July 18, 2006 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE, Vol. 152, Pt. 11 14781 The images coming out of Israel and We know that we are at a historic of the United States relating to marriage. Lebanon are a sad, ugly replay of some- crossroad in Washington this week. We The joint resolution shall be considered as thing we have seen far too often. Mr. are either days away from this Con- read. The previous question shall be consid- Speaker, there is no easy solution to gress passing this stem cell bill, or we ered as ordered on the joint resolution to final passage without intervening motion ex- this problem, despite what some pun- are going to see delays for years. We cept: (1) one hour and 30 minutes of debate dits on the talk show circuit would tell know that this issue has united Ameri- equally divided and controlled by the Major- us. This is a fight between a nation and cans into action across party lines. It ity Leader and the Minority Leader or their between terrorists who claim no na- includes over 80 Nobel Prize scientists. designees; and (2) one motion to recommit. tion. It counts hundreds of disease-fighting SEC. 2. During consideration of H.J. Res. 88 It is simply unacceptable that Iran groups advocating for 110 million pursuant to this resolution, notwithstanding would be permitted to fund a terrorist Americans who are afflicted with a ge- the operation of the previous question, the Chair may postpone further consideration of organization like Hezbollah. It is unac- netic sentence to disability or death. ceptable that the state-sponsored ter- the joint resolution to a time designated by We know President Bush has signed the Speaker. rorist organization would be placed in over 1,000 bills into law. This is not the The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gen- another nation, Lebanon, in order to time to start with the Presidential tleman from Georgia (Mr. GINGREY) is wage a steady war against one of our roadblock of a veto. allies. That is what has been happening recognized for 1 hour. f Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, for the for far too long. Mr. Speaker, our President is exactly TIME FOR A CHANGE IN purpose of debate only, I yield 30 min- right not to condemn Israel for taking LEADERSHIP utes to the gentleman from Massachu- actions to defeat its terrorist enemy. setts (Mr. MCGOVERN), pending which I (Mr. DEFAZIO asked and was given yield myself such time as I may con- f permission to address the House for 1 sume. During consideration of this res- A CLUELESS CONGRESS minute.) olution, all time yielded is for the pur- Mr. DEFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, the Mid- (Mr. MORAN of Virginia asked and pose of debate only. dle East is near all-out war and the was given permission to address the Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 918 is House for 1 minute.) United States is on the sidelines ham- a closed rule. It provides 1 hour and 30 Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Speak- strung by the Bush occupation of Iraq. minutes of debate in the House equally er, there is a conflagration in the Mid- We will borrow $1.3 billion today to run divided and controlled by the majority dle East. We are losing the war in Iraq. the government and hand the bill to leader and the minority leader or their We are losing ground to the Taliban in our kids and grandkids. designees. This resolution waives all Afghanistan. The stock market is Record gas prices are hamstringing points of order against consideration of crashing, gas prices are skyrocketing. family budgets and business. Record oil the joint resolution, it provides one We have raised the debt ceiling four profits for the oil companies, and we motion to recommit, and it provides times to $9 trillion, all of which we are are borrowing the money from Saudi that during consideration of the joint going to dump on the backs of our chil- Arabia and OPEC. resolution, notwithstanding the oper- dren, who we are inadequately edu- Now, these are difficult issues, and it ation of the previous question, the cating, let alone creating a safer world would be tough to hammer out solu- Chair may postpone further consider- for them. tions here on the floor of the House, so ation of the joint resolution to a time And what are the Republican con- the Republican majority has chosen to designated by the Speaker. gressional leadership’s priorities? To walk away from these issues of real Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support ban same-sex marriage, to ban flag concern to the American people and of House Resolution 918 and the under- burning, to ban stem cell research, to phony up an agenda full of dead-end lying joint resolution, H.J. Res. 88, the ban child safety locks on guns in the bills designed for one purpose only, to Marriage Protection Act. home, to ban abortion here and family excite the Republican right wing base First, I would like to thank Rep- planning abroad, to protect the pledge and perpetuate their hegemony here in resentative MARILYN MUSGRAVE, the of allegiance, to cut $20 billion from Congress. author and lead sponsor of this con- college student loan programs, to cut Two fake stem cell bills to cover the stitutional amendment, for her stead- $9 billion from elementary and sec- first veto by this President of a mean- fast commitment to the preservation of ondary education. And, oh, yes, more ingful stem cell bill that could provide traditional marriage. tax cuts. relief to suffering Americans, para- As the manager of this rule and an Mr. Speaker, this has got to be the lyzed Americans, Americans with de- original cosponsor of the underlying most clueless Congress in American bilitating diseases. But, no, their joint resolution, I am very pleased the history. ideologues won’t allow that. They want House will have an opportunity today f medieval science to prevail here in to consider and debate this very impor- Washington, D.C. It is time for a tant amendment to our Constitution. STEM CELL RESEARCH change in the leadership, to have a Mr. Speaker, the proceeding debate, (Mr. CARNAHAN asked and was Congress that truly represents the both on the rule and the underlying given permission to address the House needs of the American people, not a resolution, either can be divisive and for 1 minute and to revise and extend fringe element in this country. disrespectful, or it can be respectful his remarks.) f and productive. This amendment has Mr. CARNAHAN. Mr. Speaker, last nothing whatsoever to do with exclu- year this House passed the landmark MARRIAGE PROTECTION sion, but it has everything to do with stem cell bill, H.R. 810. We know that AMENDMENT protecting the traditional and histor- President Bush has already authorized Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, by di- ical definition of marriage as a union research, even though it is arbitrary rection of the Committee on Rules, I between one man and one woman. and artificially restricted, when he call up House Resolution 918 and ask Contrary to what the opponents of made his executive order allowing re- for its immediate consideration. this resolution might say today, this search on existing stem cell lines be- The Clerk read the resolution, as fol- amendment will simply preserve the fore 9 p.m. August 9, 2001, and prohib- lows: traditional definition of marriage as it iting them after that date. H. RES. 918 has existed for millennia. We know that in 2001 it was believed I anticipate there will be those on Resolved, That upon the adoption of this 78 stem cell lines existed. But now we resolution it shall be in order without inter- the other side who will say this amend- know there are only 22 that are viable, vention of any point of order to consider in ment was concocted for political pur- and they have been contaminated with the House the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 88) poses. To the contrary, Mr. Speaker. mouse stem cells. proposing an amendment to the Constitution This amendment is in response to a few

VerDate Sep 11 2014 13:17 May 03, 2017 Jkt 049102 PO 00000 Frm 00166 Fmt 0688 Sfmt 0634 E:\FDSYS\BOUNDRECORD\BR18JY06.DAT BR18JY06 ejoyner on DSK30MW082PROD with BOUND RECORD 14782 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE, Vol. 152, Pt. 11 July 18, 2006 activist judges who are trying to throw I am proud, Mr. Speaker, to be from setts but domestic partnership and out the definition of marriage, along Massachusetts, the home of the Na- civil union laws in other parts of the with over 200 years of American judi- tion’s first State Constitution. In Mas- country. The proposal before us is so cial precedent. sachusetts over 8,000 same-sex couples poorly drafted that legal experts dis- have been married since May of 2004, b 1030 agree on exactly what effect it will when it became legal. I should advise have on those laws. That means, of These judges, and these judges alone, my colleagues that Massachusetts has course, that the issue will end up back made this matter an issue, and they not fallen off the map into the Atlantic in the courts, which is ironic given the did so without one vote cast in either a Ocean. The sun still rises and sets in concept of court-bashing by the bill’s legislature or at the ballot box. These the Commonwealth. The Red Sox still supporters. activist judges substituted legal prece- play at Fenway, and life goes on. The Mr. Speaker, the impact of this de- dent and the will of the American peo- only thing that is different is that cou- bate goes far beyond constitutional ar- ple with their own personal desires and ples of the same sex who love each guments. The proponents of this bill political beliefs. Their decision to other, want to spend the rest of their are contributing to a climate of intol- scrap the traditional definition of mar- lives together, and want to get married erance. We will hear protests from the riage has forced us, forced us, to now can do so. It means that men and other side today that they have no consider enshrining the definition of women who happen to be gay are able problem with gay people. Yet here they marriage into our Constitution. to enjoy the same rights, privileges, are arguing that gay people do not de- Mr. Speaker, like most of my col- and responsibilities as men and women serve the same rights as everybody leagues, I would prefer to not have to who happen to be straight. And, Mr. else. address this issue in this manner. But, Speaker, that is how it should be. Mr. Speaker, I am also terribly trou- unfortunately, I know my constituents Those who have continued to advo- bled by the hate spewing from some of and a strong majority of the American cate a ban on same-sex marriage are on the outside groups using the same-sex people want us to defend the tradi- the wrong side of history. There are marriage issue to whip up emotions tional definition of marriage. A poll by some here who claim that they are on and raise money. Mr. Speaker, some of the New York Times, not exactly a bas- some sort of moral crusade to protect the rhetoric is just deplorable. But I tion of right-wing conservatism, they the institution of marriage. To them I doubt that we will hear any of the found that 59 percent, I repeat, 59 per- say worry about your own marriage. I bill’s supporters denouncing it here cent, of Americans favor an amend- do not need you to protect mine. I have today on the floor. ment to the Constitution stating that been happily married to the same My colleagues, discrimination is dis- marriage is a union between one man woman for 17 years without the help or crimination, and it should find no sanc- and one woman. interference of Congress. What we tuary in our Constitution or in our I also, sadly, realize this amendment should be protecting are the civil and hearts. It should find no sanctuary on will probably not have the necessary human rights of all Americans. the floor of the people’s House. two-thirds majority to pass and oppo- The fact that same-sex marriage is We all know why this proposal is be- nents will cite this as a reason to not legal in my home State has had no im- fore us. It is an election year, and if it even consider the underlying resolu- pact on my marriage except that we is an election year, the Republican tion. We heard it in a couple of the 1- were invited to more weddings. Same- leadership will find a place on the minute speeches from the other side sex marriage is a threat to no institu- agenda for gay-bashing. This proposal is worse than a distrac- just a few moments ago. Well, this vote tion, to no individual. The underlying bill before us would tion. It is not an assault on our fellow will serve as an opportunity for each not only add discrimination to the citizens. It is an attack on a piece of and every Member of this body to go on Constitution for the first time in our their humanity, and I urge you to record in support or in opposition to history. It would repeal, it would actu- stand on the right side of history and protecting the traditional definition of ally take away, the rights of thousands to defeat this bill. marriage. And after this vote each of of Americans. What do the supporters Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of us will be judged accordingly by our of this bill say to the gay couples in my time. constituents, and I can say with a clear Massachusetts who are now legally Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, I yield conscience and without hesitation that married; our family members, our myself such time as I may consume. I will support this rule, I will support neighbors, our coworkers, the people In response to a couple of things that the underlying resolution for the sake who sit next to us in church? Do you my good friend said, Mr. Speaker, now- of the sacred institution of traditional say your marriage is now meaningless adays lots of people are claiming that marriage and for the sake of our pre- and we are going to take away your marriage is a discriminatory institu- cious children. rights? Do you say we are sending you tion. Same-sex couples say marriage Mr. Speaker, I also want to encour- back to second-class citizenship? Do discriminates against them. Believe it age my colleagues to support the rule you say that we have so much hatred or not, single people are now com- and this underlying resolution. for who you are that we are willing to plaining that marriage discriminates Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of tarnish the United States Constitu- also against them. After all, say the my time. tion? singles, why should the State give spe- Mr. MCGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I want Marriage law in this country has tra- cial benefits to married parents but not to thank the gentleman from Georgia, ditionally been left to the States. In- to us? Dr. GINGREY, for yielding me the cus- deed, even in Massachusetts the same It gets worse. Even polygamists and tomary 30 minutes, and I yield myself supreme judicial court that the pro- believers in group marriage, who call 5 minutes. ponents of this bill decry recently themselves polyamorists, are saying Mr. Speaker, I very much regret that ruled that a referendum banning same- that marriage discriminates against the Republican majority in this House sex marriage can go forward. That ref- them. has brought this bill to the floor. This erendum is currently working its way Now, if the support society gives the bill, to put it simply and bluntly, is through the process. And I believe, of men and women who have the potential about adding discrimination and intol- course, that the referendum should and to create children is going to be called erance to the United States Constitu- will fail, that the citizens of Massachu- discrimination, pretty soon there is tion. This is about the Republican ma- setts would not vote to turn back the not going to be such a thing as a mar- jority’s once again trying to divide and clock. But that should be up to us, Mr. riage at all. When one group can call polarize the Nation. It is about the Re- Speaker, not to the people of Colorado marriage discrimination, then any publican leadership’s taking something or Georgia or anywhere else. group can make the same claim. that should be about love and turning In addition, this bill jeopardizes not And, also, Mr. Speaker, there was a it into a weapon of hate. just same-sex marriage in Massachu- comment about a couple loving each

VerDate Sep 11 2014 13:17 May 03, 2017 Jkt 049102 PO 00000 Frm 00167 Fmt 0688 Sfmt 0634 E:\FDSYS\BOUNDRECORD\BR18JY06.DAT BR18JY06 ejoyner on DSK30MW082PROD with BOUND RECORD July 18, 2006 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE, Vol. 152, Pt. 11 14783

other. But this is not a civil rights Mr. MCGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield a crossfire of a civil war which grows issue. Love, of course, is a great thing. 4 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio more deadly every day. The adminis- But in my humble opinion, marriage is (Mr. KUCINICH). tration has no exit strategy. Congress not just any kind of love. It is a love Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, with all does nothing. that can bear children, and it is a love due respect to my beloved colleagues, In Iran, the Department of Defense is that involves both a mom and a dad. what if a man and a woman have a actively preparing for war while the Two men might be a good father. But partnership which does not produce administration sets the stage for nego- neither one is a mom. The ideal for children? Is their marriage invalid? Is tiations that they intend to fail. Con- children is the love of both a mom and it less sacred? And the use of the word gress does nothing. a dad. No same-sex couple can provide ‘‘illegitimate’’ here is a little troubling In the Middle East, the region stands that. The ideal for marriage is about because I thought we dispensed with on the brink of a full-blown war in bringing together moms and dads so those kinds of references as we became which there will be no winners. Con- children have a mother and a father to more enlightened. gress does nothing. learn from. It is easy to take a stand for the in- In North Korea, the administration With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield 11⁄2 stitution of marriage in the abstract, won’t negotiate with North Korea, minutes to the gentlewoman from but try doing it in your own life and while North Korea is thumbing its nose North Carolina, Representative VIR- that becomes a little more complex. It at the international community. Con- GINIA FOXX. is far easier to tell others how they gress does nothing. Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I thank the should live and whom they should be Here at home, you want to talk about gentleman from Georgia for yielding permitted to marry. The science of a threat to the institution of marriage? me time. human relations requires humility. 45 to 50 million people are without I also want to thank my colleagues Whether in the heights of unity or the health insurance; bankruptcies at a for seeing the great need for this de- depths of divorce, our relationships, record level; people in home fore- bate, a need which is no longer on the our companionships, our partnerships, closures. Let’s talk about a threat to horizon but has reached the forefront are our greatest teachers. Our relation- the institution of marriage. Congress is as it has begun to affect American fam- ships are also a sphere of influence doing nothing about any of that. ilies. which should be free from government Today, in a shameless attempt to di- It is the right time to discuss a mar- interest or interference. vert, distract, and distort from the riage protection amendment. As Mem- Government does not belong in the lackluster performance of this Con- bers of this Congress, we have a respon- bedroom or secretly listening on your gress, the House is set to write dis- sibility to look at this critical situa- phone, reading your books, reviewing crimination into the U.S. Constitution. tion for marriage and the real possi- your e-mails. Government does not Iraq, Iran, the Middle East, North bility that the courts are going to rede- have a rightful role in determining who Korea, health care, gas prices, the min- fine marriage. you should love, who should love imum wage? No, the most pressing This constitutional amendment whom, and therefore enter into the for- issue in America is gay marriage. would concretely define marriage as we malization of a civil marriage con- Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, I yield always have: as the union between one tract. myself 15 seconds. man and one woman. The disintegra- We do not often quote from the Dec- The gentleman from Ohio is con- tion of the family is the force behind so laration of Independence here, but I cerned and says, what next? Is the Con- many of our most serious social prob- think it would be useful if I recited gress going to take out from the Pledge lems. We cannot turn a blind eye to the some words that are instructive at this of Allegiance ‘‘with liberty and justice social trends that are doing the most moment: for all’’? I say to my friend from Ohio, damage to America’s children. The ‘‘We hold these truths to be self-evi- no. Later on this week we will have the health of American families is built dent, that all men,’’ and we know now opportunity to defend ‘‘one Nation upon marriage, and it affects us all. all people, ‘‘are created equal, that under God’’ and keep the Federal judi- The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial they are endowed by their Creator with ciary from taking that out. Court and other local courts have ruled certain unalienable rights, that among Mr. Speaker, I yield 21⁄4 minutes to in favor of same-sex marriages. These these are life, liberty and the pursuit of the gentleman from North Carolina unsound decisions set a dangerous happiness.’’ (Mr. HAYES). precedent, and that is why a constitu- Thomas Jefferson went on to write Mr. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I thank tional amendment is necessary. If en- that governments are created to secure the gentleman from Georgia for yield- acted, it will effectively ban these ille- these rights. I might add that this gov- ing. gitimate marriages nationwide. ernment was not created to crush those Mr. Speaker, I rise today to defend This definition of marriage is not in- rights. traditional marriage. It is hard to be- tended to be discriminatory but rather Today, with a proposed constitu- lieve that we have come to such a time to uphold the sanctity of marriage as tional amendment defining marriage, in our country that we must even de- an institution. The Marriage Protec- we would establish a law which would bate this basic American value. tion Amendment removes the defini- be at odds with the 14th amendment, Marriage is defined as the union be- tion of marriage from the hands of the which guarantees equal protection of tween one man and one woman. Some courts and returns this decision to the the law. What is next? Amend the may question whether or not this issue American people, where it belongs. The Pledge of Allegiance to take out the warrants a Federal debate and Federal Massachusetts decision represents the words ‘‘with liberty and justice for action. Unfortunately, certain courts beginning of what could be a dangerous all’’? What is next? Recarve the dais in in this land have answered that ques- erosion of this sacred tradition that we front of us here, which has words tion as ideological judges threaten to must protect. carved into wood, and I will read them undo the very fabric of our families by Will we put our faith in a few for those who are not able to see them: imposing their opinions and policies as unelected activist judges seated on a words carved below the Speaker: ‘‘Tol- the final say on what marriage means. bench to define marriage, or will we erance,’’ ‘‘Justice,’’ ‘‘Union,’’ ‘‘Lib- Mr. Speaker, families matter, be- use the most democratic process we erty’’? Do we just take that apart? cause fathers and mothers matter. have to affirmatively define marriage They are not interchangeable. Lit- as it is intended? We must protect the b 1045 erally hundreds of studies point to the sanctity of marriage now. Move it? Leave it blank? crucial nature of mothers and fathers I encourage my colleagues to vote You wonder why this Congress is not rearing children within the bonds of ‘‘yes’’ on the rule and support the Mar- held in higher regard. I will tell you traditional marriage. Every deviation riage Protection Amendment. why. In Iraq, our troops are caught in from the ideal model of enduring

