FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: March 2, 2011
Human Rights Campaign Editorial/Media Advisory
Speaker Boehner: Don’t Defend Discriminatory DOMA
House intervention would violate pledge to focus on economic woes
Republican leaders in the House of Representatives plan to announce, as soon as this Friday, March 4, their response to the recent announcement by the Obama Administration that they will no longer defend Section 3 of the discriminatory Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). The Administration’s announcement also contained a clear statement that it will continue to enforce the law but will no longer defend the one section of the statute in court that denies federal recognition and benefits to legally married same-sex couples.
The question for House Republican leaders is what, if any, actions will they take in defense of DOMA and will they schedule a legally unnecessary vote in the full House in order to score cheap political points while taking their eye off the ball on the economy.
Speaker John Boehner and Majority Leader Eric Cantor have repeatedly promised Americans that they will only focus on jobs and the economy:
“Our new majority is intent on honoring the commitment we made to the American people…. We pledged we would focus on jobs and spending, and stopping the Washington regulatory assault that has led to massive uncertainty in the private sector. We’re going to keep our word.” – Speaker Boehner at the Conservative Political Action Conference, 2/10/11
“We will reform the way the House operates. This starts by rethinking how time is spent and what types of legislation we will bring to the House floor. We will identify our top policy goals and commit to take concrete steps every single week to advance those goals. And we will hold each other accountable by asking: Are my efforts addressing job creation and the economy; are they reducing spending; and are they shrinking the size of the federal government while increasing and protecting liberty? If not, why am I doing it? Why are we doing it?" – Majority Leader Cantor, 11/15/10
Regardless of how Members feel about the merits of DOMA, there is no need for the full House to vote in order to defend the law. The Speaker doesn’t need a House vote to intervene – any move in this direction would be a transparent effort to elevate the issue and throw red meat to his right-wing base. It would be particularly hypocritical given the Speaker’s contention that the President shouldn’t have made the decision he did in order to focus on the economy.
The second important issue for House Republican leadership is what does it mean to defend the constitutionality of Section 3 of DOMA in Court? The world has changed since 1996 and fair-minded Americans won’t like what House Republican leaders have to say when trying to justify federal discrimination against some of a state’s lawful marriages. Among the arguments Congress would likely have to make:
• That gays and lesbians have not faced a history of discrimination
• That one’s sexual orientation is in fact relevant to a person’s ability to contribute to society
• That, contrary to the opinion of experts, sexual orientation is something that can be changed
• That gays and lesbians are politically powerless
• That the federal government is justified in violating the federalist tradition of leaving marriage and family law to the states
Additionally, there are no guarantees that House Republican leaders would succeed these cases. In two DOMA-related cases in Massachusetts, a federal judge appointed by President Nixon has already found Section 3 of DOMA to be unconstitutional even under the lowest level of scrutiny that gives great deference to the legislature.
Every day, DOMA denies fundamental protections to legally married couples and their families.What DOMA does each and every day – in the concrete terms with which Members were not faced in 1996, when no same-sex couple could legally marry – is deny lawfully-married couples a host of rights, benefits and obligations that their neighbors take from granted.
This is not an abstract discussion. It's about denying health benefits to the husband of a career federal employee suffering from colon cancer. It's about keeping Social Security survivor benefits from the wife who stayed at home and cared for the kids. It's about making the taxes on private health insurance unbearable for a spouse. It's about driving a woman out of the home they made together for decades, so that her dying wife can use Medicaid for hospice care. It's about the husband who wants to be buried with the man who fought valiantly at Omaha Beach, or Inchon, or Da Nang, or Fallujah. It's about parents and children. Husbands and wives. Families.
The Human Rights Campaign is fighting back against DOMA, telling Congress: “Don’t defend, instead repeal.” HRC launched an action alert last week (https://secure3.convio.net/hrc/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=1055) that has generated more than 125,000 e-mails to Congress already. We also offer our supporters a survey to describe how DOMA affects their family (www.hrc.org/DOMASurvey), the results of which were presented to Congress as reasons to support repeal. Additionally we have been meeting and strategizing with Capitol Hill allies on ways to increase support for repeal.
If you are considering reporting on or editorializing about this issue, the Human Rights Campaign has resources to assist. Please contact us for more information on DOMA, the Administration’s decision to no longer defend it in court, and what lies ahead. Additionally, our website has a helpful FAQ at: www.hrc.org/issues/15364.htm.
The $161 million, however, is a decrease of 20 percent from 2008, a fact that MAP attributes, at least in part, to the economic crisis nationwide and the fact that 2009 was an off-election year.