A small victory for human rights in the US:
Senate Vote Blocks Effort to Ban Gay-Marriage in Constitution
By CARL HULSE
Published: July 14, 2004
WASHINGTON, July 14 — Backers of a constitutional amendment to prohibit same-sex marriages suffered a stinging defeat in the Senate today as opponents easily killed the initiative for the year in a procedural showdown.
Senators voted 50 to 48 against a call to cut off debate, 12 votes short of the 60 required and even below a simple majority of 51. It would have taken 67 votes to approve the amendment itself. The loss effectively ended a drive to move the proposal through the Senate before the November elections. Six Republicans helped block the amendment, illustrating the divisions in the party ranks over the idea of inscribing such a ban into the Constitution.
"The constitutional amendment we are debating today strikes me as antithetical in every way to the core philosophy of Republicans," said Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona. "It usurps from the states a fundamental authority they have always possessed, and imposes a federal remedy for a problem that most states do not believe confronts them."
Three Democrats sided with Republicans in trying to move to a vote on the language of the amendment itself. Under constitutional rules crafted by the Founding Fathers to make it difficult to alter the document, a supermajority of 67 votes is necessary to start the ratification process by the states. Today's vote did not reflect the full level of opposition since some Senate Republicans who were opposed to the amendment sided with their leadership on the preliminary vote.
"This is an unnecessary amendment that wrongly and certainly prematurely deprives states of their traditional ability to define marriage," said Senator Joseph Lieberman, Democrat of Connecticut, as he joined many of his colleagues in asserting that marriage is an issue of state domain.
Democrats also accused the Senate Republican leadership of forcing the debate on an amendment they knew could not pass to create a wedge issue for the coming elections. President Bush is a strong supporter of the proposal and conservative activist groups had aggressively urged the Senate leadership to bring the matter to the floor.
Backers of the amendment said they were only responding to court decisions they said were reshaping the traditional American view of marriage despite scant involvement on the part of the public.
"Marriage does matter," said Senator Wayne Allard, Republican of Colorado and the author of the amendment. "It matters to our children, it matters in America. Marriage is the foundation of a free society and courts are redefining marriage."
Though they lost the vote, the backers of the amendment did succeed in getting lawmakers on record on the issue and they said they expected it to reverberate throughout the campaign season. Senators John Kerry of Massachusetts and John Edwards of North Carolina, the two members of the Democratic presidential ticket, did not vote. They both oppose the amendment, however, saying that while they oppose same-sex marriage, the issue is a state concern.
"The floor of the United States Senate should only be used for the common good, not issues designed to divide us for political purposes," Mr. Kerry said in a statement today. "Throughout history, amending our Constitution — the foundation of the nations values and ideals — has been serious business.
"However, even Republicans concede that this amendment is being offered only for political gains. The unfortunate result is that the important work of the American people — funding our homeland security needs, creating new and better jobs, and raising the minimum wage — is not getting done.
"Had this amendment reached a final vote, I would have voted against it, because I believe that the American people deserve better than this from their leaders. When I am president, I will work to bring the nation together and build a stronger America."
The issue may still resurface in the House this year. A House panel was considering today a legislative proposal that its authors said could prevent federal judges from overturning the existing federal law defining marriage as being between a man and a woman, though critics said they doubted the new proposal could survive a court test.
The House majority leader, Tom DeLay, has said he might schedule a House vote later this year on a constitutional amendment.
The defeat in the Senate today came as no surprise. The Senate majority leader, Bill Frist, had already acknowledged that the amendment was unlikely to advance but said that the Senate action would be far from the last word.
"This is the start," Dr. Frist said on Tuesday. "And it's not going to be over tomorrow. We'll be back in the future." |
