kids out of the hospital,” volunteer Kim Dick said.

Cliff White can be reached at 235-3928. Wildamie Ceus is a journalism student at Penn State.

“This survey’s findings should serve as a reminder to parents and the entire community that no one is immune to the dangers of alcohol misuse and abuse,” Patrick J. “PJ” Stapleton, chairman of the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board, says in a statement.

The survey, required annually by law, presents updated information on levels and trends of underage consumption of alcohol prevention programs supported by agency partners and science-based, proven prevention strategies.

Using data collected via the Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and Delinquency’s Pennsylvania Youth Survey and the Core Institute at Southern Illinois University of Carbondale, the study reports:

– Pennsylvania youth ages 12-17 have a lower rate of alcohol dependence and abuse than the national average.

– Slightly more than one-third of those youth believe there is a “great risk” in using alcohol.

– Nearly 90 percent of Pennsylvania college students report having used alcohol in their lifetime, compared to 86 percent nationwide.

– 65 percent of Pennsylvania college students reported having their first drink by the age of 17.

– Slightly more than half of Pennsylvania college students believe the social atmosphere of their campus promotes alcohol use.

State College attorney Andrew Shubin said Centre County police officers are too concerned with generating a high number of student arrests for low-level offenses at the University Park Undergraduate Association-sponsored town hall meeting Monday night.

“What the students don’t understand is that Penn State is not Pittsburgh or Philadelphia. State College is like Mississippi — the prosecutors, defense attorneys and jurors are very conservative,” Shubin said.

Shubin, a guest attorney at the meeting, said that if he was defending a client in a Philadelphia county, the first thing that he would tell the judge is that his client is a student at Penn State because it is highly recognized institution.

But he said if he were representing a student in Centre County, it would not matter that the student attended Penn State because his client’s background would be nearly identical to that of 40,000 other students.

Shubin said that it is important for students to realize that State College is a school zone, so low-level offenses, such as drinking and selling marijuana, are treated much more harshly. If his client lived in Philadelphia and was caught selling a quarter pound of marijuana, he would get a misdemeanor charge at the most, Shubin said. If his client was caught selling the illegal substance in State College, he would most likely receive a two to four year mandatory prison sentence.

“I hate that I am paying taxes to incarcerate engineering majors,” Shubin said.

Shubin said he stresses the importance of students knowing their rights, which are the same for all citizens regardless of age. He also offered three rules for interacting with the police when questioned by authorities.

“Never give a statement to a police officer if you are the suspect of a crime. The answer to every question after you give your name should be lawyer, attorney or counselor. Always be cooperative with the police officer — anything you say will be used against you,” he said.

UPUA President Christian Ragland said it is important that students do not misinterpret Shubin’s advice.

“We should still set the precedent that wrong is wrong, Ragland (senior-political science) said. “Students should know their rights, but above all, they shouldn’t do wrong.”

Shubin said times have changed since he and parents of Penn State students were in college.

“We’re living in a totally different world now — but I’m not convinced that it is a better world, Shubin said. “The government can put so much destruction in your life when we did the same thing when we were younger and grew up to be law-abiding citizens.”

UPUA Programming Committee Chairwoman Ali Cook said she believes students will find Shubin’s advice helpful.

“I think he provided a valuable service for students and I don’t think he encouraged students to engage in illegal activities,” Cook (sophomore-finance and economics) said.

Ragland also discussed the issue of student safety and handed out surveys to collect data on students’ feelings regarding campus safety. The surveys are also available online at UPUA’s website for completion.

By Ashlynn Cannata, Fort LeBoeuf High School

The tougher drinking laws that are being considered by officials from Pennsylvania are an excellent idea. It seems to me that underage drinking is a problem that is only getting worse, and I’m not the only one noticing this trend.

Many homeowners living near campuses are becoming worried about this drunken behavior, too. Unless someone steps in to increase the consequences for these behaviors, they are just going to continue to escalate. If the penalties for underage drinking and public drunkenness haven’t changed since the 1970s, how can anyone expect this problem to get better, let alone solve itself?

Currently, underage drinking fines range from $300 to $500. You can be fined up to $300 for littering, a less serious offense than underage drinking. So, why would someone who was caught drinking underage potentially pay the say amount as someone who littered?

Underage drinking is a serious offense and should be treated as such. According to reports, some have been charged and paid the current fine, only to return to their bad behavior later. If the fine reached $1,000, it would significantly deter individuals from repeating their crime.

Seventy-seven years after the end of prohibition the battle of the “wets” versus the “drys” is alive and well in those states considering ending their government monopolies over the sale of liquor. Though not as colorful as the epic battles between Al Capone and Elliot Ness, the underlining debate continues over whether government control of liquor sales has measurable societal benefits.

As one of 18 monopoly control states (only government sale of liquor allowed), this question is front and center in Washington State where not one, but two ballot measures are being considered on whether to end the state’s liquor monopoly. A similar debate is occurring in the control states of Virginia and Pennsylvania.