VerDate Sep 11 2014 13:17 May 03, 2017 Jkt 049102 PO 00000 Frm 00168 Fmt 0688 Sfmt 0634 E:\FDSYS\BOUNDRECORD\BR18JY06.DAT BR18JY06 ejoyner on DSK30MW082PROD with BOUND RECORD 14784 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE, Vol. 152, Pt. 11 July 18, 2006 monogamous marriage between a man I would also like to insert into the The case for allowing gays to marry begins and a woman expands those bound- RECORD a letter from the Human with equality, pure and simple. Why should aries; and when we push these limits, Rights Campaign in opposition to the one set of loving, consenting adults be denied who is to say where the definition of bill before us, a letter from the Amer- a right that other such adults have and ican Jewish Committee in opposition which, if exercised, will do no damage to marriage will end? anyone else? Not just because they have al- Government and societies have to the bill before us, a letter from the ways lacked that right in the past, for sure: granted certain institutional benefits National Council of Jewish Women in until the late 1960s, in some American states and privileges to heterosexual mar- opposition to the bill before us, and a it was illegal for black adults to marry white riage because these unions have the bi- letter from the Leadership Conference ones, but precious few would defend that ban ological potential to provide societies on Civil Rights in opposition to the bill now on grounds that it was ‘‘traditional’’. with a tangible benefit, children. before us. Another argument is rooted in semantics: Mr. Speaker, redefining marriage to [From the Economist print edition, Feb. 26, marriage is the union of a man and a woman, include same-sex unions not only de- 2004] and so cannot be extended to same-sex cou- ples. They may live together and love one values marriage, but it diminishes the THE CASE FOR GAY MARRIAGE rights of children. Nature itself gave another, but cannot, on this argument, be IT RESTS ON EQUALITY, LIBERTY AND EVEN ‘‘married’’. But that is to dodge the real children this right. SOCIETY question—why not?—and to obscure the real I wish that this fight here today was So at last it is official: George Bush is in nature of marriage, which is a binding com- not necessary. We did not ask for it. favour of unequal rights, big-government in- mitment, at once legal, social and personal, But failure to enact a constitutional trusiveness and federal power rather than between two people to take on special obli- amendment will mean that the deci- devolution to the states. That is the implica- gations to one another. If homosexuals want sions made by the American people at tion of his announcement this week that he to make such marital commitments to one will support efforts to pass a constitutional the ballot box and through their elect- another, and to society, then why should amendment in America banning gay mar- they be prevented from doing so while other ed representatives regarding marriage riage. Some have sought to explain this ac- adults, equivalent in all other ways, are al- will continue to be overruled, bit by tion away simply as cynical politics, an ef- lowed to do so? bit, by a few renegade judges and local fort to motivate his core conservative sup- officials. Unfortunately, when judges porters to turn out to vote for him in No- CIVIL UNIONS ARE NOT ENOUGH distort the Constitution to overrule vember or to put his likely ‘‘Massachusetts The reason, according to Mr. Bush, is that this would damage an important social insti- the express will of the people, only con- liberal’’ opponent, John Kerry, in an awk- ward spot. Yet to call for a constitutional tution. Yet the reverse is surely true. Gays stitutional amendments can overturn amendment is such a difficult, drastic and want to marry precisely because they see the judges. draconian move that cynicism is too weak marriage as important: they want the sym- Mr. Speaker, the people in the Eighth an explanation. No, it must be worse than bolism that marriage brings, the extra sense District of North Carolina have clearly that: Mr. Bush must actually believe in what of obligation and commitment, as well as the and repeatedly asked me to defend tra- he is doing. social recognition. Allowing gays to marry ditional marriage, to do whatever it Mr. Bush says that he is acting to protect would, if anything, add to social stability, takes to ensure that the people have ‘‘the most fundamental institution of for it would increase the number of couples the final say. That is why I rise here civilisation’’ from what he sees as ‘‘activist that take on real, rather than simply pass- judges’’ who in Massachusetts early this today, convinced that this constitu- ing, commitments. The weakening of mar- month confirmed an earlier ruling that ban- riage has been heterosexuals’ doing, not tional amendment is the right thing to ning gay marriage is contrary to their state gays’, for it is their infidelity, divorce rates do. constitution. The city of San Francisco, gay and single-parent families that have wrought The time is now. Let’s give American capital of America, has been issuing thou- social damage. moms and dads the chance to protect sands of marriage licences to homosexual But marriage is about children, say some: marriage. I urge a ‘‘yes’’ vote on the couples, in apparent contradiction to state to which the answer is, it often is, but not al- rule and the Marriage Protection and even federal laws. It can only be a mat- ways, and permitting gay marriage would Amendment. ter of time before this issue arrives at the not alter that. Or it is a religious act, say federal Supreme Court. An those ‘‘activist others: to which the answer is, yes, you may PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY judges’’, who, by the way, gave Mr. Bush his believe that, but if so it is no business of the Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I have a job in 2000, might well take the same view of state to impose a religious choice. Indeed, in parliamentary inquiry. the federal constitution as their Massachu- America the constitution expressly bans the The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gen- setts equivalents did of their state code: that involvement of the state in religious mat- tleman will state it. the constitution demands equality of treat- ters, so it would be especially outrageous if Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, the 14th ment. Last June, in Lawrence v. Texas, they the constitution were now to be used for reli- amendment, section 1, says that no one ruled that state anti-sodomy laws violated gious ends. shall be denied equal protection of the the constitutional right of adults to choose The importance of marriage for society’s laws. Now, if this would pass, would how to conduct their private lives with re- general health and stability also explains gard to sex, saying further that ‘‘the Court’s why the commonly mooted alternative to this legislation, this constitutional obligation is to define the liberty of all, not gay marriage—a so-called civil union—is not amendment, supersede that provision to mandate its own moral code’’. That obli- enough. Vermont has created this notion, of of the 14th amendment and make that gation could well lead the justices to uphold a legally registered contract between a cou- provision of the 14th amendment null the right of gays to marry. ple that cannot, however, be called a ‘‘mar- and void? LET THEM WED riage’’. Some European countries, by legis- The SPEAKER pro tempore. It is not That idea remains shocking to many peo- lating for equal legal rights for gay partner- the province of the Chair to interpret ple. So far, only two countries—Belgium and ships, have moved in the same direction the pending measure or to construe its the Netherlands—have given full legal status (Britain is contemplating just such a move, relationship to the Constitution. Those to same-sex unions, though Canada has and even the opposition Conservative leader, Michael Howard, says he would support it). are matters to be elucidated by Mem- backed the idea in principle and others have conferred almost-equal rights on such part- Some gays think it would be better to limit bers in debate. nerships. The sight of homosexual men and their ambitions to that, rather than seeking Mr. MCGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield women having wedding days just like those full social equality, for fear of provoking a myself such time as I may consume. enjoyed for thousands of years by backlash—of the sort perhaps epitomised by Mr. Speaker, I would like to insert heterosexuals is unsettling, just as, for some Mr. Bush this week. into the RECORD at this time an article people, is the sight of them holding hands or Yet that would be both wrong in principle that appeared in the Economist maga- kissing. When The Economist first argued in and damaging for society. Marriage, as it is zine entitled ‘‘The Case For Gay Mar- favour of legalising gay marriage eight years commonly viewed in society, is more than riage.’’ ago (‘‘Let them wed’’, January 6th 1996) it just a legal contract. Moreover, to establish shocked many of our readers, though fewer something short of real marriage for some I will insert into the RECORD an exec- than it would have shocked eight years ear- adults would tend to undermine the notion utive summary of the Cato Institute’s lier and more than it will shock today. That for all. Why shouldn’t everyone, in time, policy analysis entitled: ‘‘The Federal is why we argued that such a radical change downgrade to civil unions? Now that really Marriage Amendment: Unnecessary, should not be pushed along precipitously. would threaten a fundamental institution of Anti-federalist and Antidemocratic.’’ But nor should it be blocked precipitously. civilisation.

VerDate Sep 11 2014 13:17 May 03, 2017 Jkt 049102 PO 00000 Frm 00169 Fmt 0688 Sfmt 0634 E:\FDSYS\BOUNDRECORD\BR18JY06.DAT BR18JY06 ejoyner on DSK30MW082PROD with BOUND RECORD July 18, 2006 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE, Vol. 152, Pt. 11 14785 [From Policy Analysis, June 1, 2006] the federal marriage amendment (‘‘FMA’’) Thank you for considering our views on THE FEDERAL MARRIAGE AMENDMENT UNNEC- would undermine the guiding principles of this important matter. ESSARY, ANTI-FEDERALIST, AND ANTI-DEMO- our Constitution. Constitutional amend- Respectfully, CRATIC ments have expanded rights for Americans, RICHARD T. FOLTIN, including voting rights, religious liberty, Legislative Director and Counsel. (By Dale Carpenter) and equal protection. Discrimination has no EXECUTIVE SUMMARY place in our nation’s founding document. NATIONAL COUNCIL OF JEWISH WOMEN, Members of Congress have proposed a con- The proposed amendment’s supporters and July 17, 2006. stitutional amendment preventing states drafters disagree over whether it would ban DEAR REPRESENTATIVE: On behalf of the from recognizing same-sex marriages. Pro- the civil union and domestic partnership pro- 90,000 members and supporters of the Na- ponents of the Federal Marriage Amendment tections that several states and cities have tional Council of Jewish Women (NCJW), I claim that an amendment is needed imme- extended to same-sex couples. Sixty percent am writing in opposition to the federal mar- diately to prevent same-sex marriages from of Americans agree that all families should riage amendment (H.J. Res 39). The federal being forced on the nation. That fear is even be able to protect one other in times of cri- marriage amendment also threatens funda- more unfounded today than it was in 2004, sis, whether to take care of a sick family mental constitutional rights such as reli- when Congress last considered the FMA. The member, share retirement savings, of make gious liberty and domestic violence protec- better view is that the policy debate on important decisions on the death of a part- tions. same-sex marriage should proceed in the 50 ner. The FMA could render laws that provide A ban on same-sex marriage would set a states, without being cut off by a single na- these protections unconstitutional, hurting dangerous precedent by amending the Con- tional policy imposed from Washington and real American families. stitution to restrict the rights of a specific enshrined in the Constitution. class of people. Furthermore, the proposed Americans prioritize fairness over dis- A person who opposes same-sex marriage language is vague and would consequently crimination. Congress should focus on fair- on policy grounds can and should also oppose jeopardize existing state recognized civil ness, and abandon the divisive politics be- a constitutional amendment foreclosing it, unions. To deny couples in committed rela- hind the FMA. With gas prices rising and on grounds of federalism, confidence that op- tionships the same legal benefits accorded issues related to health care and education ponents will prevail without an amendment, spouses in heterosexual marriages is preju- on the minds of Americans, Congress should or a belief that public policy issues should dicial, morally offensive, and goes against not be spending its time seeking to discrimi- only rarely be determined at the constitu- the spirit of a free democracy. nate against a group of Americans and treat- tional level. Passage of the vague language within H.J. ing them differently under the law in our There are four main arguments against the Res. 39 would also have broader consequences Constitution. FMA. First, a constitutional amendment is for all unmarried Americans. For instance, unnecessary because federal and state laws, Your ‘‘no’’ vote on the FMA is a vote in Ohio, the media reports that some people combined with the present state of the rel- against discrimination and for the values are losing the protection of domestic vio- evant constitutional doctrines, already that belong in our Constitution: liberty, lence laws based on that state’s marriage make court-ordered nationwide same-sex equality, and fairness. amendment. The federal marriage amend- marriage unlikely for the foreseeable future. Thank you for your consideration. If you ment, which has almost identical language, An amendment banning same-sex marriage have any questions, or need more informa- would create similar ambiguities that would is a solution in search of a problem. tion, please contact David Stacy at endanger protections for non-married vic- Second, a constitutional amendment defin- 202.572.8959 or Lara Schwartz at 202.216.1578. tims, potentially reduce criminal penalties, ing marriage would be a radical intrusion on Sincerely, and invalidate many state and local statues. the nation’s founding commitment to fed- JOE SOLMONESE, This law would inadvertently help those who eralism in an area traditionally reserved for President. hurt others by complicating established laws state regulation, family law. There has been in place to protect victims of violence. no showing that federalism has been unwork- THE AMERICAN JEWISH COMMITTEE, In addition, the passage of H.J. Res. 39 able in the area of family law. Washington, DC, July 17, 2006. would jeopardize religious liberty. To date, Third, a constitutional amendment ban- Re: Marriage Protection Amendment (H.J. no administrative or judicial decision in any ning same-sex marriage would be an unprece- Res. 88) state or locale requires a religious group to dented form of amendment, cutting short an perform any marriage against its will. The DEAR REPRESENTATIVE: On behalf of the ongoing national debate over what privileges American Jewish Committee, the nation’s proposed amendment, on the other hand, and benefits, if any, ought to be conferred on oldest human relations organization with would impose a single, religious definition of same-sex couples and preventing democratic over 150,000 members and supporters rep- marriage upon the entire nation. Central to processes from recognizing more individual resented by 33 regional offices nationwide, I religious autonomy is the ability to choose rights. urge you to oppose the Marriage Protection who can take part in important religious rit- Fourth, the amendment as proposed is con- Amendment (H.J. Res. 88). If passed, this leg- uals or services, including marriage. For the stitutional overkill that reaches well beyond islation would amend the U.S. Constitution government to interfere in this process and the stated concerns of its proponents, fore- to provide that marriage in the United show preference to one particular religion’s closing not just courts but also state legisla- States shall consist only of the union be- point of view would significantly undermine tures from recognizing same-sex marriages tween a man and a woman. The amendment the separation of religion and state. and perhaps other forms of legal support for would also prevent both the federal and state NCJW is a volunteer organization, inspired same-sex relationships. Whatever one thinks constitutions from being interpreted to re- by Jewish values, that works to improve the of same-sex marriage as a matter of policy, quire that marriage or the legal incidents quality of life for women, children, and fami- no person who cares about our Constitution thereof shall be conferred upon any union lies and to ensure individual rights and free- and public policy should support this unnec- other than the union of a man and a woman. doms for all. As such, we believe that gay essary, radical, unprecedented, and overly and lesbian individuals should have the con- broad departure from the nation’s traditions The Marriage Protection Amendment stitutional right to affirm and protect their and history. would mark the first time the Constitution relationships through marriage. We endorse has been amended to include discrimination. laws that would provide equal rights for It is a threat to the fundamental rights of HUMAN RIGHTS CAMPAIGN, same-sex couples. Washington, DC, July 17, 2006. many Americans and would only serve to en- Enshrining discrimination in a document shrine discrimination in our social fabric. DEAR REPRESENTATIVE: On behalf of the whose purpose is to safeguard rights and Human Rights Campaign (‘‘HRC’’), our na- Moreover, the Marriage Protection Amend- freedoms is wrong. I urge you to vote to de- tion’s largest civil rights organization pro- ment would imperil civil union and similar feat this bill. moting equality for gay, lesbian, bisexual provisions that have been adopted in some Sincerely, and transgender (‘‘GLBT’’) Americans, I states. While AJC takes no position on state PHYLLIS SNYDER, write to urge you to vote no on H.J. Res. 88, recognition of same-sex marriage per se, AJC NCJW President. a proposed amendment to the United States believes that same-sex couples who choose to Constitution that would write discrimina- enter into domestic arrangements such as LEADERSHIP CONFERENCE ON tion into our Constitution and brand lesbian civil unions should be afforded the same CIVIL RIGHTS, and gay families as second-class citizens in legal rights, benefits, protections and obliga- WASHINGTON, DC, JULY 14, 2006. every state in our nation. tions conferred upon heterosexual couples Oppose the ‘‘Federal Marriage Amendment’’ Our Constitution was written to promote who enter into civil marriage. (H.J. Res. 88) Don’t Write Discrimination liberty, equality, and fairness. ‘‘We, the peo- We therefore urge you to oppose H.J. Res. into the Constitution ple’’ means all of the people. By singling out 88 in order to protect against enshrining dis- DEAR REPRESENTATIVE: On behalf of the a group of Americans for unequal treatment, crimination in the Constitution. Leadership Conference on Civil Rights

VerDate Sep 11 2014 13:17 May 03, 2017 Jkt 049102 PO 00000 Frm 00170 Fmt 0688 Sfmt 0634 E:\FDSYS\BOUNDRECORD\BR18JY06.DAT BR18JY06 ejoyner on DSK30MW082PROD with BOUND RECORD 14786 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE, Vol. 152, Pt. 11 July 18, 2006 (LCCR), the nation’s oldest, largest, and dividuals demanded that Congress ‘‘impeach against the will of the people, I will most diverse civil and human rights coali- Earl Warren.’’ The Supreme Court’s ruling in tell you that in Massachusetts, where tion, we strongly urge you to oppose the Loving v. Virginia (1967), which invalidated a gay marriage has been legal now for ‘‘Federal Marriage Amendment’’ (H.J. Res. state anti-miscegenation law, resulted in over 2 years, I think the majority of similar attacks. Fortunately, our nation 88), a radical proposal that would perma- the people are absolutely fine with it. nently write discrimination into the United avoided taking any radical measures against States Constitution. LCCR believes that this the so-called ‘‘judicial activists’’ or their de- Over 8,000 gay couples have been mar- highly divisive amendment is a dangerous cisions, and we believe a similar level of cau- ried, and life goes on. Nothing has and unnecessary approach to resolving the tion is warranted in this case. changed. The only thing that has ongoing debate over same-sex marriage, and At a time when our nation has many great changed is that people in gay relation- that it would turn 225 years of constitutional and pressing issues, Congress can ill afford to ships can enjoy the same rights and history on its head by requiring that states exert time and energy on such a divisive and privileges and responsibilities as those actually restrict the civil rights of their own discriminatory constitutional amendment. who are in heterosexual relationships. citizens. We implore you to focus on the critical needs I would also say to my colleagues As a diverse coalition, LCCR does not take facing our nation, and to publicly oppose this amendment. If you have any questions that if you are so worried about defend- a position for or against same-sex marriage. ing the institution of marriage, then I The issue of same-sex marriage is an ex- or need further information, please contact tremely difficult and sensitive one, and peo- Rob Randhava, LCCR Counsel, at (202) 466– think we should all worry about our ple of good will can and do have heartfelt dif- 6058, or Nancy Zirkin, LCCR Deputy Direc- own marriages. In Massachusetts, I ferences of opinion on the matter. However, tor, at (202) 263–2880. Thank you for your con- should point out for the record that we LCCR strongly believes that there are right sideration. have the lowest divorce rate in the and wrong ways to address the issue as a Sincerely, country. So maybe we know something matter of public policy, and is extremely Leadership Conference on Civil Rights about marriage that maybe you don’t. A. Philip Randolph Institute, American concerned about any proposal that would Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, I yield Association of People with Disabilities, alter our nation’s most important document American Civil Liberties Union, American myself 15 seconds. for the direct purpose of excluding any indi- Humanist Association, American Jewish The gentleman from Massachusetts I viduals from its guarantees of equal protec- Committee, Americans for Democratic Ac- am sure is aware of the fact that in his tion. tion, Americans United for Separation of State, opponents have gathered 170,000 The proposed amendment is antithetical to Church and State, Anti-Defamation League, signatures supporting a constitutional one of the Constitution’s most fundamental Asian American Justice Center (formerly guiding principles, that of the guarantee of amendment they hope would end gay known as NAPALC), Asian Pacific American equal protection for all. For the first time in marriage, despite what their supreme Labor Alliance, AFL–CIO, Association of Hu- history, the Constitution would be altered to court did. manistic Rabbis, Bazelon Center for Mental be used as a tool of exclusion, restricting the Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the Health Law, Central Conference of American rights of a group of Americans. It is so far- gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Rabbis, Citizens’ Commission on Civil reaching that it would not only prohibit MCHENRY). Rights, Disability Rights Education & De- states from granting equal marriage rights Mr. MCHENRY. Mr. Speaker, we fense Fund, Friends Committee on National to same-sex couples, but also may deprive Legislation, Global Rights, Hadassah, the must defend traditional marriage. Mar- same-sex couples and their families of funda- Women’s Zionist Organization of America, riage, family and community are not mental protections such as hospital visita- Human Rights Campaign, Jewish Labor catch phrases. They are the backbone tion, inheritance rights, and health care ben- Committee. of our American society. Sadly, how- efits, whether conveyed through marriage or Korean American Resource & Cultural other legally recognized relationships. Such ever, there is an organized effort by ju- Center (KRCC), Korean Resource Center a proposal runs afoul of basic principles of dicial activists and the radical left in (KRC), Lambda Legal, League of United fairness and will do little but harm real chil- this country to destroy our traditional Latin American Citizens, League of Women dren and real families in the process. American culture. Voters of the United States, Legal Momen- Constitutional amendments are extremely The Federal Marriage Amendment tum, Metropolitan Washington Employment rare, and are only done to address great pub- provides a national definition of mar- Lawyers Association, Mexican American lic policy needs. Since the Bill of Rights’ Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Na- riage and leaves marriage laws to the adoption in 1791, the Constitution has only tional Alliance of Postal and Federal Em- State legislatures. It adds a layer of been amended seventeen times. LCCR be- ployees, National Association for the Ad- protection against court-imposed ar- lieves that the Bill of Rights and subsequent vancement of Colored People (NAACP), Na- rangements other than marriage and amendments were designed largely to pro- tional Association of Human Rights Work- protects States from being forced to tect and expand individual liberties, and cer- ers, National Association of Social Workers, tainly not to deliberately take away or re- recognize same-sex unions created by National Council of Jewish Women, National strict them. other States. Council of La Raza, National Disability LCCR is particularly troubled by the viru- Years of social science evidence con- Rights Network, National Education Asso- lent rhetoric of some organizations working firms that children respond best when ciation, National Employment Lawyers As- to enact the proposed amendment, and their their mom and dad are married and sociation, National Gay and Lesbian Task animus towards gays and lesbians. The at- Force, National Jewish Democratic Council, live in the home. That is why it is im- tacks made by many of the most vocal pro- National Korean American Service & Edu- portant that we defend traditional ponents, such as the Traditional Values Coa- cation Consortium (NAKASEC). marriage and this traditional notion of lition and the American Family Association, National Partnership for Women & Fami- family law that emphasizes the impor- are disturbingly similar to the sorts of at- lies, National Urban League, National Wom- tance of the foundational principle of tacks that have been made upon other com- en’s Law Center, People For the American family and to address the needs of chil- munities as the have attempted to assert Way, PFLAG National (Parents, Families their right to equal protection of the laws. dren in the most positive and effective and Friends of Lesbians and Gays), Planned way. This is, of course, an element of the debate Parenthood Federation of America, Project that the civil rights community finds deeply We must defend what is sacred in our Equality, Inc., Retail, Wholesale and Depart- Nation against reckless actions of a disturbing, as should all fair-minded Ameri- ment Store Union, UFCW, Service Employ- cans. ees International Union (SEIU), Society for dangerous few who seek to impose In addition, supporters of the Federal Mar- Humanistic Judaism, The Interfaith Alli- their liberal lunacy on our society. riage Amendment cite ‘‘judicial activism’’ as ance, Union for Reform Judaism, Unitarian That is why we must fight for families, a reason to enact it. Terms like ‘‘judicial ac- Universalist Association of Congregations, and this is a war worth fighting. tivism’’ are alarming to LCCR and the civil United Church of Christ Justice and Witness Mr. MCGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield rights community because such labels have Ministries, United Food and Commercial myself such time as I may consume. routinely been used in the past to attack Workers International Union, United States Mr. Speaker, let me say that I used judges who made courageous decisions on Student Association, Women Employed, to think that what was sacred in this civil rights matters. When Chief Justice Earl Workmen’s Circle/Arbeter Ring, YWCA USA. Warren wrote the unanimous Supreme Court country was defending civil rights and decision in Brown v. Board of Education Mr. Speaker, let me also just say in civil liberties and fighting against dis- (1954), for example, defenders of segregation response to some of the speakers who crimination. Apparently I am mis- cried ‘‘judicial activism’’ across the South have come before us who have talked taken, based on the comments that I and across the country. Many groups and in- about gay marriage as somehow going have just heard.

VerDate Sep 11 2014 13:17 May 03, 2017 Jkt 049102 PO 00000 Frm 00171 Fmt 0688 Sfmt 0634 E:\FDSYS\BOUNDRECORD\BR18JY06.DAT BR18JY06 ejoyner on DSK30MW082PROD with BOUND RECORD July 18, 2006 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE, Vol. 152, Pt. 11 14787 Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the Our Constitution, the most cherished Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Speak- gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. document embodying the American er, I thank my good friend from Massa- BALDWIN). Dream of life, liberty and the pursuit chusetts for yielding me time. Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. Speaker, I thank of happiness, should not be amended to Mr. Speaker, you know we have a the gentleman and rise this morning in single out and deny the rights of any conflagration in the Middle East today strong opposition to the rule before us. one group of Americans. This divisive, as we speak. We have raised the debt I hope later today to return to the hateful, and unnecessary amendment is ceiling four times to over $9 trillion, floor and address the substance of Fed- unworthy of our great Constitution and we are going to pass it all on to our eral Marriage Amendment. But now I that has been the foundation of our kids. And yet this is how the Repub- want to speak to this process, because great Nation. lican congressional leadership chooses by bringing up this unnecessary and di- I urge my colleagues to reject this to spend its time. visive amendment to write discrimina- rule and to vote against the amend- Nobody’s marriage is endangered. tion into the Constitution, the leader- ment. What this is really about and what this ship of this House once again illus- Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, I yield amendment should be entitled is the trates just how out of step Congress is myself 30 seconds. ‘‘Gay Discrimination Act.’’ That is all with the rest of America. Mr. Speaker, I want to point out to it is. And what is its motivation? It is With the defeat of the amendment in the gentlewoman from Wisconsin that a crass political attempt to divide the Senate a mere 5 weeks ago, this 45 States currently define marriage as America in an election year. That is legislation should have never reached a union of one man and one woman or what this is all about. We know it. And the floor of the House. Yet, unsur- expressly prohibit same-sex marriages; I suspect a lot of the American people prisingly, politics is prevailing over and those 45 States we are talking know it as well. common sense, and today we are going about, Mr. Speaker, include 88 percent What every American should find to be hearing a lot of hurtful political of the population of this country. We most objectionable is that you are rhetoric targeting gay and lesbian fam- are not just talking about Georgia. The using the Constitution to do this. Our ilies, all for the purpose of pandering to fact is in a constitutional amendment, Founding Fathers put together the a narrow political base. three-fourths of the States will have to Constitution and the Bill of Rights in Mr. Speaker, America faces great ratify it. order to protect and enhance individual challenges, both at home and abroad. Mr. MCGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, will rights and liberties. And this goes di- We are confronted with record high gas the gentleman yield? rectly counter to what our Constitu- prices, an endless and expensive war in Mr. GINGREY. I yield to the gen- tion is all about by prohibiting indi- Iraq, skyrocketing health care costs, tleman from Massachusetts. vidual rights and limiting States and a growing international crisis in Mr. MCGOVERN. If all these States rights. the Middle East and North Korea. But are doing what you want them to do, They talked about life, liberty and the Federal Marriage Amendment al- why do we need a Federal constitu- the pursuit of happiness. And, yet, all lowed under this rule, of course, does tional amendment? you can think about is ways to make Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, reclaim- nothing to address these very pressing life more difficult for people who do ing my time, it is because of these ac- challenges. not fall into the mainstream of Amer- tivist judges who are chipping away at At a time of such great tests con- ica. That is not what America is about. fronting our Nation, America’s leaders the will of the people. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to my This amendment needs to be defeated should be uniting, rather than dividing, good friend, the gentleman from Texas and we need to stand up for human our country. But the FMA does exactly rights, for civil rights, and for States (Mr. NEUGEBAUER). the opposite of that, and it certainly Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Mr. Speaker, I rights. puts politics ahead of real progress. rise today in support of the definition We know it is never going to get en- The Federal Marriage Amendment is of a marriage as between one man and acted. But we should not be spending also unnecessary. Since 2004, States one woman. I think really what we are our time talking about it. We should around the country have been address- doing on the floor today is determining not be spending our time trying to seek ing the issue of gay marriage through how America will define itself. Thou- political gain at the expense of people the normal legislative and govern- sands of years and many civilizations who want to live committed lives with mental process. Today, Massachusetts have defined a marriage as the union each other. That is not endangering remains the only State that allows gay between one man and one woman. With anybody. Defeating this amendment is marriage. But several other States, in- few exceptions, those civilizations that what our Founding Fathers wanted cluding Vermont, Connecticut and did not follow that perished. America to be about. California, have passed laws granting Forty-five States, as the gentleman Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to the civil union protections for same-sex just said, have determined by people Federal Marriage Amendment, and I do so for couples. Those laws would certainly be that were elected by the people of that one simple reason—the United States Con- threatened if this amendment were to State that marriage is the definition of stitution must never be allowed to expressly pass. one man and one woman. So, today, we authorize, indeed to expressly direct, discrimi- The proposed FMA limits the ability are really on the floor to debate wheth- nation against a group of individuals that is of States to confer protections such as er America will continue to define based upon their shared personal characteris- important rights like hospital visita- itself and the definition of marriage on tics tion rights, health insurance and a godly institution that was estab- Mr. Speaker, this amendment shouldn’t be broader civil union or domestic part- lished thousands and thousands of called the Marriage Protection Amendment. It nership protections on unmarried cou- years ago that one man and one woman isn’t needed to strengthen or enhance the in- ples, and it undermines our federalist would come together and become one stitution or traditional marriage in this country. tradition of deferring to the States to and produce families, families that all Call it what it is—it’s the Anti-Gay Marriage regulate the institution of marriage. across America have said that the defi- Amendment, for it is intended to deny gay and Mr. Speaker, many Americans are nition of marriage is between one man lesbian Americans, solely on the basis of their struggling with the issue of same-sex and one woman. orientation, the ability to maintain the same marriage on a personal level today. I urge my colleagues today to define kind of committed relationships that every There is a vibrant debate going on America as a moral country. other adult in the country is entitled to. across our Nation, in church base- This is discrimination in its rankest form. ments, in break rooms, in dining b 1100 The amendment is the first of its kind, for it rooms. This debate would be com- Mr. MCGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield seeks to change the Constitution, not to pro- pletely shutdown and stifled if this 2 minutes to the gentleman from Vir- hibit, but to authorize a specific form of dis- amendment were to pass. ginia (Mr. MORAN). crimination.

VerDate Sep 11 2014 13:17 May 03, 2017 Jkt 049102 PO 00000 Frm 00172 Fmt 0688 Sfmt 9920 E:\FDSYS\BOUNDRECORD\BR18JY06.DAT BR18JY06 ejoyner on DSK30MW082PROD with BOUND RECORD 14788 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE, Vol. 152, Pt. 11 July 18, 2006 And it does this by forever preventing the that have democratically voted not to emies but to make a point. And my states from extending the rights and protec- sanction these unions. This is a mis- point is this. This is off base. This is tions of marriage to a certain class of citizens. carriage of judicial power. I urge my wrong. I wish we had time to debate States would be denied the right to recog- colleagues to support the democratic the theology of this issue, because I nize and afford same sex couples the legal process and support the Federal mar- would do it with anybody in this place. rights and protection that heterosexual couples riage amendment. Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, I yield receive from government, such as the right to Mr. MCGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, just myself 45 seconds. receive health benefits and hospital visitations. for the record, there is no Federal chal- Mr. Speaker, I do not know that I Furthermore, those states that have already lenge at this time in any Federal court could debate theology with the gen- seen fit to recognize and enact domestic part- to DOMA. So that not is not even an tleman from Missouri, as an ordained nership state laws would be preempted by this issue. minister, but I do know a little bit amendment. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the about the sacrament of marriage, Mr. Never, however, has the Constitution, on its gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Speaker, as one of about 200 Catholic face, been amended to deny a specific set of CLEAVER). Members of the United States Con- rights to a specific class of citizens. Mr. CLEAVER. Mr. Speaker, I prob- gress. By approving this measure, the House ably perform more marriages than all I think God has spoken very clearly, would be party to act that would stand as an of the other Members in this body, col- very clearly on this issue. And I would extraordinary affront to the Constitution and, lected. When I perform a wedding in refer the gentleman to Holy Scripture, especially, to the Bill of Rights and the funda- Los Angeles in August, it will push me and what the word says in regard to mental principles and protections it enshrines. over the 400 mark for my career as an marriage and the sanctity of marriage. This is not what the Constitution is about; ordained United Methodist pastor. I think it is pretty clear. this is not what our country is about. The I am baffled over what is taking The gentleman wants to talk about place on this floor. When Rome ruled amendment should be seen for what it is—a the fact that this should be a church the world, every now and then Roman crass attempt to politically divide the American issue. I agree with you. I wish it were, soldiers had to go back to Rome and public in an election year. It must be soundly if it were not for these activist Federal pledge loyalty to the Emperor. It was defeated, and I urge my colleagues to do so. judges and these public officials. I will called sacramentum. In my tradition, Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, I yield remind the gentleman from Missouri, the Christian tradition, we took that myself 15 seconds. the good Reverend, that they will be word to use as our word sacrament, our Mr. Speaker, I just want to remind the one that would be performing these the gentleman from Virginia that it is pledge of loyalty to God. The generic marriage ceremony, marriages and they would do it to a not all about money and how we spend which almost every denomination uses, fare-thee-well. it that we are in this Congress, but it begins by saying, marriage is an honor- Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the is also about values and how this great able estate instituted by God and sig- gentleman from California (Mr. DANIEL country represents them to the world, nifies to all the uniting of this man and E. LUNGREN). not the least of which is the Middle this woman in His church. Mr. DANIEL E. LUNGREN of Cali- East. The point, Mr. Speaker, is that the fornia. Mr. Speaker, the argument on Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the domain of the church is the place the floor that somehow this is a church gentleman from Florida (Mr. STEARNS). where definitions should be made with issue misses this point entirely. We are Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Speaker, I thank regard to marriage. Every denomina- talking about the legal implications, my colleague also for his point that tion has struggled or is struggling with and whether or not the Government of values are important here in Congress. this issue. The United Methodist the United States can recognize a pref- That is why we are here. So I rise in Church voted last year not to allow erential status for marriage between support of the rule and support of the same-sex marriages. The Episcopalian one man and one woman. amendment. Church voted to do the same. Now, is this unprecedented? No, it is In 1996, we passed in Congress the De- I resent a body of legislators telling not. Read your American history. The fense of Marriage Act, DOMA, so this is me, a member of a denomination, that State of Utah was not allowed to be- not a new issue, back in 1996 to protect they will decide who can and who can- come a State until they recognized the institution of marriage. not get married. It is the responsibility marriage as being only between one Unfortunately, DOMA does not go far of the church not the Government. If man and one woman. That had to do enough to protect States from courts the Government is going to become in- with whether you could have multiple that choose to drastically alter mar- volved in this sacrament, then why not partners. riage laws. This amendment is greatly communion? Why does the Congress This is a different aspect of that supported, greatly supported by the not then begin to deal with how many question, but essentially the legal basis majority of Americans. As pointed out times a month a church should do com- is the same. And that is what we are earlier, 20 States, 20 States voted and munion? talking about here. Those who wish to elected to define marriage as between a Friends, this is the saddest day for change this, as these activist judges do, man and a woman by overwhelming me since I have been here, because I carry the burden of arguing why we majorities. can see clearly that this body is willing should change an institution which has On average, these States have ap- to trespass on the domain of God. Mar- stood the test of time for thousands of proved constitutional amendments riage is a holy institution. It was cre- years. with 70 percent approval ratings. Addi- ated by God. And we say in my tradi- There are reasons for this in terms of tionally, 23 other States have enacted tion that Jesus ordained and beautified it being the most stable unit of society laws that similarly limit marriage to marriage when he performed his first upon which our society has found itself unions between a man and a woman, miracle at the wedding in Cana of Gal- in need. That is what we are talking and my State is among them, Florida. ilee, not on the floor of Congress. about. It is not discrimination. It is al- Yet, not one State, I say to my col- The church controls this issue. If this lowing the existence of a definition of leagues over there, not one State has body would like to move to have the the most fundamental unit of society. chosen by popular vote to permit mar- civil marriages restricted, that is fine. That is it simply. We are not intruding riages between homosexuals. Explain People who want to go to the court- in the province of churches. that to me. Why, if there is so much house, or want to get married on a Mr. MCGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield concern over there, why a State has ship, that is fine. But in terms of the 4 minutes to the gentleman from Ten- not permitted it? church, keep your hands out of the nessee (Mr. DAVIS). Without this amendment, activist church. Mr. DAVIS of Tennessee. Mr. Speak- judges would be able to force recogni- The church is a sacred institution. I er, first of all I want to clarify some- tion of same-sex marriage upon States did not come to this floor to make en- thing about the activist judges. Since

VerDate Sep 11 2014 13:17 May 03, 2017 Jkt 049102 PO 00000 Frm 00173 Fmt 0688 Sfmt 0634 E:\FDSYS\BOUNDRECORD\BR18JY06.DAT BR18JY06 ejoyner on DSK30MW082PROD with BOUND RECORD July 18, 2006 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE, Vol. 152, Pt. 11 14789 1953, since Eisenhower was sworn into we should extend the punishment of by judicial fiat to redefine our con- office, there have been 23 Federal abuse to prevent those who do such a stitutional definition of marriage judges appointed to the U.S. Supreme heinous act from ever running for an which has stood for 223 years. Court. Of that amount, 17 have been elected position anywhere. Mr. Speaker, I yield 11⁄4 minutes to Republicans, 6 have been Democrats. We should also prevent those who my good friend from Texas, who has The Court today has 7 Republicans, and commit adultery or get a divorce from been married to his lovely wife for 37 2 Democrats. running for office. Mr. Speaker, this years, Judge John Carter. I do not know who they are blaming. House must lead by example. If we Mr. CARTER. Mr. Speaker, I want to Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for want those watching on C–SPAN to ac- thank my colleague from Georgia. We yielding. Mr. Speaker, I am a cosponsor tually believe we are serious about pro- have now made 38. of this amendment. And I rise today tecting marriage, then we should go Mr. Speaker, anywhere in the world with some serious concerns. First, I am after the other major threats to the in- today you can wake somebody up in concerned about the use of faith and stitution, not just the threats that ho- the middle of the night, you pick them, marriage to score political points. I am mosexuals may some day be allowed to and you say, excuse me, wake up just a also concerned about the scope of the marry in a State other than Massachu- second. What is a marriage? They will amendment. setts, and elected officials should cer- say a union between a man and a First, I will talk about the amend- tainly lead by example. woman. This is a confused world that we are ment’s scope. In my opinion, the Now for my second concern, Mr. trying to define here. The reality is amendment limits its ability to truly Speaker. As a person of faith who has marriage has always been a union be- protect marriage. As written, the been blessed with a wonderful marriage tween a man and a woman. Now, in amendment defines marriage between a of 42 years, I am deeply troubled that China they might say a civil union. In man and a woman. Sounds good, but I some may be using this amendment to Rome they might say a church union, do not think that alone will be good score political points with their base. but it has always been a union between enough to fully protect marriage. Why else would we be voting for an Mr. Speaker, it is my belief that the a man and a woman. amendment that has no chance of be- In my faith, I believe it is part of amendment does not go far enough. If coming law since the Senate has al- God’s plan for the future of mankind. we truly want to protect marriage, we ready rejected it? Why else would we The sacredness of a marriage is based, should look and do all the things we vote on an amendment that may not be to this Nation, and, quite frankly, must to go after the evils that threaten necessary, when you consider that 45 every Nation on Earth, it is how the each and everyone of our marriages. States have enacted either constitu- base governing we have in our lives These are the evils of divorce, adultery tional or statutory bans on gay mar- starts. and abuse. riage? And other States, like my home Mr. Speaker, that is why this should The amount of divorce that has oc- State of Tennessee, have put such bans be a part of the United States Con- curred in this country has become a on the ballot in November. stitution. When activist judges would threat to marriage. What do our chil- Why, too, would Congressional Quar- go try to change the real world, it is dren learn when they see their parents terly in their July 17, 2006 issue, report our job to step up and stand up for the getting divorced left and right, only to this amendment is a part of the legisla- moral values of this Nation. remarry and get divorced again? What tive values agenda rolled out to rally This is why I support this rule, and I kind of example does it set? the GOP base in the run-up to the No- support the legislation and the con- This occurrence clearly undermine vember elections? stitutional amendment to follow. the values that are the foundation of Just as one should not take the Mr. MCGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield every marriage. Of course I am speak- Lord’s name in vain, I also believe a 1 minute to the gentlewoman from ing of the commonly recited tenet, good value for folks is to never under- California (Ms. WOOLSEY). ‘‘Till death do us part.’’ Marriage is for mine religion or marriage by using Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I honor life. This amendment needs to include them to score political points with the the long-term marriages of my col- that basic tenet. base in order to win elections. leagues, all, in this Congress, but this Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I think we In closing, Mr. Speaker, I think it is so-called Marriage Protection Amend- should expand the scope of the amend- time for both parties to stop pandering ment isn’t about trying to reduce the ment to outlaw divorce in this country. to the bases that live on the political divorce rate, or it is not about helping Going further, Mr. Speaker, I believe fringes and instead remember that married couples work through their infidelity, adultery, is an evil that there is one more true base: the Amer- problems. This bill is about keeping threatens the marriage and the heart ican people. The people I represent two adults from making a life-long of every marriage, which is commit- would be more motivated if we could commitment to each other. With ev- ment. address the cost of $3 a gallon gasoline, erything that is happening in this How can we as a country allow and cut it in half, reduce the cost of world, it seems like this should be the adulterers to go unpunished and con- health care for a family of four from least of our worries. tinue to make a mockery of marriage? $1,000 it currently costs for a family, Mr. Speaker, it is time for the major- Again, by doing so, what lessons are we increase the minimum wage from $5.15 ity party to quit intruding on our pri- teaching our children about marriage? to $7.25 an hour, address the illegal im- vate lives and start working on the I certainly think that it shows we are migration, reduce budget deficits and issues that really matter to the Amer- not serious about protecting the insti- balance our budget. ican people and to their families. The tution and this is why I think the b 1115 American public wants us to work to- amendment should outlaw adultery gether, to bring our soldiers home from and make it a felony. Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, I yield Iraq, to address the rising cost of gas, Additionally, Mr. Speaker, we must myself 15 seconds. to raise the minimum wage. address spousal abuse and child abuse. My good friend, the gentleman from Faced with such important issues, Think of how many marriages end in Tennessee, decried politics, and then he amending the Constitution to decide divorce or permanent separation be- started his remarks about politics. He what we should do in our private lives cause one spouse is abusive. And, Mr. talked about whether these judges were is nothing more than a cheap stunt. Speaker, I personally think child abuse Republican judges and Democratic Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, I proud- may be the most despicable act one can judges and gave numbers. ly yield 2 minutes now to the gen- commit. In response to him, we are blaming tleman from Kansas (Mr. RYUN), who This is why if we are truly serious activist judges, whether they are has been married 371⁄2 years. about protecting marriage to the point Democratically appointed or Repub- Mr. RYUN of Kansas. Mr. Speaker, I where we will amend the Constitution, lican appointees, who are attempting rise in strong support of this rule and

VerDate Sep 11 2014 13:17 May 03, 2017 Jkt 049102 PO 00000 Frm 00174 Fmt 0688 Sfmt 0634 E:\FDSYS\BOUNDRECORD\BR18JY06.DAT BR18JY06 ejoyner on DSK30MW082PROD with BOUND RECORD 14790 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE, Vol. 152, Pt. 11 July 18, 2006 the underlying legislation, House Joint judges, activist judges, pacifist judges, comes out of his ears. He is literally Resolution 88, the Marriage Protection any kind of judges, from deciding. It is now raring to go, because he had a V8. Amendment. an amendment to prevent anybody He says to himself, wow, I could have It is on behalf of the many families of from deciding. had a V8. Note for the record, I just the Second District of Kansas that I In the State of Massachusetts, we smacked myself in the forehead to rep- urge my colleagues to give our State have had same-sex marriage for over 2 resent what happened in the commer- legislators the opportunity to ratify years. None of the negative con- cial. Now, that is apparently the log- the definition of marriage as a union sequences that people have predicted ical structure of same-sex marriages. between one man and one woman. came true. Apparently there were these 37-, 38-, 42- Mr. Speaker, we have reached a point In consequence, I believe the polit- year-long marriages all over the place. in history where some have forgotten ical community of Massachusetts is There are happily married men all that it is the family, not the govern- prepared to say, if two men love each over America, and they are content ment, that is the fundamental building other and are prepared to be com- with their wives. They are hetero- block of our society. This constitu- mitted to each other legally as well as sexual, and they feel this physical and tional amendment would be entirely emotionally, that is rather a good emotional attraction to each other. unnecessary were it not for the activist thing and we will say it’s okay. Then they read in the paper that in the judges who are recklessly imposing If the voters of Massachusetts, in a State of Massachusetts it is now pos- their creative definitions of marriage referendum in 2008, which we might sible for there to be a same-sex mar- upon citizens within their jurisdiction. have, were to ratify same-sex marriage, riage. They have assailed the very anchor this amendment would cancel it out. It How is a marriage endangered? Ap- of family, the marriage between one has nothing to do with activist judges. parently, people happily married in In- man and one woman. It seems obvious It has to do with a decision that says diana, Nebraska, Kansas, and Mis- to me and to 70 percent of Kansans who no State by any political process can sissippi read that we have had same-sex voted for a State constitutional make that decision. The legislature of marriage quite successfully in Massa- amendment, that when we have strong California, not judges in California, chusetts, and they look in the mirror families rooted in a marriage between voted to allow two women who love and they say, wow, I could have mar- one man and one woman, we give the each other to be legally responsible for ried a guy. next generation the best chance for the each other. So, apparently, same-sex marriage is American Dream. When we have strong That, if it were to be ratified by a the V8 juice of America. And appar- families, we have strong schools, Governor after the next election, would ently there are people who fear that stronger communities, and a stronger be cancelled out. So this is not an knowing that two men who love each Nation. amendment about activist judges. This other, want to be committed to each Some would say that my beliefs are is an amendment that says no State by other, somehow will dissolve the bonds simplistic and old-fashioned. But the whatever process, including a ref- of matrimony between two facts are in, and the facts say there are erendum, can make this decision. heterosexuals, it is, of course, non- real consequences when society does Why? I also feel strengthened in my sense. I will do my friends the credit of not protect marriage and the family. advocacy of a cause when people won’t acknowledging that they don’t believe But don’t take my word for it. Just ask tell me their real arguments against it. it. There is a political motive here. former President Clinton’s own domes- I think this is motivated, frankly, by a Now, there are people who are genu- tic policy adviser, Bill Galston, who dislike of those of us who are gay and inely concerned that there would be wrote, from the standpoint of economic lesbian on the part of those who are negative social consequences. well-being and sound psychological de- the main motivators. I understand that. I have heard that velopment, the evidence indicates that You know, we are told don’t take every time we deal with discrimina- the intact two-parent family is gen- things personally, but I take this per- tion, when we dealt with the Ameri- erally preferable to the available alter- sonally. I take it personally when peo- cans with Disabilities Act, with gender, natives. It follows that a prime purpose ple decide to take political batting with race, with ethnicity, with age. I of a sound family policy is to strength- practice with my life, when people de- understand their fears. We have had en such families by promoting their cide that they would demonize, not same-sex marriage in Massachusetts formation and retarding their break- just me, I am old, I am over it, but for over 2 years. down whenever possible. young people who are just starting out, Thousands of loving men and women Dr. Galston’s research indicates what who find themselves, for reasons they have been able to come together and many of us, what we already know can’t explain, attracted to someone of express their commitment to each through studies, that kids are better the same sex, and they are demonized other, and no one, not even the most off in an intact family that begins with in this House of Representatives as if dedicated opponent, has been able to a marriage between one man and one they are a threat to marriage. point to a single negative consequence. woman. I urge my colleagues to join That is the biggest nonsensical state- So I understand the people who are me in supporting the rule and the un- ment of all. Yes, marriage between a afraid. We have disproven the fears, derlying legislation. man and woman who are in love is a and what is left is only dislike of many Mr. MCGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield good thing. How does allowing two men of us. It simply is not appropriate to 41⁄2 minutes to the gentleman from who love each other to become legally score political points by demonizing or Massachusetts (Mr. FRANK). committed endanger these marriages seeking to minimize the lives of your Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. of 37 or 38 years? Let me tell you the fellow citizens. Speaker, as I listen, I am struck anew logical structure, or the illogical struc- Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, I have by the ability of preprogrammed rhet- ture, of the argument on the other no other speakers on my side. While I oric to resist the facts. We have heard side. am going to reserve the balance of my talk about activist judges, Federal People will remember the commer- time for closing, I want to respond and judges. No Federal judge has been in- cial for V8 juice years ago in which a give myself as much time as I might volved here. There is not a pending de- cartoon character who was feeling consume to the gentleman from Massa- cision that is now in force by a single poorly drank various juices to see if he chusetts, for whom, and whose intel- Federal judge. That doesn’t stop people or she could be energized. None of them lect, I have a deep respect. I think he from invoking it, because facts are ir- worked. Tomato juice didn’t work. knows that. relevant to this kind of rhetoric. Apple juice didn’t work. Pineapple Let me just say that Americans are a In fact, this amendment is being de- juice didn’t work, and then someone good and tolerant people. The people of scribed in ways that are not accurate. gives him a V8. The cartoon character this country believe in equality and It is not an amendment to prevent gets pumped up, literally, and steam freedom, and we respect the rights of

VerDate Sep 11 2014 13:17 May 03, 2017 Jkt 049102 PO 00000 Frm 00175 Fmt 0688 Sfmt 0634 E:\FDSYS\BOUNDRECORD\BR18JY06.DAT BR18JY06 ejoyner on DSK30MW082PROD with BOUND RECORD July 18, 2006 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE, Vol. 152, Pt. 11 14791 individuals to conduct their personal tolerant people. He is absolutely right. between one man and one woman, and lives as they see fit. Unfortunately, that doesn’t extend in I proudly count myself among that 76 Reasonable people can differ in their terms of the tolerance part of it to a percent. views on homosexuality or its causes, lot of Members of this Chamber. I want to close this debate by re- consequences, and moral significance. I mean, we have listened to this de- minding my colleagues that we have an Personally, I think it is a good thing bate for nearly an hour now, and we opportunity today to stem the tide of that American citizens who happen to have heard the words from the other this judicial activism and to restore be gay are accorded more tolerance and side, and they are words of exclusion, the ability of the American people to respect today than was the case 50 and even hate. establish policies that affect them and their lives through their elected Rep- years ago. b 1130 But I honestly believe that the issue resentatives. facing us today is not the issue of ho- We have heard talk about family val- Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I encourage mosexuality. Most fundamentally, the ues. Well, hate is not a family value. my colleagues, please support this rule, issue we face today is marriage, the Discrimination is not a family value. and upon the conclusion of general de- meaning of marriage as an institution Exclusion and denying people’s rights bate, I ask my colleagues to affirm and how best to support it. I favor the are not family values. legal and historical precedent and de- Federal Marriage Amendment because In Massachusetts, my home State, fend our traditions about supporting I want to support the institutution of same-sex marriage is legal. It is legal. the underlying amendment to restore marriage and keep it strong. Gay couples can go to the town hall, the definition of marriage as a union This issue is not, in my humble opin- city hall, fill out the forms, pay the ap- between one man and one woman. ion, about homosexuality. plication fee and legally get married; Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Will 8,000 couples have done so, and every- of my time and I move the previous the gentleman yield? thing has stayed the same in Massa- question on the resolution. Mr. GINGREY. I yield to the gen- chusetts. Life goes on. The previous question was ordered. tleman from Massachusetts. But what you want to do here today The resolution was agreed to. Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. This is with this amendment is not only pre- A motion to reconsider was laid on a question, and I appreciate the civil vent other States from acting as Mas- the table. spirit in which he discusses it. Would sachusetts has done, but what you are Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, pursu- the gentleman explain to me does how saying to those 8,000 couples is that we ant to House Resolution 918, I call up the fact that two women in Massachu- want to affirmatively go and take the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 88) pro- setts who are allowed to be legally away your rights; we want to null and posing an amendment to the Constitu- committed to each other in any way void your legal rights. tion of the United States relating to endanger or threaten marriages be- That is shameful. It is insulting. It is marriage, and ask for its immediate tween heterosexuals elsewhere? discrimination. If your State wants to consideration. Mr. GINGREY. Well, in response to ban gay marriage, that is your State’s The Clerk read the title of the joint the gentleman, again, as I said, it is right to do so, but the people of Massa- resolution. The text of the joint resolution is as not an issue of same-sex union. chusetts have a different opinion, and Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. But if the people of Massachusetts want to follows: how does it hurt? respect and honor same-sex marriages, H.J. RES. 88 Mr. GINGREY. And benefits that are that is our business. It should not be Resolved by the Senate and House of Rep- afforded them by many States. The the business of the House of Represent- resentatives of the United States of America in atives or the United States Senate to Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House States certainly have the right to pre- concurring therein), That the following article scribe that in regard to issues of con- go in there and to go against and to is proposed as an amendment to the Con- sanguinity and the age of consent and void the will of the people of Massachu- stitution of the United States, which shall be benefits for same-sex unions. setts. valid to all intents and purposes as part of But they don’t, in my opinion, have Mr. Speaker, this is all about politics the Constitution when ratified by the legis- the right to redefine the definition of here today. The Senate has already de- latures of three-fourths of the several States: marriage. feated this. This is appalling that we ‘‘ARTICLE — Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. How are here today. This is about gay-bash- ‘‘SECTION 1. This article may be cited as does it hurt? How does the existence of ing. It is about winning political the ‘Marriage Protection Amendment’. a same-sex marriage in any way points. Quite frankly, this is disgrace- ‘‘SECTION 2. Marriage in the United States threaten a happy heterosexual mar- ful. shall consist only of the union of a man and Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, I yield a woman. Neither this Constitution, nor the riage? constitution of any State, shall be construed Mr. GINGREY. Reclaiming my time, myself the remaining time. to require that marriage or the legal inci- I think that the gentlewoman from Mr. Speaker, I rise again in support dents thereof be conferred upon any union Colorado and those of us who support of this rule and in full support of and other than the union of a man and a this constitutional amendment feel recognition of the importance of this woman.’’. that this is all about marriage that re- underlying amendment to our Con- The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursu- sults, or potentially can result, in the stitution. ant to House Resolution 918, the gen- procreation of children. This is what I appreciate each and every one of tleman from Georgia (Mr. KINGSTON) our Constitution has implied for 223 my colleagues who spoke during the and the gentleman from New York (Mr. years and, indeed, what the word of debate on this rule. I fully recognize NADLER) each will control 45 minutes. God has implied for 2,000 years. that many of us will have to simply, The Chair recognizes the gentleman With that, I will continue to reserve yet respectfully, as I said, disagree. from Georgia. the balance of my time for the purpose However, Mr. Speaker, I know that I Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield of closing. stand today with the citizens of Geor- myself such time as I may consume. Mr. MCGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, may I gia’s 11th Congressional District, as Mr. Speaker, in 1996, the United inquire how much time I have left. well as the vast majority of Georgia States Congress passed DOMA, Defense The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. and the Nation’s citizens who continue of Marriage Act, and the idea behind BONNER). The gentleman from Massa- to be outraged by the ability of a few that was that marriage would be recog- chusetts has 11⁄2 minutes. judges to overturn our legal precedent nized in this Nation as the union of one Mr. MCGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I want and our traditional family values. man and one woman. It was not the to agree with my colleague from Geor- In 2004, the people of Georgia af- first time that the United States Con- gia (Mr. GINGREY) when he says that firmed with a vote of 76 percent to 24 gress had gotten involved in the defini- the American people are a good and percent that marriage is an institution tion of marriage. Indeed, Mr. LUNGREN

VerDate Sep 11 2014 13:17 May 03, 2017 Jkt 049102 PO 00000 Frm 00176 Fmt 0688 Sfmt 0634 E:\FDSYS\BOUNDRECORD\BR18JY06.DAT BR18JY06 ejoyner on DSK30MW082PROD with BOUND RECORD 14792 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE, Vol. 152, Pt. 11 July 18, 2006 had reminded us earlier today that the dress the issues of the day. We have was a different amendment we consid- State of Utah and Arizona and I believe worked hard in the war on terrorism. ered. one other Western State, in order to We have worked hard in the situation But what is the Constitution between join the Union, needed to define in in the Middle East. Indeed, as the friends when there is an election com- their State constitution marriage as a President attended the G–8, the num- ing up? From what precisely would this union between one man and one woman ber one topic right now is, of course, amendment protect marriage? From in order to become States in the United Lebanon and Israel. divorce? From adultery? No. Evidently, States. We have worked hard on balancing the threat to marriage is the fact that But unfortunately, since 1986, activ- the budget. This House recently passed there are millions of people in this ist courts have eroded the intent of the line-item veto. This House has country who very much believe in mar- Congress, and so we come today on the passed earmark reform. The Appropria- riage, who very much want to marry House floor with H.J. Res. 88, which tions Committee, which has passed 10 but who are not permitted to marry. reads: ‘‘Marriage in the United States out of its 11 appropriations bills, has b 1145 shall consist only of the union of a man reduced spending $4 billion by cutting This amendment, contrary to what and a woman. Neither this Constitu- out 95 different programs. We are en- we have heard, doesn’t block activist tion, nor the constitution of any State, gaged in addressing the fuel situation. courts from allowing people of the shall be construed to require that mar- We have passed tax reform which has same sex to marry. It would also pre- riage or the legal incidents thereof be created 5.3 million jobs since 2003. vent their fellow citizens from deciding conferred upon any union other than We are very involved in the issues of democratically to permit them to do the union of a man and a woman.’’ today, and I will say to you that mar- so, whether through the legislative The purpose of this is to say that no riage is certainly one of the top-tier process or even through a referendum governmental entity, legislative, exec- issues that it is the right and the obli- of the people. utive or judicial, shall be allowed to gation of the United States Congress to And why is it requisite on Congress alter the definition of marriage from address, and again, not a battle that we to tell any State that the people of one man and one woman, and it also have chosen to have but one that has that State may not make up their prevents Federal courts from con- been thrown back to us by the courts. minds for themselves on this question? struing the Constitution or a State That is why we are here today, and Why is it necessary for the Federal constitution to change that definition we will have this debate, and I look for- Government to amend our Constitution as well. ward to hearing from my friend from to say to Massachusetts, which is going This, indeed, is the desire of the New York. to hold a referendum on this subject in American people at this point. A recent Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of 2008, you may not do so because we poll shows that 69 percent of Ameri- my time. have decided this for you? cans strongly agree that marriage Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield Mr. Speaker, I have been searching in should exist between one man and one myself such time as I may consume. vain for some indication of what might woman. The State Constitution amend- Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support happen to my marriage, or to the mar- ments on the States that have passed of marriage, in support of families, and riage of anyone in this room, if loving them, which now numbers 45, average in support of national unity. I rise couples, including couples with custody by passing 71.5 percent. Forty-five against this proposed constitutional of children, are permitted to enjoy the States, Mr. Speaker, have enacted laws amendment, against the drumbeat of blessings of matrimony. about this. election-year political demagoguery. If there is a Member of this House Why is this necessary, then, to come This amendment does not belong in who believes that his or her own mar- back to the floor if the States are han- our Constitution. It is unworthy of our riage would be destroyed by someone dling it? The fact is that there are great Nation. The Senate could not else’s same-sex marriage somewhere in great and deliberate challenges to even muster a simple majority to con- America, I would welcome an expla- DOMA in the United States Constitu- sider it, much less the requisite two- nation of what he or she thinks would tion. We can go back to 1965. The Su- thirds to adopt it. happen to his or her marriage and why. Are there any takers? Anyone here preme Court in Griswold v. Con- We have amended the Constitution who wants to get up and say why they necticut discovered a constitutional only 27 times in our history, the first 10 believe their marriage would be threat- right to contraceptive noted in marital of them, the Bill of Rights, in 1791. ened if two other people are permitted privacy, and the Court in Roe v. Wade Constitutional amendments have al- to marry? in 1973 decided that the right to repro- ways been used to enhance and expand I didn’t think so. ductive privacy was applied to abor- the rights of citizens, not to restrict The overheated rhetoric we have tion, wholly outside the context of a them. been hearing is reminiscent of the bel- marriage. The Bill of Rights, which was added licose fear-mongering that followed the In 1996, the Court in Bowers v. Hard- in 1791, protected freedom of speech, Supreme Court’s decision almost 40 wick refused to create a right of sexual freedom of religion, freedom of assem- years ago in Loving v. Virginia which privacy for same-sex couples, but then, bly, the right to be secure in our struck down State prohibitions against in 2003, the Court reversed itself in the homes. Ten amendments protecting in- interracial marriage. The Supreme Lawrence v. Texas case. In the Law- dividual rights and liberties. We Court had overstepped its authority, rence case, the Court claimed not to amended the Constitution to perma- we were told. The Supreme Court had have gone so far as to establish a right nently wipe away the stain of slavery, overridden the democratic will of the to same-sex marriage, but then the to expand the right to vote, to expand majority, the Supreme Court had State of Massachusetts and the Massa- the rights of citizenship and to allow signed a death warrant for all that is chusetts Supreme Judicial Court for the direct election of senators. good and pure in this Nation. Fortu- prominently used the Lawrence deci- Now we are being asked to amend the nately, we survived as a Nation and we sion just a few months later to do ex- Constitution again, to single out a sin- are better for that Supreme Court deci- actly that. gle group and to say to them for all sion. That is why we are here today, Mr. time, you cannot even attempt to win I believe firmly that in the not-too- Speaker. This is not, as we have been the right to marry. distant future people will look back on charged, political pandering. This is This amendment was introduced last these debates with the incredulity with not a frivolous exercise. Indeed, I cer- month. We have never held hearings on which we now view the segregationist tainly think this Congress, under the it. The Judiciary Committee has never debates of years past. I think the pub- leadership of the Speaker and under considered it. Never. Don’t let anyone lic opinion polls are indicative: Opposi- the leadership of the President of the tell you that the Judiciary Committee tion to gay marriage is a direct func- United States, has worked hard to ad- considered it in 2003. We did not. That tion of age. The older people are, the

VerDate Sep 11 2014 13:17 May 03, 2017 Jkt 049102 PO 00000 Frm 00177 Fmt 0688 Sfmt 0634 E:\FDSYS\BOUNDRECORD\BR18JY06.DAT BR18JY06 ejoyner on DSK30MW082PROD with BOUND RECORD July 18, 2006 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE, Vol. 152, Pt. 11 14793

more set in the ways of the old dis- er BOEHNER for bringing this bill to the over the country will continue to be criminatory practices of this country floor. Letters and e-mails and phone ensnarled with same-sex marriage liti- they are, the more they oppose gay calls continue to pour into my office gation as opponents of traditional mar- marriage. If you take a poll of people urging me to continue in this effort. riage continue to fight to expand their under 35 years old, 70 to 75 percent are We know that polls show that the over- agenda to the rest of the country. in favor of allowing gay marriage. That whelming majority of the American While recent court victories are not is the trend for the future because de- people support traditional marriage, unimportant, the ultimate court test, mographics is destiny. marriage between a man and a woman. the test in the United States Supreme Mr. Speaker, this amendment actu- The people have a right to know Court, is still on the horizon. And legal ally does more than it purports to do. whether their elected Representatives experts agree at least four and prob- It would not only preempt any State agree with them about protecting tra- ably five of the members of that court law allowing people of the same gender ditional marriage. will act to overturn traditional mar- to marry, even if that law was ap- I cannot think of a better good that riage across America. That is why proved by the legislature or by ref- this body may pursue than to promote most legal experts expect DOMA to fall erendum, it would preclude any State and defend the idea that every child de- once a challenge finally reaches the from extending medical visitation serves both a father and a mother. high Court, which is why it would be privileges or inheritance rights, for ex- Studies demonstrate the utmost impor- the very height of foolishness to rely ample, to same-sex couples. That is tance of the presence of a child’s bio- on the Supreme Court to protect mar- what ‘‘the incidents thereof’’ in the logical parents in a child’s happiness, riage. Sadly, that august tribunal is amendment means. health and future achievements. If we part of the problem. Justice Scalia has Proponents of this amendment have chip away at the institution which already warned us that the Court’s 2003 already tried to use a similar prohibi- binds these parents and the family to- Lawrence decision was only the begin- tion against same-sex marriage to at- gether, the institution of marriage, ning of a road at the end of which is a tack in court domestic-partner bene- you begin to chip away at the future radical redefinition of marriage at the fits. So when they tell you this is only success of that child. hands of the Court. about marriage, don’t believe it. No I would not want to negate the heroic Does anyone else see the irony in the court has required that a marriage in job that many single parents do every opponents of this bill calling on us to one State be recognized in another, so day in providing the necessary support wait until the Supreme Court rules be- don’t believe anyone who tells you that to a child’s happiness. But today we fore deciding this issue? Many of those this amendment is meant to protect are discussing what social policy is who protested the loudest that DOMA your own State laws. best for our children, and I am con- was unconstitutional when it was en- The Defense of Marriage Act which vinced that the best is found in pro- acted in 1996 are today the ones who passed this Congress and which the moting and defending traditional mar- say we ought to presume DOMA is con- President signed in 1996 says no State riage. stitutional until the high Court tells us can impose its marriage laws on an- Are there other important issues? Of otherwise. The American people want us to set- other. course there are, but preserving the in- There are many loving families, Mr. tle this issue now. They don’t want us stitution of marriage, which, as the Su- Speaker, who deserve the benefits and to wait to see how much havoc the preme Court said many years ago, is protections of the law. They don’t live courts will wreak on the definition of ‘‘the foundation of the family and of just in New York or San Francisco or marriage before we act to protect it. Boston, they live in every one of the society, without which there would be Our marriage laws represent cen- 435 congressional districts of this great neither civilization nor progress,’’ cer- turies of cumulative wisdom regarding country. They are not from outer tainly warrants a few hours of our the best way to address public concerns space, they are not a public menace, time. And even if there are other issues about property, inheritance, legal li- and they do not threaten anyone. They we need to address, as a former Mem- ability and raising children. The last are our neighbors, our coworkers, our ber, one of my favorites, J.C. Watts matter is especially important because friends, our siblings, our parents, and said, ‘‘Members of Congress are capable we now know beyond any reasonable our children. They deserve to be treat- of walking and chewing gum at the doubt that children thrive best when ed fairly. They deserve the same rights same time.’’ they are raised in a traditional family. as any other family. And where are those who say we are And statistically speaking, the further I regret that this House is being so wasting time when we were renaming we go from this ideal, the more we can demeaned by this debate. It saddens me post offices and Federal buildings ear- expect to see increases in measures as that this great institution would sink lier this year? Mr. Speaker, if we have a whole host of social problems. to these depths to have what we have enough time to rename post offices and Again, this is not to say that chil- already heard on this floor and to what Federal buildings, surely we can spend dren raised in nontraditional families we will hear that amounts to pure big- one afternoon debating whether or not will necessarily fall prey to these prob- otry against a minority population, the traditional definition of marriage lems, but public policy is based on cu- even on the eve of an election. is worth preserving. mulative, not individual experience. We know this amendment is not Others have asked why we need this Facts, as it has been said, are stubborn going anywhere. We know this is mere- amendment given that courts in New things. And one sad but stubborn fact ly a political exercise. Shame on this York, Georgia, and Nebraska have re- is that the statistical dice are loaded House for playing politics with bigotry. cently turned back challenges to tradi- against children who are raised with- Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of tional marriage. I just would like to out a father and a mother. my time. say these decisions simply do not settle Some oppose the Marriage Protection Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I would the issues. Cases in New Jersey and Amendment on the grounds that the just point out to my good friend from Washington, to name only two of institution of marriage is already in New York that 16 States have recently many, remain pending. trouble. Why be concerned, they say, passed marriage protection amend- Additionally, the Massachusetts Su- about same-sex marriage when the di- ments, and on an average they have preme Court’s Goodridge decision le- vorce rate among couples in traditional passed by 71.5 percent. galizing same-sex marriage in that marriages is so high? But can’t you see Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she State continues to stand. Just last this is a non sequitur? It is like saying may consume to the primary author of week, legislators in Massachusetts put to a doctor, The patient already has H.J. Res. 88, the gentlewoman from off a measure to give the people the op- pneumonia, so why are you taking pre- Colorado (Mrs. MUSGRAVE). portunity to decide this issue for them- cautions to prevent him from getting a Mrs. MUSGRAVE. Mr. Speaker, I selves. While the Goodridge case re- staph infection? Yes, traditional mar- thank Speaker HASTERT and Mr. Lead- mains on the books, court dockets all riage has its problems, we all know

VerDate Sep 11 2014 13:17 May 03, 2017 Jkt 049102 PO 00000 Frm 00178 Fmt 0688 Sfmt 0634 E:\FDSYS\BOUNDRECORD\BR18JY06.DAT BR18JY06 ejoyner on DSK30MW082PROD with BOUND RECORD 14794 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE, Vol. 152, Pt. 11 July 18, 2006 that, and the high divorce rate is a na- atives, and we are going to debate gay take an anticipatory action, somehow tional scandal. But far from under- marriage. we are unconstitutional. mining my point, this reinforces it. We This debate is meant to do nothing How have we changed the terms of are dismayed by the breakup of fami- more than get the American people to the debate when we are talking about a lies because we know broken families look at other issues, ignore gas prices, traditional definition of marriage that lead to more and more children being ignore the unemployment rate. Let’s has stood the test of time for thou- deprived of the tremendous benefit of talk about gay marriage. sands of years, has been understood by having both their mom and dad around I am proud to be from Massachusetts every single one of our Founding Fa- to raise them. and represent 8,000 couples who have thers at the time of the formation of Other opponents of this amendment been married. And let me tell you this country, that somehow we are the argue that the existence of same-sex about one of the couples in my district, ones that are upsetting the apple cart; marriage in Massachusetts has not Bonnie Winokar and her partner Mary when, in fact, it is those who wish to caused the earth to stop spinning on its McCarthy. They have been together for change this traditional definition in a axis, so they ask what is all this fuss 19 years. But for 17 of those years, radical way? about. After only 2 years of experience, Bonnie was unable to provide Mary They say, well, the Federal Govern- it is absurd to suggest that we can even with the health care benefits that she ment should not be involved in it. And begin to guess how the redefinition of was afforded as a high school math yet we pointed out historically the marriage in that State will ramify in teacher. Two years ago they got mar- Federal Government has been involved the future. And the fact that same-sex ried and now this happy couple has in defining marriage, refusing to allow marriages in Massachusetts do not di- health insurance. They have coverage. at least the State of Utah to become a rectly affect my marriage or your mar- They have family visitation and inher- State until they accepted that defini- riage means nothing in regard to the itance rights that every other married tion of marriage. What we are talking about is chang- public policy debate. The breakup of couple in America has. ing the fundamental vision of marriage the family next door does not directly I ask my colleagues, how do Bonnie that is in our civil structure, a pref- affect your marriage or my marriage and Mary threaten other marriages? I erential treatment that is allowed either, but we all recognize that every don’t feel threatened by the 8,000 cou- under our laws for marriage, under- family that comes apart is a tragedy, ples in Massachusetts who have been stood traditionally. And they say, well, and that is why our laws have always married. As a matter of fact, I want to we passed DOMA so you don’t have to sought to encourage, not undermine, tell you something. People in Massa- worry. Yet, many who are saying that traditional families. chusetts overwhelmingly now realize that approving gay marriage has not in argued on the floor of the House that Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 DOMA was unconstitutional. Professor any way negatively impacted hetero- minutes to the gentleman from Massa- Lawrence Tribe has said it is unconsti- sexual couples. That is why, over- chusetts (Mr. MEEHAN). tutional. Many of the organizations whelmingly, people in Massachusetts Mr. MEEHAN. Mr. Speaker, you are who are against this particular amend- support the SJC decision. the Republican Party in America and ment have argued in court that it is But we ought to keep clear and keep what do you do? You have had control unconstitutional and believe it is only in mind that this debate today is not of the House of Representatives, you inevitable until they overturn it by really about gay marriage. It is about control the Supreme Court, you con- way of their particular lawsuits the failure of this administration and trol the United States Senate, you con- brought against it. trol the White House. What are you this Congress to do the right thing by So the question here is really, do you going to do? the American people. believe there is reason to maintain the Seven million people in America are Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield traditional definition of marriage, al- unemployed. 3 minutes to the former attorney gen- lowing it to be the essential unit of our There are 46 million Americans that eral of California, the distinguished society, not that there aren’t other don’t have health insurance. DAN LUNGREN. units of society, but the essential unit The minimum wage hasn’t been in- Mr. DANIEL E. LUNGREN of Cali- of our society that has withstood the creased in nearly a decade. The gap be- fornia. Mr. Speaker, where to begin? test of time? That is the simple ques- tween people who are wealthy and peo- We have heard the argument that tion before us. ple who are poor is getting wider and somehow we shouldn’t bring constitu- We never asked for this debate. This wider. tional amendments to the floor; we debate began with, yes, activist judges We have a war in Iraq that has killed shouldn’t amend the Constitution. who said, wait a second, times have 2,500 Americans, 20,000 Americans have It is a very interesting argument changed and, therefore, the traditional been seriously injured, and a policy when you realize there are two ways to notion of marriage is out the window. going in the wrong direction. amend the Constitution, one is the for- Why? Who said so? Because of what? You have a failed prescription drug mal process that is contained in the This is not a question of discrimina- plan, written by the prescription drug Constitution itself, which we are em- tion as some have argued on the other industry behind closed doors, that is barking upon today, and the other one side, unless they are saying we are dis- confusing seniors. It is going to cost is by activist judges. criminating against bigamy and polyg- taxpayers $700 billion. People don’t like to hear that. They amy, because the United States has Gasoline is $3 a gallon at the pump. seem to say judges have the right to spoken, as I said before, in saying the amend the Constitution, to give new traditional definition of marriage is b 1200 meaning to the words of the Constitu- enshrined in our institutions and in our Global warming is threatening our tion, to actually give the opposite law. environment and our health. What are meaning to the words of the Constitu- Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield you going to do? Let’s have a debate tion and we have to accept that for- 11⁄2 minutes to the distinguished gen- about gay marriage again on the floor ever, because if we do anything opposed tlewoman from California (Ms. LINDA of the House. to that, we are somehow changing the T. SA´ NCHEZ). We are not going to debate an exit Constitution, even though we are fol- Ms. LINDA T. SA´ NCHEZ of Cali- strategy in Iraq. We don’t have a plan lowing the exact requirements of the fornia. Mr. Speaker, I rise to urge my to lower the cost of gasoline. We don’t Constitution itself. colleagues to oppose the Federal Mar- have a plan to provide health care or to The second thing that is said is wait riage Amendment. The Republican give American seniors the ability to a second, no court has declared mar- leadership clearly doesn’t get it. Our buy prescription drugs at a low cost in riage to be unconstitutional in the tra- country is grappling with skyrocketing bulk. Oh, no. Oh no, this is Tuesday in ditional sense, so we should wait until gas prices, wars in Iraq and Afghani- Washington in the House of Represent- that happens. In other words, if we stan, the constant threat of terrorism,

VerDate Sep 11 2014 13:17 May 03, 2017 Jkt 049102 PO 00000 Frm 00179 Fmt 0688 Sfmt 0634 E:\FDSYS\BOUNDRECORD\BR18JY06.DAT BR18JY06 ejoyner on DSK30MW082PROD with BOUND RECORD July 18, 2006 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE, Vol. 152, Pt. 11 14795 concerns about pension security, and much less the required two-thirds for a The debate before us today is about the rising cost of health care insur- constitutional amendment. Why then ensuring that the will of the people of ance. are we rushing to judgment here the United States is protected. But instead of addressing these prior- today? What is the compelling reason My home State of South Carolina is ities, what does the Republican leader- to consider this now? one of 45 States that has already en- ship decide we need to focus on? Gay Sixteen States have passed constitu- acted laws defining marriage as a marriage, of course. As if passing the tional amendments that would define union between a man and a woman. Federal Marriage Amendment would marriage in their own States as being Our message is clear: marriage mat- magically make all of our country’s between a man and a woman. Others, ters, and it should be limited to that of biggest challenges go away. including my own State, are consid- a man and a woman. This resolution is not only a waste of ering such amendments this year. So I stand here today wondering why time; it is completely unnecessary. The While I may disagree with the voters in we are faced with the fact that a hand- Senate has already rejected this my State or any State in adopting such ful of judges have taken it upon them- amendment, so we know that even if an amendment to their constitution, selves to hand down rulings that rede- the House passes this, the bill is not that is their prerogative, and State fine marriage for moms and dads and going anywhere. constitutions are where they should be most importantly children across this Furthermore, 45 States already ban considered. Nation. same-sex marriage, either by statute or For better than 200 years, family law Mr. Speaker, some in this country, by their State constitution. has been exclusively the domain of the elected by no one, believe they have Even more important, passage of this States. That is where it should remain. the right to supersede the wishes of my amendment would mark the first time Vice President CHENEY said exactly constituents and the constituents of that our Constitution has been amend- this, and I agree with him. The chief other Members here today. ed to take rights away from people. crafter of the Defense of Marriage Act I urge my colleagues to join me Amending our Constitution to force of 1996, former Representative Bob today in supporting the Marriage Pro- States to discriminate against a tar- Barr, said as much, and I agree with tection Amendment ensuring constitu- geted group of Americans would tar- him. Marriage and divorce, inheritance ents’ voices are heard. nish our history of protecting and adoption, child custody, these are Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 everybody’s equal rights under the law. matters correctly left to the States. It minutes to the distinguished ranking I therefore strongly urge all of my does not belong in the Constitution of Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, colleagues to vote against the Federal the United States. the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Marriage Amendment. But that is the genius of our Federal CONYERS). Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I con- system, to allow States to find solu- Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I thank tinue to reserve the balance of my tions to issues such as family law the ranking member of the Constitu- time. which work uniquely for them. The tion Subcommittee, Mr. NADLER, for Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 States can pass their own laws, and his fine work in this area. He hasn’t minutes to the gentleman from Ari- many have. We should not be in the had all that much to do because the zona (Mr. KOLBE). business of passing a constitutional bill never came to the Constitution Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Speaker, the pro- amendment to make this point. And we Committee. We never had hearings. We posed constitutional amendment before certainly should not be tampering with never had a markup. We didn’t even us today illustrates exactly why those the Constitution to address an ongoing have supporters of this amendment who wrote the Constitution of the societal dialogue on, admittedly, a yesterday at the Rules Committee United States went to such extraor- very difficult subject. which set the rules that allowed it to dinary lengths to ensure that it was a Amending the Constitution is, thank- come to the floor today. long and arduous task to amend it. fully, a difficult task. That cum- And so I am happy to join in opposi- The procedure to pass a constitu- bersome process has saved us from tion with a number of friends that I tional amendment was designed spe- making ill-advised changes during would like to indicate. First, the cifically to compel the Nation and its these past 215 years. It will save us now NAACP, which is in convention here in leaders to carefully consider the sig- from this ill-advised action. Washington this week, is strongly op- nificant and profound implications We have not used the amending proc- posed to this amendment. So is the such a change could bring. This issue ess to limit the rights of citizens. From AFL–CIO and the American Civil Lib- simply fails to meet the threshold of the first amendment to the 14th, the erties Union, the Jewish Committee, what the Framers called a ‘‘great and original Framers and the Congress that the Human Rights Campaign, the Na- extraordinary occasion.’’ But of even followed have sought to expand, to pro- tional Council of La Raza, the National greater significance is the issue of indi- tect the rights of citizens. This would Urban League, Planned Parenthood, vidual rights. This proposed amend- be a unique amendment in that it and countless religious organizations. ment would be the first time we would takes away rights from one group They are all telling us to leave the amend that document to restrict while specifically conferring them Constitution alone. human freedoms, rather than to pro- upon another. Try to find another pro- The other consideration that I would tect and expand them. vision in the Constitution that does bring to the Members’ attention is the Let’s be honest. This bill has been this. You will look in vain. far-reaching scope of this amendment brought to the House floor by the lead- Mr. Speaker, this Congress and those that has never been heard in the Judi- ership solely because of election-year after should be about protecting and ciary Committee. Not only would it politics. The very process by which this expanding freedoms. This proposed ban same-sex marriages, but it would bill comes up is an affront to this insti- amendment to our Constitution is also deprive same-sex couples and their tution. Like previous attempts, it was about discrimination. It is about fear. families of fundamental protections not considered by any committee of It is unnecessary. It is unwarranted, such as hospital visitation, inheritance the House, it was not brought to the and it should be soundly defeated. rights, and health care benefits. floor by the chairman of that com- Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield Ladies and gentlemen, this amend- mittee, rather it was brought by the 2 minutes to the distinguished gen- ment is divisive. It is unnecessary. It is leadership, who decided to take it upon tleman from South Carolina (Mr. BAR- constitutionally extreme. And I must themselves to do the work of the com- RETT). point out that the amendment has al- mittees and their chairmen. Mr. BARRETT of South Carolina. ready been debated in the other body Moreover, this same legislation was Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of and did not prevail. What we are doing, considered in the Senate, where it H.J. Res. 88, the Marriage Protection as has been widely recognized, is a po- didn’t even receive a majority vote, Amendment. litical act. It is getting near election

VerDate Sep 11 2014 13:17 May 03, 2017 Jkt 049102 PO 00000 Frm 00180 Fmt 0688 Sfmt 0634 E:\FDSYS\BOUNDRECORD\BR18JY06.DAT BR18JY06 ejoyner on DSK30MW082PROD with BOUND RECORD 14796 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE, Vol. 152, Pt. 11 July 18, 2006 time. Let’s whip up the forces of con- brought about following an advent of In Massachusetts gay couples are not servatism. Let’s deal with this subject the deterioration of marriage and fam- masterminding acts of terrorism. They to energize the political base 4 months ily. are not cutting Medicaid. They are not before the election. And marriage matters to kids. As my putting a hole in the Medicare pre- b 1215 Hoosier colleague and friend Vice scription drug program. They are not President Dan Quayle first accurately running up the Federal deficit. They Ladies and gentlemen, please, the observed, Mr. Speaker, marriage is the are doing what everyone else does. amendment is unnecessary because our safest harbor to raise children. Sociolo- They are getting through life. Constitution has been amended only 27 gists tell us that children raised by Others have alluded to the constitu- times in 219 years and to preserve our married parents experience lower rates tional issues. There are States every- right to free speech was one of the ob- of premarital childbearing, illicit drug where, Mr. Speaker, that are address- jectives, to protect the right to assem- use, arrest, health, emotional and be- ing this through the constitutional ble was another objective of a constitu- havioral problems, school dropout rate, means available to them as States, and tional amendment, the right to vote and poverty. that is fine. A recent ruling in Massa- was subject to constitutional amend- And marriage even matters to adults. chusetts from the Supreme Judicial ment. The right to be free of discrimi- A recent 5-year study in 1998 found that Court that entered the famous decision nation was subject to constitutional continuously married husbands and that has provoked some controversy amendment. They all ensured the in- wives experience significantly better said that if the people of Massachusetts tegrity and continuity of our govern- emotional health and less depression want to overrule the decision of the ment. than people of other marital status. Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, So I urge a ‘‘no’’ vote on the Let us say ‘‘yes’’ very humbly today they can via their own State constitu- Musgrave same-sex marriage amend- to the marriage as traditionally de- tional mechanism. Let them do it if ment. fined. Let us say ‘‘no’’ to activist they want to. As others have said, this Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I want courts bent on redefining it. is an area that has been reserved con- to point out that, in fact, under H.J. Marriage matters, Mr. Speaker. It tinually through our jurisprudence to Res. 88, State legislatures can allow was ordained by God, instituted in the our States. same-sex benefits in the unions. law. It is the glue of the American fam- But, no, it is an election year. We Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the ily and the safest harbor to raise chil- know it is an election year and we distinguished gentleman from Indiana dren. Let us put in that most sacred of know you have to do it. You have got (Mr. PENCE). documents an affirmation of that insti- to energize the base. But the American (Mr. PENCE asked and was given per- tution upon which our society de- people are not stupid. They see through mission to revise and extend his re- mands. this. They know what is going to hap- marks.) I urge my colleagues to embrace H.J. pen. Mr. PENCE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in Res. 88, the Marriage Protection I remember when the President came strong support of the marriage amend- Amendment. to office pledging that he would be a ment and offer heartfelt thanks and Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker I yield 31⁄2 uniter, not a divider. And what we are congratulations to the gentlewoman minutes to the gentleman from Massa- doing here today is divisive and divid- from Colorado (Mrs. MUSGRAVE) for her chusetts (Mr. DELAHUNT). ing Americans. Let us experience a principled, compassionate, and coura- Mr. DELAHUNT. Mr. Speaker, I sense of tolerance. geous leadership on this issue from her thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield very first term in Congress. Two years ago this May, people in 2 minutes to the distinguished gen- Mr. Speaker, in the wake of ominous Massachusetts, my home State, woke tleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. PITTS). decisions by activist courts across the up thinking and talking about same- Mr. PITTS. Mr. Speaker, marriage land, I come to the well today to de- sex marriage like everyone else. You has been under attack for years in fend that institution that forms the could not avoid it. It was on the cover America. Regardless of where we look, backbone of our society: traditional of every newspaper. It was a national we have seen a gradual weakening of marriage. Like millions of Americans, issue. the institution that historically we I believe that marriage matters, that it Now, since then, 9,000 gay and lesbian have relied on to nurture America’s was ordained by God, instituted among couples have been married in Massa- kids. men, that it is the glue of the Amer- chusetts. And you know what the news And while marriage has taken a beat- ican family and the safest harbor to flash is? The news flash is that there is ing from divorce and other factors, the raise children. not a news flash. The sky has not fall- statistics still show that the best home I believe first, though, marriage en. The tsunamis have not come. Ev- for kids is still with a mom and dad should be protected, because it wasn’t eryone is going through their daily who are married and love each other. our idea. Several millennia ago the lives. That is the ideal we are talking about words were written that a man should Mr. Speaker, the average American here: the best home for kids. By pro- leave his father and mother and cleave family does not wake up every morning tecting marriage, this amendment pro- to his wife and the two shall become worrying about same-sex marriage. In- motes such an environment for our one flesh. It was not our idea; it was stead, they are worried about the price kids. God’s idea. And I say that unashamedly of gas that they have to put in their ve- Statistics show children living with on the floor where the words ‘‘In God hicle to take their kids to school. They their mom and dad are safer, that they We Trust’’ appear above your chair, worry about whether their kids are are less likely to be abused or ne- Mr. Speaker. getting a decent education. They worry glected, that they have fewer health And let me say emphatically that about health care. They worry about problems, that they engage in fewer this debate today is not about discrimi- mortgage rates and whether they will risky behaviors than their peers, that nation. I believe that if someone choos- ever be able to retire. they are more likely to do well in es another life-style than I have cho- And if they are worried about any school, that they are better off eco- sen, that that is their right in a free so- marriage, I would suggest it is their nomically, that they display increased ciety. But tolerance does not require own. There are plenty of threats to ability to adapt to changing cir- that we permit our courts to redefine marriage out there today. We are all cumstances. Study after study shows an institution upon which our society aware of them. Trying to find time to us this, Mr. Speaker. depends. Marriage matters, according spend with their families, the pressures But most Americans do not need a to the researchers. Harvard sociologist of making ends meet, all the chal- scientific study to tell them that mar- Pitirim Sorokin found that throughout lenges that we all know exist. But riage is important for our children and history, societal collapse was always what is not a threat is gay marriage. our families. When given the chance to

VerDate Sep 11 2014 13:17 May 03, 2017 Jkt 049102 PO 00000 Frm 00181 Fmt 0688 Sfmt 0634 E:\FDSYS\BOUNDRECORD\BR18JY06.DAT BR18JY06 ejoyner on DSK30MW082PROD with BOUND RECORD July 18, 2006 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE, Vol. 152, Pt. 11 14797 have their voices heard on this issue, dling discrimination and hate. They ernment. Today, Americans who want they have overwhelmingly come down have a much more positive and healthy the protection of marriage laws for on the side of protecting marriage. attitude towards their neighbors, their their same-sex partnerships are in the Twenty States have now passed voter friends, their relations, who happen to process of petitioning their govern- referendums to amend their constitu- be gay and lesbian. The good news is ment. tion to protect marriage. Six more will that the States are trying to figure out The Constitution is for expanding have it on the ballot this November. ways to handle it. rights, opportunities and aspirations. I Six more next year. There is a pattern The bad news is that Congress is not want to see the day when I can protect here. Every time the people are actu- part of the solution but is instead pan- my family, my life partner of 10 years, ally given a chance to vote on this, dering politically in something that through the same laws and with the they choose to protect marriage over- has already been killed in the other same obligations, responsibilities and whelmingly. In more than half of the 20 Chamber, that has no chance of pas- rights as can straight Americans. States, they have amended their con- sage; going through a ritual that is ac- These are my aspirations, both as an stitution with over 70 percent of the tually setting us back. American and as a Member of Con- vote or more. I am confident that in the long run gress, to see the Constitution that I These numbers should tell us some- truth and justice is going to prevail. have sworn to support and protect illu- thing, Mr. Speaker. They should tell us We are not going to be having any as- minating a path to justice and equality that people understand intuitively saults on any heterosexual marriages, for more and more Americans. what studies show us empirically: Mar- but we will be dealing with how we are The amendment we are debating riage is important, it is the foundation going to provide the necessary protec- today would do just the opposite. Why of the family and it is the safest harbor tions for our gay and lesbian citizens. would we amend the U.S. Constitution to raise children. That day, sadly, is not today. to say that one group of Americans, This amendment protects marriage Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I re- gay and lesbian Americans, can no from the whims of activist courts that serve the balance of my time. longer petition their government for would further undermine this institu- Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I now redress of grievances? A healthy and a tion by radically redefining its defini- yield 5 minutes to the distinguished vibrant debate on same-sex marriage is tion. It would see to it that the people gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. occurring throughout this Nation at have a say on an issue of fundamental BALDWIN). this very time in break rooms, in din- importance to our Nation. Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. Speaker, I thank ing rooms, in church basements. Don’t It is the right policy, Mr. Speaker, Mr. NADLER for yielding the time. cut it off. It is what democracy is all and I urge all my colleagues to support At the beginning of every session of about. the Marriage Protection Amendment Congress, I raise my right hand and One State in our Union allows same- today. state the following oath: ‘‘I, Tammy sex marriages, several others have Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 Baldwin, do solemnly swear that I will passed civil union protections for minutes to the gentleman from Oregon support and defend the Constitution of same-sex couples, and others still are (Mr. BLUMENAUER). the United States against all enemies, silent on the issue or have passed laws Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I foreign and domestic; that I will bear or State constitutional amendments appreciate the gentleman’s courtesy in true faith and allegiance to the same; prohibiting same-sex marriage. This is permitting me to speak on this issue. that I take this obligation freely, with- what happens in a democracy when I have heard my friends on the other out any mental reservation or purpose people petition their government for side talk about marriage being under of evasion; and that I will well and change. attack. Well, I think it probably is in faithfully discharge the duties of the But we also know that this really many sectors. Marriages are under office on which I am about to enter. So isn’t about the substance. It is about strain today in terms of economics. help me God.’’ politics. Why else would we be debating There are social cross-currents. We see and voting on a measure that the Sen- b 1230 failed marriages. But it is not under at- ate has already effectively killed? tack by our gay and lesbian citizens. I have felt deep pride in our country You will get your rollcall vote, but The gay and lesbian citizens I know and our democracy and particularly in shame on you for playing politics with in my community are dealing with the the Constitution itself every time I people’s families and their lives. everyday stresses of their lives, which have taken that oath. But if we were to Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield are actually more difficult than most pass this amendment, it would put a 2 minutes to the gentleman from Mis- Americans. They are struggling stain on our founding document. souri (Mr. GRAVES). against discrimination in the work- In our democracy since its founding, Mr. GRAVES. Mr. Speaker, today I place. They are struggling against dis- a basic premise is that in a government proudly rise in support of House Joint crimination and in some cases violence by, for and of the people, the people Resolution 88, the Marriage Protection directed towards gay and lesbian citi- must have the ability to petition their Amendment. zens. And every day gay and lesbian government for the redress of griev- Today, Mr. Speaker, 45 out of 50 couples in long-term committed rela- ances. Americans who wanted women States have enacted laws defining mar- tionships, sometimes involving chil- to have the right to vote petitioned riage as a union between a man and a dren, have to struggle with the fact their government. Americans who woman. That is 90 percent of the that they are not afforded the protec- wanted an end to slavery petitioned States, and these States contain 88 per- tions and the resources to be able to their government. Americans who cent of the population. deal with the everyday challenges like wanted an end to child labor petitioned In August 2004, the people of my health care emergencies. That is what their government. Americans who home State of Missouri overwhelm- they are dealing with. They are not as- wanted to end segregation policies pe- ingly voted by a majority of 71 to 29 saulting my marriage or anybody titioned their government. Americans percent to approve a State constitu- else’s. They are trying to deal with a who wanted to protect our environ- tional amendment protecting the tra- difficult hand that has been dealt to ment petitioned their government. ditional definition of marriage. Unfor- them. Our constitutional system, the tunately, this sacred institution and The good news is that we are seeing checks and balances between the three the will of the people are under direct the changes that are going to make a coequal branches of government, was assault by an out-of-control judiciary difference in the long run. The good created to ensure protection of minor- branch. Radical judges on the supreme news is that younger Americans won- ity rights, and throughout history court of Massachusetts have already der what bizarre episode we are in- many groups of individuals have imposed same-sex marriage in that volved with here. They are not ped- sought such protection from their gov- Commonwealth against the wishes of a

VerDate Sep 11 2014 13:17 May 03, 2017 Jkt 049102 PO 00000 Frm 00182 Fmt 0688 Sfmt 0634 E:\FDSYS\BOUNDRECORD\BR18JY06.DAT BR18JY06 ejoyner on DSK30MW082PROD with BOUND RECORD 14798 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE, Vol. 152, Pt. 11 July 18, 2006 majority of citizens, and I fear the ac- this, who really, frankly, dislike the sense whatsoever. No one has shown me tivist State and Federal judges will fact that we exist; and disliking the what the connection is. As a matter of soon impose same-sex marriage upon fact that we exist individually, they fact, of course, people will have an ex- other jurisdictions in our Nation. are particularly distraught at the no- ample of people of the same sex living What that means is the people in my tion that we will associate with each together, and if that somehow desta- home State of Missouri may have legal other in various ways. bilizes heterosexual marriage, then it recognition of same-sex marriage I want to address now the people who is going to happen. forced upon them, even though 71 per- are worried about the social con- If the gentleman wants me to yield, I cent of Missourians voted to adopt an sequences, because I invite people to would be glad to yield. amendment preventing such a practice. look at the evidence. There were no Mr. DANIEL E. LUNGREN of Cali- Mr. Speaker, it is becoming increas- negatives. fornia. Mr. Speaker, what I would like ingly apparent that our only recourse But now let me go back to the point to ask is this: Does the gentleman see is to amend the Constitution of the about the judges, because that is rel- any problem with society allowing United States. This is not a decision I evant to Massachusetts, and the points preferential status in some ways to the take lightly, but we must act to defend are linked. Because in Massachusetts traditional marriage between a man the foundation of our society. Without what we have seen is that thousands of and a woman? Because that, to me, is such an amendment, people in Mis- people have had their lives enriched by what it really comes down to. souri, and many other States, will be being able to love each other in a le- Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. I disenfranchised by the courts. gally connected way, and it has been a would say to the gentleman this: no, I Yes, Mr. Speaker, the Senate has good thing for them, and it has had think we give preferential status to dealt with this, and, no, this isn’t a po- zero negative consequences. I believe people who are married over people litical issue. The reason that the Sen- the political community in Massachu- who aren’t. What I don’t see, what no ate has dealt with this is exactly why setts, through the elected legislature, one has argued, is how does allowing the House needs to stand up and send a maybe through a referendum, although two men have that status interfere positive message to the American peo- I hope it doesn’t come to that, will sup- with the status. I assume you give a ple about what is the best married en- port this. preferential status because you want to vironment to raise our children, and Be very clear: this amendment says give people an incentive to marry. that is an environment that is a mar- that even if the people of Massachu- Okay, let’s do that. Let’s give people riage between a man and a woman. setts, after 4 years of same-sex mar- an incentive to marry. Mr. Speaker, this Congress as rep- riage being in existence, vote to ratify But if you are a heterosexual strong- resentatives of the American people it by a majority, their vote does not ly attracted to someone of the opposite has a duty to protect marriage from at- count. This amendment cancels out a sex and really not at all attracted to tack by the courts. I urge my col- referendum. the idea of someone of your same sex, leagues to vote in favor of the Marriage In California, where the legislature how does the existence of that under- Protection Amendment. voted for it, if a Governor should be mine this? Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 elected in November who would sign Yes, I think we should give a pref- minutes to the distinguished gen- that bill, this amendment says, no, leg- erence to heterosexual marriage. We tleman from Massachusetts (Mr. islature; no, Governor. We the Federal should incentivize it. How does the ex- FRANK). Government will decide. So it is not istence of same-sex marriage discour- Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. about restraining activist judges. It is age or retard heterosexual marriage? Speaker, first, let’s be very clear: this about overruling any decision. Would anyone want to answer that for is not an attempt to restrain judges. So then the question is, Why do it? me? There have been two sources of oppo- Usually our view would be that if peo- Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield sition to same-sex marriage. A large ple are going to benefit from some- 31⁄2 minutes to the gentleman from Mis- number of people who bear those of us thing, enjoy it, we would let that hap- souri (Mr. AKIN). who are gay and lesbian no ill will have pen, in the absence of harm. Mr. AKIN. Mr. Speaker, the debate been opposed to it because they have Now, clearly there is value to same- before us today, as has been high- heard that it would lead to social dis- sex marriage. There are men and lighted by people from both sides of the ruption. That is a common theme when women, millions of us, who, for reasons aisle, is about a definition of marriage. we deal with issues involving par- we don’t understand, nobody really I think that the point that in the sub- ticular groups in our society against does, in my judgment, feel an attrac- tlest way has to be made clear, it is whom there has been discrimination. tion to people of the same sex. What something that most Americans under- I invite people to go back and read many of them have said is, you know stand logically, and that is marriage is the debates over the Americans with what, we would like to have our love not about love; it is about a love that Disabilities Act to read what people put into a legally connected context. can bear children. There is a difference. like Pat Robertson said in opposition We want to be legally bound to each I love my parents. I love my family. to it. I remember this debate 30 years other, as we are emotionally and mor- I have friends that I love. But I love ago in Massachusetts when we were ally. my wife and we are married. Marriage talking about the Equal Rights Amend- Who is that hurting? Well, we are is a love that bears children and re- ment. And so, yes, I understand that told that it hurts marriage. And here is plenishes society along those lines. there are people who are opposed to where the illogic comes in. People get I have been married personally for 31 same-sex marriage who do not in any up and say we have to be against let- years. We have six children and even a way feel themselves prejudiced against ting two women marry because it is grandson. The children are doing well. gay men and lesbians, but who worry very important that men and women One is a first lieutenant that just came about the social consequences. marry. back from Fallujah. The other two sons I think here we can point to the There is no connection. Nothing here are over at the Naval Academy. I have facts. We had full civil unions in threatens heterosexual marriage. It is two daughters that have not gone off to Vermont in 2000. We have had same-sex just the most illogical argument I have school yet. marriage in Massachusetts for over 2 ever heard. If two men are attracted to All of those children, growing up years. In no case is there the slightest each other and want to live together with a mother and a father, have un- evidence of social disruption. Let me legally, how does that endanger hetero- derstood the first primitive concepts of say, though, that is one wing of the op- sexual marriage? government. They have understood position. So the argument that we must ban what it is like to live under authority. There is another wing in the opposi- same-sex marriage to protect hetero- They understand what it is like to tion, the people who are motivated by sexual marriage literally makes no work hard. They have learned to walk

VerDate Sep 11 2014 13:17 May 03, 2017 Jkt 049102 PO 00000 Frm 00183 Fmt 0688 Sfmt 0634 E:\FDSYS\BOUNDRECORD\BR18JY06.DAT BR18JY06 ejoyner on DSK30MW082PROD with BOUND RECORD July 18, 2006 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE, Vol. 152, Pt. 11 14799 and to talk and to get along with each portant issue, and to say to Congress- grandparents, by the way, they are other and all of those things. woman BALDWIN and to Congressman grandmothers. Their commitment, We also know that historically the FRANK what an honor it is to serve their love and their happiness are a people that are filling our prisons, the with you in the Congress. It is a privi- source of strength to all who know people who socially get in trouble a lot lege to call you colleague. them. are statistically people who have not Mr. Speaker, the crisis in the Middle They are leaders in our community had the blessings of a loving mother East reminds us that it is our responsi- and are held in high esteem by all who and father and a stable home. It bility as a Congress to address the ur- know them. Why should they not have doesn’t mean that people can’t get in gent priorities of the American people. the full protection of the law to be able trouble when they come from that Yet today it is painfully obvious that to share each other’s health and be- background, but statistically it is a lot instead of tackling the challenges fac- reavement benefits, to be able to share easier for a child to grow up with the ing our Nation and our world, Repub- all of the protections and rights accru- benefit of a loving home with a mother licans want to persist in their agenda ing to financial relationships, inherit- and a father. to distract and to divide. ance and immigration? So from a practical point of view, to That is why the American people are Why should Phyllis and Del and mil- preserve our civilization and society, it demanding a new direction. That is lions of gay and lesbian citizens not be is important for us to preserve mar- why they say in great numbers that treated equally and not be afforded the riage. It is not just love; it is a love our country is going in the wrong di- legal protections conferred by mar- that produces children. rection. The challenges that our coun- riage? I will again vote against this We ask ourselves, well, is this such a try face are too great for the Repub- amendment, as I have in the past, be- big debate? Really it shouldn’t be. We lican politics as usual. The constitu- cause it is counter to the noble ideas of have 45 States that have passed legisla- tional amendment that we are debating liberty, freedom and equality for which tion saying a marriage is between a today has been brought to this floor this Nation stands. man and a woman. Also anybody who with full knowledge that it has no This amendment defiles our cher- knows something about the history of prospect for success either now or in ished Constitution by saying that some the human race knows that there is no the near future, the foreseeable future. members of our society are not equal civilization which has condoned homo- This is a partisan exercise by Repub- under the law. This is blatant discrimi- sexual marriage widely and openly that licans to divide the American people nation. It is wrong. It does not belong has long survived. rather than forge consensus to solve in our Constitution. It is contrary It is for the practical reason that our urgent problems. Our Constitution, again to the noble purpose for which marriage is about bringing the next which we all take an oath to support this Nation was founded, and it is con- generation along, and it works best and defend, is an enduring and living trary to the principle of ending dis- with one dad and one mom. That is document that has throughout our his- crimination, unifying our country, and what a great majority of Americans be- tory expanded rights, not diminished fostering equality for all. lieve. them. The American people demand that So it is sad that we have to basically Though the Federal marriage amend- this Congress address their priorities: tell our courts, because of their activ- ment claims to protect marriage, it creation of jobs, creating a minimum ist nature, the beliefs of such a great benefits no one and actually limits the wage that has not been raised in 9 block of Americans. rights of millions of Americans. In Sep- years, gas prices that are over $3 a gal- I will conclude my comments by tember, I am happy to say, my husband lon, and the skyrocketing cost of high- doing something that I don’t know that and I will be celebrating our 43rd wed- er education. That is what they want I have done on the floor before, and ding anniversary. I am a mother of us to be doing here. that is to call attention to my col- five, we have five children and five Mr. Speaker, let us strive to do the league, the gentlewoman from Colo- grandchildren, expecting our sixth work of the American people. Let us rado, MARILYN MUSGRAVE, who has had grandchild in October. And we cer- strive to unite our country, take our the courage to do what seems so obvi- tainly appreciate the value of family. country in a whole new direction, let ous, so obvious to at least 45 States’ We see family in our community as a us honor our Constitution, let us honor worth of Americans, to bring this source of strength and a source of com- all of God’s children and let us reject amendment to the floor. fort to people. What constitutes that this amendment. For her efforts to defend plain old family is an individual and personal de- Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield traditional marriage, she has had mil- cision. But for all, it is a place where 11⁄2 minutes to the distinguished major- lions of dollars thrown against her, and people find love, comfort and support. ity leader, the gentleman from Ohio even a television ad that I have seen of As we consider this amendment, we (Mr. BOEHNER). some fat pink-dressed lady that is must understand we are talking about Mr. BOEHNER. I thank my colleague stealing jewelry off a corpse. She has our fellow citizens, equal under the for yielding. had to put up with that. law, who are lesbian and gay, and what Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong I say to you, Congresswoman it means to them. They are members of support of the Marriage Protection MUSGRAVE, we are proud of you, and we our communities with dreams and aspi- Amendment offered by the gentle- thank you for standing up for some- rations, including their right to find woman from Colorado (Mrs. thing that is so foundational to our so- comfort, love and support on equal MUSGRAVE). ciety. terms. Mr. Speaker, over the past few days They have every right and every ex- some people have asked me, Why are b 1245 pectation of any American that they we having this debate and this vote? I Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 are entitled to the very purposes for think this is an issue that the Amer- minute to the distinguished minority which this country was founded, that ican people want their Representatives leader of the House, the gentlewoman we are all created equal by our Creator, to debate and to vote on. And that is from California (Ms. PELOSI). and endowed with inalienable rights of why it is part of the American Values Ms. PELOSI. I thank Mr. NADLER for life, liberty and the pursuit of happi- Agenda that we released last month. yielding and for his great leadership in ness. It has been front-page news all across defending the Constitution of the Let me tell you about two extraor- the country, sparking intense debate United States which is, of course, our dinary constituents of mine, I have amongst our fellow citizens. Many peo- oath of office. talked about them on the floor before. ple that we represent believe the Con- Mr. Speaker, I also want to thank Phyllis Lyon and Del Martin, both in gress needs to act. While 45 of the 50 Mr. CONYERS, the gentleman from their eighties, and they have lived to- States have either a State constitu- Michigan, for his leadership on this im- gether for more than 50 years. They are tional amendment or a statute that

VerDate Sep 11 2014 13:17 May 03, 2017 Jkt 049102 PO 00000 Frm 00184 Fmt 0688 Sfmt 0634 E:\FDSYS\BOUNDRECORD\BR18JY06.DAT BR18JY06 ejoyner on DSK30MW082PROD with BOUND RECORD 14800 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE, Vol. 152, Pt. 11 July 18, 2006 preserves the current definition of mar- Lucy a world in which prejudice and Mr. Speaker, I am proud to stand riage, left-wing activist judges and offi- discrimination are mere footnotes in with those who support this legislation cials at the local levels have struck her high school history book. Vote and those who understand that this down State laws protecting marriage. ‘‘no.’’ historic relationship between a man The American people should decide Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield and a woman is worth defending, even this issue, not out-of-touch judges who 21⁄2 minutes to the distinguished gen- if we do not succeed. are bent on redefining what marriage is tleman from Virginia (Mr. FORBES). Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield to for America’s moms and dads. Poll Mr. FORBES. Mr. Speaker, one of the the gentleman from Texas (Mr. GENE after poll shows that the American things that I think we can probably GREEN) for the purpose of making a people don’t want marriage to be rede- agree on today is the opponents of this unanimous consent request. fined by judges today and for our chil- legislation have questioned why we are Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. dren tomorrow. even here. Mr. Speaker, I agree with Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.J. And protecting the institution of them on that and disagree with them Res. 88. marriage safeguards, I believe, the on almost everything else, because it I believe that the institution of marriage American family. Studies show that just baffles me, as we think about our should consist of one man and one woman children best flourish when one mom Founding Fathers dreaming that we and I voted for the 1996 Defense of Marriage and one dad are there to raise them. would ever stand here and have to de- Act, but I cannot support this bill. And 30 years of social science evidence bate the definition of marriage and The Defense of Marriage Act has never confirms that children respond best whether or not that was between a man been challenged in the Supreme Court and it when their mom or dad are married and a woman. seems like we are putting the cart before the and live at home. And that is why mar- Earlier today I stood where you are horse. riage and family law has emphasized now standing and I listened to some of We should allow our system of checks and the importance of marriage as the the words that were used against this balances to work as it has for over 200 years. foundation of family, addressing the legislation. I wrote some of them down. Our founding fathers created three branches needs of children in the most positive And one of the words was ‘‘hateful.’’ of government to work independently, but way. And as I wrote that down, all I could equally. In Texas, we already have a law that states Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to think about is if you want a definition that the institution of marriage is between one send a strong message to America’s of hateful, look at the attacks that man and one woman. We also have a law that moms and dads rather than allowing have been brought against the sponsor states that Texas does not have to recognize judges to redefine marriage. I urge my of this piece of legislation across the marriages that were performed outside of the colleagues to support the amendment. country for daring to bring it to the Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 floor for debate. That defines hateful. state of Texas. Even if other states decide to change their minutes to the gentlewoman from Cali- And then they raised the word ‘‘un- standards for issuing marriage licenses. It will fornia (Ms. HARMAN). important.’’ And they list all of the not change how marriage licenses are issued Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Speaker, how other things that they think are im- in Texas. ironic that we consider this discrimina- portant. And that frightens me, be- The Defense of Marriage Act supports our tory, so-called marriage protection cause they do not recognize the dif- state laws. Marriage is a state issue and it measure just one week after success- ference and the importance of the con- should remain so. When my wife and I mar- fully renewing by a strong bipartisan nection between strong marriages in ried 36 years ago we went to our county margin a landmark piece of civil rights this country and the strength of our courthouse, not our federal courthouse. legislation, the Voting Rights Act. Nation. We do not seek marriage licenses from the The Voting Rights Act brought mil- And then they call it divisive. Divi- federal government. lions of Americans into the heart of sive to dare to stand against activist Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 American democracy. It has been a judges who will try to redefine literally minutes to the gentleman from Mis- critical milestone in our Nation’s ongo- hundreds of years of historical sanc- souri. ing quest to live up to the ideals of tioning of the institution of marriage. Mr. CLEAVER. Mr. Speaker, in 1974, equality and freedom embodied in the And then they say it is intolerant. I was ordained as an elder in the Constitution. In contrast, today’s leg- They couch themselves with love, United Methodist Church after having islation, if passed, would be a tragic and all they want to do is have love. completed 3 years of seminary, 4 years step backwards. Amending the Con- Well, Mr. Speaker, suppose you have a of undergraduate work. I have been stitution to limit the rights of a spe- teacher who loves her 13-year-old stu- pastoring for 32 years. As of today, I cific group amounts to government- dent, and just says, all we want to do is have never, ever been asked to perform sanctioned discrimination, and tram- love each other and be together. We a wedding between same-sex partners. I ples on the prerogative of the State to would never think of sanctioning that. do not even know of a minister who has define community values. Suppose you have a situation where a ever been made that request. Regulation of marriage is histori- husband came in and said I love three And so I am not sure how significant cally a State-sanctioned enterprise. wives. Just let me love them. How is this is, except for the fact that I am How hypocritical it is for those who that harming society? not here to defend anything except the often invoke States rights to claim I think, Mr. Speaker, you could use church. We have people sitting in the this is a Federal issue. I believe I un- every argument you hear on this floor gallery and people looking at this derstand something about the cruel ef- today against this legislation to justify broadcast all across America. And the fects of discrimination on the indi- both of those two situations. But, Mr. chances are really high that almost 100 vidual and society at large. Speaker, I think one of the things that percent of them have marriage licenses You see, my father was a refugee bothers me most is when we hear the signed by a member of the clergy, and from Nazi Germany. His medical school argument that we shouldn’t try be- not a Member of Congress. class was the last to graduate before cause this legislation just won’t pass. Marriage was ordained by God, and in the Nazi purges of Jewish students Well, Mr. Speaker, we try because we all of the weddings the words are read, began. He and some of my family fled believe that values are still important ‘‘Marriage is an institution by God sig- Germany a year later. in America. We try because we believe nifying the uniting of this man and Mr. Speaker, one of the greatest joys marriage between a man and a woman this woman in holy matrimony’’. of my life occurred recently. I became is a cornerstone of those values. We try And then we go on to say that, in my a grandmother for the first time. because we believe the only way to pro- tradition, ‘‘Christ adorned and beau- I urge this House to carefully assess tect the rights of States to define mar- tified marriage when he performed his how our action today will impact fu- riage for themselves is to pass this first miracle at the wedding in Cana of ture generations. And I wish for little amendment. Galilee.

VerDate Sep 11 2014 13:17 May 03, 2017 Jkt 049102 PO 00000 Frm 00185 Fmt 0688 Sfmt 0634 E:\FDSYS\BOUNDRECORD\BR18JY06.DAT BR18JY06 ejoyner on DSK30MW082PROD with BOUND RECORD July 18, 2006 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE, Vol. 152, Pt. 11 14801 b 1300 the fact that we were all created equal limited time here as lawmakers help- Marriage is sacred. It is holy. It is an by our Creator, equal but different, and ing all American families, and not dis- institution created by the church. Now, for a purpose. He showed us that pur- criminating against any. the United States Congress is going to pose in the Garden of Eden, Adam and Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I would trespass on the property of the church? Eve. He showed us once again, and point out that if this amendment does, I am concerned that we have gone blessed that difference, at Cana, as my in fact, make marriage, well, discrimi- too far. Every judicatory or denomina- friend and colleague from Missouri just nate, and the opponents want to make tion in the world is debating this issue, referenced, by Jesus performing his marriage more inclusive, then is it not and it should remain in that domain, first miracle by blessing that wedding also true that we should and will broaden the definition of marriage, so not on the floor of Congress. I don’t feast between a man and a woman. that as Mr. FORBES from Virginia want Congress to approve or disapprove I think there is a reason why mar- pointed out it is not merely a matter of how we perform marriages in my riage has always been such a sacred in- one same-sex couple. church. stitution. I believe some things, some definitions in our society are absolute. But why are we tripping over the I sat on the front row in December, word ‘‘couple’’? Why can’t marriage be and I thought about Exodus: For 6 Up isn’t down, dark isn’t daylight, black isn’t white, fish isn’t fowl, and three people or four people? Why can’t days, work is to be done, but the sev- it be a combination, if that is what we marriage, since the beginning of time, enth day shall be your holy day, a sab- are talking about. bath of rest for the Lord. Whoever does as close as I can tell, has been between I want to point that out to my any work on it must be put to death. a man and a woman. If it was, indeed, friends, that this doesn’t just end with As I thought about that, we were sit- good enough for our Creator, and it was being one definition or the other if you ting here on a Sunday morning debat- indeed our Creator’s plan, that we were don’t want to go with this definition. ing the defense bill. created different for an absolute divine Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I want- purpose, I think we best not be messing gentlewoman from North Carolina (Ms. ed to point out to my friend from Mis- with His plan today. FOXX). souri that in order to become States in It is important, I will disagree with Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I want to the United States of America, Arizona my colleague from Missouri in this re- say amen to everything my colleagues and Utah had to change their own gard, it is very important that when a who have just spoken before me, Mr. State constitutions to recognize mar- nation is, indeed, founded upon Judeo- FORBES and Mr. BEAUPREZ, said. They riage as a union between one man and Christian principles that we are willing made very eloquent arguments. one woman in order to do away with to stand and define what we are for, Mr. Speaker, if Members of the House polygamy. lest we forget what we are about. vote as their States have voted on this Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the I strongly encourage the adoption of amendment, the amendment will pass. distinguished gentleman from Colorado this amendment. Forty-five States have defined mar- (Mr. BEAUPREZ). Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 riage as the union of a man and a Mr. BEAUPREZ. Mr. Speaker, I minute to the distinguished gentle- woman. As a sociologist, I taught, and thank the gentleman and thank him woman from Illinois (Ms. SCHAKOW- I believe, that marriage is the for bringing this amendment to the SKY). foundational institution of every cul- floor and managing the time. I also Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I ture. It is under attack by the courts. would be remiss if I didn’t acknowledge rise today in strong opposition to the It needs to be defended in this way by the leadership of my colleague from constitutional amendment to prohibit defining it as the union of a man and a Colorado (Mrs. MUSGRAVE) on this same-sex marriage. If this amendment woman. issue. She has been a true champion, were to pass, it would mean the first If it is going to be defined otherwise, not only a champion inside this Cham- time in history that the Constitution it must be done by the legislatures and ber, but a champion for the values that has been amended to include discrimi- not by the courts. Today we are going I think a vast majority of Americans nation. I believe in marriage as a stabi- to vote on a constitutional amendment hold dear. For that she has paid what lizing force in our society, as a nur- to define marriage as the union of a has already been recognized as a sig- turing environment for our children, as man and a woman. This is about who is nificant personal price. Again, I ap- a public expression of the most pro- going to determine the definition, whether it is the courts or the legisla- plaud her and I certainly admire her found love and devotion of a commit- ment between two people to take re- tive bodies. character and her tenacity. The amendment is about how we are Mr. Speaker, this debate seems to be sponsibility for one another, in a legal going to raise the next generation. How framed by talking about what we are and a personal sense, in sickness and in are they going to be raised? It is a fun- health. against. I think what we ought to be damental issue for our families and for The vast majority of marriages are, talking about, frankly, is what we are our future. It is an issue for the people. and, of course always will be, between for. Too often in society, especially It is not an issue that the courts should these days, it seems like we are against one man and one woman. But the same resolve. the very institutions that made this virtues of couplehood apply to any lov- Those of us who support this amend- Nation great. ing adults. ment are doing so in an effort to let I see above your head, Mr. Speaker, Surely the 27-year relationship of my the people decide. We are making the words ‘‘in God we trust,’’ and di- dear friends Michael and Roger does progress in America on defining mar- rectly opposite you over my left shoul- not threaten my marriage in any way. riage as the union of a man and a der is the medallion of the very first The loving family that Ann and Jackie woman and will not stop until it is de- law giver, Moses. We all know where expanded when they adopted David, fined and protected as that union. Mar- those laws came from, the very hand of giving him two adoring parents, is a riage is about our future. I continue to God. good thing, regardless what anyone be struck by the opponents of this I think very often about the fact that may say to the contrary, although they amendment, who say it is an effort to we proudly profess that we are founded are free to say it. promote discrimination. The amend- on Judeo-Christian principles. I think But nothing in the Constitution ment is about promoting our future, it is indisputable where those prin- should be established to exclude them our families, about how we raise the ciples come from and what the origin from the rights that they deserve. next generation and about allowing a of those principles is. There are so many pressing issues right definition of marriage that is as old as I believe that in the very beginning now that are working, that undermine the creation of human beings. He created us, yes, all equal. The dis- families. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to tinguished minority leader mentioned Same-sex couples embrace the posi- support the Marriage Protection that a little bit ago, that we celebrate tive values of families. Let’s spend our Amendment.

VerDate Sep 11 2014 13:17 May 03, 2017 Jkt 049102 PO 00000 Frm 00186 Fmt 0688 Sfmt 0634 E:\FDSYS\BOUNDRECORD\BR18JY06.DAT BR18JY06 ejoyner on DSK30MW082PROD with BOUND RECORD 14802 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE, Vol. 152, Pt. 11 July 18, 2006 Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 being run against Mrs. MUSGRAVE. If b 1315 minute to the distinguished gentle- she wants to see hateful speech, and I believe in the 10th amendment and woman from California (Ms. LEE). one of the most hideous hateful acts its constitutional premise: ‘‘The pow- Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the that I have witnessed on any Member ers not delegated to the United States gentleman for yielding and for his lead- of Congress, I would invite anybody by the Constitution, nor prohibited by ership. Of course, I stand in strong op- who is talking about hate to watch the it to the States, are reserved to the position to H.J. Res. 88. ads that are run against our colleague States respectively, or to the people.’’ This amendment seeks to enshrine, for sponsorship of this amendment. My good friend who just spoke from and it does seek to enshrine, discrimi- Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the South Carolina made a very valid nation into our Constitution. As an Af- gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. point, that we are now tampering with rican American woman, and as a per- INGLIS). constitutional privileges that we have son of faith, there is no way that I can Mr. INGLIS of South Carolina. Mr. yielded to the States, and more impor- support discriminating against any- Speaker, I thank the gentleman for tantly, the Bill of Rights and the Con- body. The history of our Nation has yielding. I will be voting for the stitution have made it very clear that been a long process of bringing people amendment. I have got questions, it is a document of enhancement, of af- of different backgrounds together. though. Why now? Why this amend- firmation of rights. This amendment would take every- ment? Why now? My concern is that we are now stand- thing that this Nation stands for as a No court has ordered the State of ing on the floor of this sacred body de- beacon of hope, a land of opportunity, South Carolina to recognize a Massa- nying rights to human beings and and a tolerant, democratic society and chusetts marriage. In fact, it is all Americans. We are denying the rights, turn it all on its head. Government within any given State. If a court had the privacy rights, civil liberties should not be in the business of dis- ordered South Carolina to recognize a rights. We are even going so far as to criminating against its people, pure Massachusetts marriage, this amend- deny visitation rights at hospitals and and simple. Government should not get ment would not be failing today on the the ability to mourn your loved one. into the personal lives of individuals. House floor, as we all know it will. It Might I say that this past week a We must reject this, and it is a hate- would be passing with a significant dear, beloved friend of mine mourned ful and discriminatory amendment. It margin. his partner, mourned his partner, and I also have a question about why this takes an extraordinary step that pre- all of the community came to acknowl- amendment. Why not a federalism vious amendments have not taken. It edge the leadership of his partner. Is amendment? Why not an amendment bars States from granting pretty much his grief or his loss to be degraded on that honors the 10th amendment to the any legal partnership such as civil this floor, to be denied, to ask the Constitution that says that all powers unions or domestic partnerships. question whether it was not a special not delegated to the Federal Govern- Congress is supposed to work to pro- and sacred relationship? ment are reserved to the States? mote a better life for all Americans. So I ask my colleagues, as we cor- As it is, this amendment is not what rected the enslavement of those of us That means improving our Nation’s it should be. It should be a federalism education system, working to provide who came here first in the bottom of amendment. It should be an amend- the belly of a slave boat with the 13th, health care for the 47 million unin- ment that says States have the prerog- sured, ensuring that people have a roof 14th and 15th amendment, affirmation ative to define marriage within their of rights, creating rights, not denying over their heads. boundaries. As it is, we are providing a rights, I will not stand here on the We must see this amendment for Federal definition of marriage, or at- what it is. It is clearly election-year floor today and accept the responsi- tempting to do so, in this amendment bility of denying rights. Might I say, pandering. It is an attempt to create a that will fail. the Senate, the other body, has already diversion from the real issues that this I think it is also important to ask spoken. They could not get a simple Congress should be dealing with. why this amendment, and to point out majority. Why? It is wrong to deny This is clear election year pandering. This is that no one should be under the rights to Americans. simply an attempt to create a diversion from misimpression that we are here man- I will not allow the flag to be dese- the real issues this Congress should be deal- dating, let’s say, a biblical definition of crated by this amendment. Defeat this ing with. marriage. If we were, we would be di- constitutional offering and bring back It’s also an amendment once again en- recting the States only to grant di- freedom to America. shrouded in an attempt to cloud the public’s vorces on the biblical basis of infi- Mr. Speaker, this resolution is the symbol of image of same-gender couples. They want to delity. But nobody is proposing such an the misplaced priorities of the Republican fill everyone’s head with images of gay cou- amendment. leadership in the House. It is clear that this ples marching into churches and demanding Why? Because we have avoided the amendment is being addressed not for the marriage equality. This has nothing, nothing at dangers of a theocracy. I agree with policy involved but simply for floor debate. We all to do with churches and marriage. what my colleague from Missouri said have considered this issue in Congress be- The Republican Leadership wants to rile up earlier, Mr. CLEAVER: this is the fore, and doing so again is simply a waste of the religious right with the idea that this has to church’s business. This is the syna- taxpayers’ money. This debate is ill-advised do with an attempt to force religious institu- gogue’s business. This is the business and will not help the American people. Issues tions to sanctify same-sex couples. of the mosque to figure out what is we could be addressing here today are: the Same-sex couples merely want the same marriage within their definition. global war on terrorism we are fighting, from rights that many take for granted; hospital visi- Now, when a State gets involved, it is which we have been distracted by the war in tation rights, health care benefits, inheritance really just about children and the re- Iraq, and a war that has resulted in a dev- rights, and joint tax-filing. These all come with sult of divorce. Why now? Why this astating toll on American lives and our budget; civil ceremonies, through a license granted by amendment? But yet the question is the crisis in the Middle East; increasing gas a local county or city, not through an order simply brought up, so we vote for it. prices; a ballooning budget deficit of over $5 signed by a church or any religious institution. Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 trillion that is choking our economy and crucial We must make clear, this is about equal minutes to the distinguished gentle- social service programs; and a health care rights. woman from Texas (Ms. JACKSON-LEE). system that is failing the millions of Americans I urge my colleagues, and the public, to see Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. that remain uninsured. this amendment for what it is really for. A Speaker, let me say to my colleagues Why are we wasting time on the House mere political diversion tactic and an attempt on the other side of the aisle, I do be- floor, in our legislative offices and with our val- to write hate into the Constitution. lieve in the separation of church and uable staff to handle this imprudent amend- Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I would State, as one asked the question that ment? invite the previous speaker, my friend, we should be talking about what we be- I oppose this bill because, for the first time to watch one of the 527 ads that are lieve in. in America’s rich and long democratic history,

