Marriage Amendment Receives Chilly Reception In Congress

Marriage Amendment Receives Chilly Reception In Congress

By U.S. Rep. Diana DeGette (D-CO)

07/07/04

DENVER, CO - Summer in the nation's capital not only means high temperatures and unbearable humidity, it also means that political posturing is kicked into the highest gear. The clearest example of this is that the United States Senate will soon consider the Federal Marriage Amendment.

Republican leaders acknowledge that this mean-spirited likely amendment won't pass. Instead, they are seeking to put Senators on the spot by forcing them to vote against this divisive amendment. Their false hope is that Americans will interpret a vote against the proposal as a vote against the sanctity of marriage.

Proponents of the amendment, however, have overplayed their hand. As Americans learn more about what the Federal Marriage Amendment would do, their support for it declines. That is because most Americans strongly believe that the Constitution should expand people's rights, not take them away.

Americans understand that our Constitution was designed to protect the civil liberties of all citizens. But this amendment would do just the opposite. It would deny same-sex couples such basic rights as the ability to visit each other in the hospital, share health insurance, obtain Social Security survivor benefits or get certain tax benefits. Such a move is worse than unnecessary. It runs counter to the very constitutional traditions our nation has followed for more than 200 years.

These traditions were established when our Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

As James Madison wrote in Federalist Paper 10, the Founders did not want our governing document to be rewritten by special interests each time a contentious political issue emerged, particularly when amending the constitution would limit "the rights of other citizens." To this day, we are reminded of this wisdom every time a contentious social issue is debated in Congress. Otherwise, our Constitution would be littered with repealed amendments that enforced now-outdated and unpopular positions, such as prohibition, on the American public.

But what the Senate is doing is almost worse than that. They are using the Constitution as a mere political tool to try to score points with the public in the next election.
Even Republican Leader Tom DeLay, a vicious opponent of expanding civil rights for gays and lesbians, refuses to bring the amendment up in the U.S. House of Representatives because it would be defeated. The Constitution was not created to serve as a tool for politicians who are trying to eke out a few more votes in a close election. Yet, as public support for an amendment to ban same-sex marriage wanes, that is all Senate proponents of the Federal Marriage Amendment are left with.

This column ran in Outfront Colorado.