Gay Journalist: DOMA Repeal Law Has No Chance

A journalist with a prominent gay publication says that the law to repeal DOMA doesn't stand a chance of passing the House, assuming it finds approval from the Senate, the Village Voice reported on July 21.

Nonetheless, at least one anti-gay politician is using the Congressional hearing on the Respect for Marriage Act, which would repeal DOMA, as a pulpit for reiterating anti-gay claims that lump committed same-sex couples with polygamists and practitioners of incest.

Village Voice correspondent Steven Thrasher interviewed MetroWeekly journalist Chris Geidner about the prospects for The Respect for Marriage Act, which was re-introduced to the Senate by Dianne Feinstein. Openly gay Congressman of New York Jerrold Nadler introduced companion legislation in the House.

"It was Geidner who asked Press Secretary Jay Carney the question that got the White House to voice its support for the Respect for Marriage Act, the first time Obama has endorsed specific legislation to repeal DOMA," the Village Voice article noted.

"Yet despite the fact that the White House is supporting it, and the Senate overwhelming confirmed the first openly gay federal judge this week, the bill is basically dead on arrival in the house, should it even pass the Senate."

"Despite the fact that nobody really wants to talk about it, the House has voted to affirm DOMA this year in the National Defense Authorization Act," Geidner told the Village Voice. "A majority of the House has voted for DOMA this year."

DOMA, the Defense of Marriage Act, was signed in 1996 by then-President Bill Clinton. The law targets gay and lesbian families for exclusion from any federal recognition and allows states to ignore marriages granted to same-sex couples in other jurisdictions. This leaves even families in the sex states where marriage equality is currently legal without key protections that heterosexual married couples are given as a matter of course, such as access to Social Security benefits and tax protections.

Moreover, American citizens whose same-sex life partners are foreign nationals are often faced with insurmountable barriers to bringing their partner to the U.S., whereas heterosexuals are allowed to sponsor their foreign spouses, helping them obtain residency and green cards, and even citizenship.

"Substantively, there is a difference between supporting repeal of DOMA and supporting the Respect for Marriage Act, because the Respect for Marriage Act goes a step further with the certainty provision [which stipulates that] if you are legally married in New York... and you move to, say, Ohio, that has an anti-gay marriage amendment, your marriage, under federal law, would still be recognized" under the provisions of the Respect for Marriage Act, Geidner told Thrasher.

"I think the Certainty Provision certainly makes the bill more difficult to pass," Geidner added.

As far as the needs of bi-national same-sex couples are concerned, Geidner told the Village Voice, "The problem is, even if you repeal DOMA, a bi-national couple who lives in, say, Nevada, isn't going to be able to be legally married, and therefore be able to apply for a I-130 green card petition based on marriage, because they aren't married.

"Now, some people have said is that, because of the Certainty Provision, they would be able to go to New York and get married, but sort of get into the, 'If they are able to, if they can afford it, if they want to' " get married, Geidner continued. "Regardless of the Certainty Provision and regardless of repealing DOMA, you're still going to have a lot of problems relating to bi-national couples," Geidner said.

One means of addressing those problems would be to pass the Uniting American Families act, which proposes the creation of a "new category [for] permanent partners. And that's what the bill used to be called, when it was originally introduced, was the Permanent Partners Act. And what it would do is create a new federal definition that would not necessitate you to have a legal marriage." Geidner added that "This was long before there was any thought that you would actually get the repeal of DOMA any time soon."

As a result, simply repealing DOMA or passing the Respect for Marriage Act might still leave some families vulnerable to being "lost in the shuffle," Geidner noted, unless additional, and more specific, legal remedies are obtained.

Nonetheless, the fact that the Senate is even holding a hearing on the proposed law has prompted anti-gay groups to go on the defensive.

"One conservative group called Wednesday's Judiciary Committee hearing 'a dog and pony show' for the media and for homosexuals, who comprise a 'very influential portion' of the Democrats' political base," Christian news outlet CNSNews.com reported on July 21.

"The Family Research Council also noted that the witness list was 'stacked' in favor of those who want the Defense of Marriage Act overturned," the article added.

Anti-gay politicians have also taken the opportunity to grandstand.

Iowa Republican Congressman Steve King claimed to the Senate panel that "Traditional marriage is a sacred institution and serves as the cornerstone of our society," and suggested that gay and lesbian families had no place participating in that institution, lest they "devalue" it.

"[W]e must oppose any effort that would diminish the definition of marriage," King added.

The anti-gay politician also offered the idea that marriage, rather than being a right, is a privilege granted by the state, and seemed to be under the impression that domestic aspect of marriage such as cohabitation and parenthood outside of marriage are against the law.

"A marriage license is offered because that's a permit to do that which is otherwise illegal," King asserted. "It's not a right to get married; that's why states regulate it by licensing. They want to encourage marriage."

King also said that a claim to the protections and obligations of marriage based on love and devotion is insufficient. The senator said that the same claim might be made by polygamists or by people who practice incest.

King is a longtime opponent of marriage equality. When Iowa's state supreme court struck down a state law barring marriage equality and opened the door for Iowa to become the first heartland state to allow same-sex couples to marry, King declared that devoted families of the same gender were nothing but a socialist plot to destroy personal liberties, noted political newspaper The Hill on Sept. 23, 2009. Therefore, King's argument insinuated, personal liberties such as marriage ought to be restricted, evidently in the name of democracy.