VerDate Sep 11 2014 13:17 May 03, 2017 Jkt 049102 PO 00000 Frm 00187 Fmt 0688 Sfmt 9920 E:\FDSYS\BOUNDRECORD\BR18JY06.DAT BR18JY06 ejoyner on DSK30MW082PROD with BOUND RECORD July 18, 2006 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE, Vol. 152, Pt. 11 14803 the Constitution will be used not as a beacon opposition to this amendment. Among them cial issue. It did not work in the 1920s when of liberation but an instrument of deprivation. are: the Anti-Defamation League; the Alliance the 18th amendment declared alcohol to be il- On the 230-year anniversary of our Constitu- of Baptists; the American Civil Liberties Union; legal and it did not work in the 1960s when tion, let us not desecrate it by enacting this the League of Women Voters of the United interracial marriage was still considered a act. H.J. Res. 88, the ‘‘Marriage Protection States; the American Jewish Committee; the crime. This amendment will not change the Amendment,’’ proposes to impose the opinion NAACP; and many more. lives of those who want to live as a married of a minority of the members of this Congress I have here in my hand a letter to Rep- couple; all it will do is take away their license on the lives of all Americans on matters that resentatives HASTERT and PELOSI, signed by to do so. concern their personal lives, their family rela- over 2,500 members of the clergy in our Na- THIS WILL CLOG THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM tions, and their very identity. tion. They come from different faiths and back- The MPA is a lawyer’s dream and a judge’s TENTH AMENDMENT grounds, and may disagree on many things, nightmare. The number of cases that will flood The 10th Amendment states: ‘‘The powers but they all oppose this amendment. the system will be outlandish. Does the MPA This proposed amendment will forever write not delegated to the United States by the Con- retroactively invalidate all marriages that have discrimination into the U.S. Constitution rather stitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are occurred in the interim? If a spouse has died, than focusing on the crucial problems and reserved to the States respectively, or to the how does the retroactive annulment effect people.’’ The individual states need to have challenges that affect the lives of all of us. It custody of the children, or property rights? the ability to differ with the Federal Govern- is nothing more than a political distraction for There will be a litany of case law brought out ment in an area that relates to what goes on the country to divert attention from the over- to deal with these questions, and our judicial in the homes of individuals. abundance of real problems and our tremen- system will be filled with cases trying to sort EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAW dous lack of effective solutions. out the lasting effects of the MPA. Gay and lesbian Americans are American VIOLATION OF PRIVACY citizens who pay taxes and protect our com- Our civil liberties are based upon the funda- THIS IS LIKELY TO FAIL munities as fire fighters, police officers, and by mental premise that each individual has a right Amending the constitution is not a simple serving in the military, and therefore desire the to privacy, to be free from governmental inter- thing, and should be done with care and cau- same rights and protections as other Ameri- ference in the most personal, private areas of tion over a longer period of time. Our haste in cans. one’s life. Deciding when and whether to have this matter will be the tragic flaw of the MPA’s Denying gay and lesbian couples the right children is one of those areas. Marriage is an- journey. Recent polls show that a majority of to marry amounts to a federal taking—legal other. people who oppose gay marriage also oppose rights in pensions, health insurance, hospital In 1965 the Supreme Court ruled in Gris- amending the constitution to ban them. In ad- visitations, and inheritance that other long- wold v. Connecticut that a married couple had dition, this amendment has already been con- term committed couples enjoy. It should never the right to use birth control. In doing so, the sidered in the Senate and was rejected. be our job to restrict the rights of the American Court recognized a ‘‘zone of privacy’’ implicit MPA DOES NOT HELP FAMILIES people—only to extend them. This amendment in various provisions of the Constitution. Most Many of my colleagues are arguing that the would write discrimination into our Constitu- recently, the Supreme Court struck down a MPA is here to protect the family. Spending tion. law criminalizing sex between same-sex cou- time and resources to amend the constitution As Members of Congress with the authori- ples in Lawrence v. Texas based upon these to prevent gay marriages is not helping a sin- ties vested in us as a body, we have a re- same principles. gle family. Divorce, abuse, unwed mother- sponsibility to deal with issues that need atten- Indeed, Lawrence relied principally on Gris- hood, and unemployment are doing far more tion. There is no emergent need relating to in- wold, Eisenstadt and Roe v. Wade. Collec- harm to millions of families everywhere. To dividual well-being, national security, or any tively, these decisions recognize the funda- those who are taking up the cause to protect other government interest that warrants a con- mental principle that the Constitution protects American families, perhaps your attention stitutional amendment for this purpose. This is individuals’ decisions about marriage, could be focused elsewhere on the problems a waste of the taxpayers’ dollars. This Amend- procreation, contraception and family relation- which are truly plaguing them. ment takes away existing legal protections, ships. The issues are inextricably linked—in The vocal proponents of the MPA show under state and local laws, for committed, law as well as policy. their strong and willful hatred of the gay and long-term couples, such as hospital visitation THERE IS NO VALID NEED TO AMEND THE CONSTITUTION lesbian community. This egregious amend- rights, inheritance rights, pension benefits, and Amending the Constitution is a radical act ment would enshrine discrimination against a health insurance coverage among others. that should only be undertaken to address specific group of citizens and intolerance of Under current law, marriage is a decision of great public-policy needs. Since the adoption specific religious beliefs into our Nation’s most the state. As marriage was initially tied to of the Bill of Rights, in 1791, the Constitution sacred document. The fight for equality is property rights, this has historically always has been amended only 17 times. Moreover, uniquely woven into our Nation’s history. From been a local issue. The state gives us a mar- the Constitution should be amended only to the suffrage movement, to the civil rights riage license, determines a couples’ tax brack- protect and expand, not limit, individual free- movement, to the gay rights movement, mi- et and authorizes its divorce. It does not need doms. By contrast, the Marriage Protection norities in this country have worked tirelessly additional control over the situation. Religious Amendment is an attempt to restrict liberties, to achieve the equal rights guaranteed to all. conceptions of marriage are sacrosanct and and on a discriminatory basis. should remain so, but how a state decides to THE LEGAL INCIDENT OF MARRIAGE WARRANTS A DEFENSE OF MARRIAGE ACT ALREADY EXISTS LICENSE dole out hospital visitation rights or insurance The Defense of Marriage Act, which Presi- benefits should be a matter of state law. As Marriage provides a multitude of critical pro- dent Bill Clinton signed into law in 1996, al- legal relationships change, laws adapt accord- tections to same sex couples and their chil- ingly. ready exists and recognizes marriage as a dren. These legal incidents include rights re- Matters of great importance, such as mar- heterosexual union for purposes of federal law lated to: group insurance; victim’s compensa- riage, need to reflect the will of the people and only. DOMA was designed to provide indi- tion; worker’s compensation; durable powers be resolved within the democratic process. By vidual states individual autonomy in deciding of attorney; family leave benefits; and a joint having Congress give the states restrictions how to recognize marriage and other unions tax return. initially, we are denying them the chance to let within their borders. This allowed legislators These benefits are necessary for families to their constituents decide what is best for them. the latitude to decide how to deal with mar- function. If ‘‘marriage’’ is truly a license that We cannot use the Constitution as a bullhorn riage rights themselves, while simultaneously extends rights, it should not be denied to one to dictate social policy from Washington. stating that no state could force another to group of people—otherwise, this body will be Furthermore, any law determining who may recognize marriage of same sex couples. For guilty of legislating in violation of the Equal or may not marry denies religious institutions those who want to take a stance on marriage Protections Clause of the Constitution. the right to decide this amongst themselves alone, DOMA should quell their fears. We do Mr. Speaker, again, I urge my colleagues to and is therefore a denial of the religious free- not need additional, far reaching legislation. defeat this resolution. doms that we treasure so dearly. MPA WILL NOT CHANGE VIEWS ON SAME SEX MARRIAGE Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield Leading civil rights and religious organiza- The Federal government cannot use its in- 1 minute to the gentleman from Cali- tions across the Nation have expressed their fluence to change people’s minds about a so- fornia (Mr. DANIEL E. LUNGREN).

VerDate Sep 11 2014 13:17 May 03, 2017 Jkt 049102 PO 00000 Frm 00188 Fmt 0688 Sfmt 0634 E:\FDSYS\BOUNDRECORD\BR18JY06.DAT BR18JY06 ejoyner on DSK30MW082PROD with BOUND RECORD 14804 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE, Vol. 152, Pt. 11 July 18, 2006 Mr. DANIEL E. LUNGREN of Cali- ican people and not on rhetorical de- mous influence it holds as the key document fornia. Mr. Speaker, if I could just re- vices that have no substantive mean- that binds our nation together. spond to the question of federalism. ing, because the other body already de- We are concerned that the Marriage Pro- There is a mistake on this floor when tection Amendment would mark the first feated it. time in history that an amendment to the people are talking about this being a Mr. Speaker, I spent all morning this Constitution would restrict the civil rights violation of federalism. Federalism, morning at the National Defense Uni- of an entire group of Americans. Misusing properly understood, is a check on the versity participating in a military ex- our nation’s most cherished document for power of the Federal Government by ercise with respect to Iran’s develop- this purpose would tarnish our proud tradi- the State government and vice versa. ment of nuclear weapons. I spent my tion of expanding citizens’ rights by Con- The reason why the federalism issue time trying to figure out how we are stitutional amendment, a tradition long sup- does not apply here is because mar- going to protect the American people ported by America’s faith communities. riage and the family is likewise an in- These concerns alone merit rejection of the from that threat, and then I come to Marriage Protection Amendment. stitution, although a private one, the floor of the House, and we waste We also share a serious concern that the which provides a countervailing source time debating how we are going to pro- proposed Marriage Protection Amendment of power vis-a-vis the government, and tect the American people from same- would infringe on religious liberty. there are lot of arguments on the floor. sex marriages when we cannot even Thoughtful people of faith can and do dis- It is too bad we do not have a lot more amend the Constitution in this session agree on the issue of marriage. America’s time to talk about it. of Congress. many religious traditions reflect this diver- The simple question, though, is are sity of opinion, as do we who sign this letter. If we spent more time trying to hunt But we respect the right of each religious we going to fundamentally change the down Osama bin Laden and less time group to decide, based on its own religious definition of marriage, understood in trying to hunt down people in mar- teachings, whether or not to sanction mar- this country since its founding, and riages that we find objectionable, we riage of same-sex couples. It is surely not the allow a preferential status for marriage would all be safer. federal government’s role to prefer one reli- properly understood? That is what we Now, I have a deep respect for my gious definition of marriage over another, are really talking about. It is not dis- colleagues on the other side of the aisle much less to codify such a preference in the crimination. It is the question of and on the other side of this issue, but Constitution. To the contrary: the great con- whether you allow the traditional form tribution of our Constitution is to ensure re- I would suggest that the American peo- ligious liberty for all. of marriage to be given preferential ple want us focused on real security Some argue that a constitutional amend- status. and real safety. ment is necessary to ensure that clergy and Those that argue against this amend- Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, if I can faith groups will never be forced to recognize ment do not want that to be the case ask the gentleman from New York, I marriages of same-sex couples against their anymore. They are the ones that are have one more speaker. Then we are will. This argument is unfounded. Such coer- overturning history and overturning ready to close. cion is already expressly forbidden by the the way things have been done for sev- Mr. NADLER. I will yield to Ms. First Amendment’s ‘‘establishment’’ clause, eral hundred years in this country and its guarantee of the right to ‘‘free exercise’’ JACKSON-LEE for a unanimous consent of religion, and the Supreme Court’s doctrine thousands of years in this culture. request, and then you have your speak- of religious autonomy that is rooted in both Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield er, and I will close for my side and you religion clauses. These, and only these, are myself such time as I may consume. close for yours. Let me ask how much all the protection of religious autonomy— Federalism is the division of power time we have left at this point. and of religious marriage—our nation needs. between the Federal Government and The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Our nation’s founders adopted the First Amendment precisely because they under- the States. Family law, marriage, di- GILLMOR). The gentleman from New stood the dangers of allowing government to vorce have always been a matter for York (Mr. NADLER) has 3 minutes re- the States. This amendment attempts have control over religious doctrine and de- maining. The gentleman from Georgia cisions. It is this commitment to religious to seize it for the Federal Government. (Mr. KINGSTON) has 41⁄4 minutes remain- freedom that has allowed religious practice That is a major change in federalism, ing. and pluralism to flourish in America as no- whatever the gentleman from Cali- Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield to where else. If this freedom is to be main- fornia may say. the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. tained, we must respect the rights of faith It is most certainly an issue of fed- JACKSON-LEE) for a unanimous consent communities to apply their own religious eralism because the Federal Govern- request. teachings and values to the issue of same-sex ment has never before gotten into the Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. relationships. It is surely not the business of definition of marriage or divorce or politicians to assert control over the doc- Speaker, I insert into the RECORD at trine and practice of our faith communities. any of those things. It has always been this point the Clergy for Fairness, Reli- The Marriage Protection Amendment left to the States until this amend- gious Leaders Opposed to the Federal would dignify discrimination and undermine ment. Marriage Amendment, that shows the religious liberty. America’s religious com- Mr. Speaker, I yield 11⁄2 minutes to standing of the religious community of munities do not support this amendment. As the distinguished gentleman from New America. It is entitled: ‘‘We, the Peo- leaders of these communities, we urge you to York (Mr. ISRAEL). ple.’’ vote against any attempt to pass this Amendment. Mr. ISRAEL. I thank my friend from CLERGY FOR FAIRNESS, Respectfully, Washington, DC, July 7, 2006. New York, and Mr. Speaker, I rise to Rev. Richard K. Heacock, Jr., United Rep. J. DENNIS HASTERT, oppose this resolution. Methodist, Fairbanks, AK. Mr. Speaker, this is not the grave Speaker of the House, Rev. Janice A. Hotze, Episcopal, St. Mi- crisis that a constitutional amendment Washington, DC. chael and All Angels, Haines, AK. demands. I will tell you what the grave Rep NANCY PELOSI, Rev. Dale Kelley, Christian Church (Disci- House Minority Leader, ples of Christ), Unalaska, AK. crises are that we should be spending Washington, DC. our time on. Rev. Robert Thomas, Jr., Episcopal, St. DEAR REP. HASTERT AND REP. PELOSI: As Peter’s, Seward, AK. North Korea tested a ballistic missile clergy from a broad spectrum of religious Rev. Diana Jordan Allende, Unitarian Uni- last week. We are still waiting for a traditions we hold diverse views regarding versalist, Auburn UU Fellowship, Auburn, strategy for success in Iraq. Gas prices marriage. However, we are united in our op- AL. are skyrocketing. War is erupting in position to amending the U.S. Constitution Rabbi Jeffrey Ballon, Jewish, Bnai Sha- the Middle East. And Congress wants to define marriage. lom, Huntsville, AL. the American people to believe that The Marriage Protection Amendment The Rev. James Creasy, Episcopal, raises alarming constitutional concerns. We Opelika, AL. same-sex marriages are the gravest do not favor using the constitutional amend- Rev. Peter M. Horn, Episcopal, Vestavia threat to their security. ment process to resolve the divisive issues of Hills, AL. We need to be focusing on issues of the moment. Loading down the Constitution Mr. Steven T. Karnes, Jewish, Kingdom Of true security and safety for the Amer- with such amendments weakens the enor- Yahwey Assembly, Phenix City, AL.

VerDate Sep 11 2014 13:17 May 03, 2017 Jkt 049102 PO 00000 Frm 00189 Fmt 0688 Sfmt 0634 E:\FDSYS\BOUNDRECORD\BR18JY06.DAT BR18JY06 ejoyner on DSK30MW082PROD with BOUND RECORD July 18, 2006 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE, Vol. 152, Pt. 11 14805 Rev. Ruth B. LaMonte, Episcopal, Trinity Rev. Dr. Eric Elnes, United Church of Rev. Connie Zekas Bailey, RSI Inter- Church, Birmingham, AL. Christ, Scottsdale Congregational United national, Vista, San Marcos, CA. Rev. Lynette Lanphere, Episcopalian, Church of Christ, Scottsdale, AZ. Rev. Keith G. Banwart, Jr., Evangelical Leeds, AL. Rev. Barbara M. Farwell, Presbyterian, Lutheran Church in America, St. Matthew’s Rev. Elizabeth L. O’Neill, Presbyterian, Serving as chaplain in lifecare community, Church, Glendale, CA. Immanuel PCUSA, Montgomery, AL. Sun City, AZ. Rev. Erwin C. Barron, PCUSA, Old First Rev. Marjorie F. Ragona, Metropolitan Rev. Mary S. Harris, Presbyterian, Tucson, Presbyterian Church, San Francisco, CA. Community Churches, Bethel, Birmingham, AZ. Rev. Hank Bates, Independent Religious AL. The Rev. Robert Harvey, Episcopal, Tuc- Science, Palm Springs, CA. Rev. Mary C. Robert, Episcopal, All Saints, son, AZ. Rabbi Haim Beliak, Jewish, Beth Shalom Mobile, AL. Rev. William H. Jacobs, Disciples of Christ, of Whittier, Los Angeles, CA. Rev. Alice I. Syltie, Unitarian Univer- First Christian Church of Mesa, AZ, Tempe, Fr. John A. Bell, New Church Inclusive An- salist, UU Church of Huntsville Alabama, AZ. glican Reform, St. Savior—San Francisco, Huntsville, AL. Rev. Dawn E. Keller, ELCA, Tucson, AZ. Oakland, CA. Rev. Jack Zylman, Unitarian Universalist Rev. Steve J. Keplinger, Episcopalian, St. Rabbi Elissa Ben-Naim, Reform Jewish, Church of Birmingham, Birmingham, AL. David’s, Page, AZ. Los Angeles, CA. Pastor Robert Anderson, Lutheran, Hot Rev. Delores J. Kropf, Ecumenical Catho- Rev. David L. Bennett, United Methodist, Springs Village, AR. lic, St. Mihael’s Ecumenical Catholic Central United Methodist, Stockton, CA. Rev. Alma T. Beck, Episcopal, St. Mi- Church, Tucson, AZ. Fr. William S. Bennett, OHC, Episcopal, chael’s Episcopal Church, Little Rock, AR. Fr. Gordon K. McBride, Episcopal, Grace Santa Barbara, CA. Rev. Sharon M. Coote, Christian Church St. Paul’s, Tucson, AZ. Rev. Dr. Gaye G. Benson, United Meth- (Disciples of Christ), Pulaski Heights Chris- Rev. Gary N. McCluskey, Lutheran odist, El Sobrante, CA, Richmond, CA. tian Church, Little Rock, AR. (ELCA), University Lutheran, Tempe, AZ. Rev. Susan Bergmans, Episcopal, San Rev. Stephen J. Copley, Mr. United Meth- Rev. Marc E. McDonald, United Methodist, Pablo, CA. odist Church, North Little Rock, AR. Hope UMC, Bullhead City, AZ. Rabbi Michael Berk, Reform Jewish, San Rev. Gerald G. Crawford, II, Episcopal, St. Fr. Brian H. O. A. McHugh, Episcopal, Coo- Francisco, CA. Mark’s, Crossett, AR. lidge, AZ. Rabbi Linda Bertenthal, Jewish, Union for Rev. Marc Fredette, Unitarian Univer- Rev. Lee J. Milligan, United Church of Reform Judaism, Los Angeles, CA. salist, Unitarian Universalist Fellowship of Christ, Church of the Painted Hills, