Respect for Marriage Act
Ninety members of Congress introduced a bill yesterday to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). You can read the very short bill, called the Respect for Marriage Act, here.
The relevant section of the bill that amends the US code, states:
For the purposes of any Federal law in which marital status is a factor, an individual shall be considered married if that individual’s marriage is valid in the State where the marriage was entered into or, in the case of a marriage entered into outside any State, if the marriage is valid in the place where entered into and the marriage could have been entered into in a State.
This issue is a generally awkward one for the small-government, states-rights, personal freedom Republicans to straddle while still appeasing their social issues voters. Evangelical voters will probably be among those most strongly opposed to this new law.
There are two significant sides to the federal marriage question. One is the symbolic aspect. The symbolism is important for both sides. Proponents of gay rights see federal recognition as a crucial step toward achieving equality under the law. For them, it is even more important that merely the legal benefits of marriage, it is the accompanying social acceptance. Opponents of gay rights saw DOMA as a levy that could contain the acceptance of gay marriage and limit its legal benefits to individual states.
The other side is a substantial practical side. By enacting the Respect for Marriage Act, the federal government will provide many significant benefits to same-sex couples through government programs such as Social Security. The new bill also strikes the following that was enacted when DOMA was passed:
No State, territory, or possession of the United States, or Indian tribe, shall be required to give effect to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any other State, territory, possession, or tribe respecting a relationship between persons of the same sex that is treated as a marriage under the laws of such other State, territory, possession, or tribe, or a right or claim arising from such relationship.
If this exemption is struck, it may eventually allow same sex couples married in one state to be considered married in other states. Although this effect may not occur instantly (it will have to be litigated in most jurisdictions), the removal of DOMA makes it more likely that same sex couples suing for recognition under the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the Constitution will be successful.
Although health care reform is dominating the public dialog right now, I think we can expect this issue to become important again at some point. It is good to see that this issue hasn’t been forgotten, and that with 90 co-sponsors, it has a strong base of support.
About time.
I am glad to see 90 members of Congress with the guts to stand up and do the right thing. Let’s pass this bill!
It is worrying though to see how weak the Democratic caucus is at marshalling its own majority. Before the sausage-making process began, Obama-like health care reform enjoyed the approval of 70-80% of the country. Since the Democrats actually took up the issue, they managed to lose over a third of that support and they are having more trouble negotiating with themselves than with the Republicans.
If super majorities in both houses and control of the White House isn’t enough to pass health care that is moderately on the left, I have doubts about their ability to pull off a social issue like repealing DOMA.
Republicans don’t need anything close to a majority to control our government when Democrats are this weak.
I was quite encouraged to hear the process is beginning for the repeal of DOMA. It may take a while, but I am glad it is coming to the front burner!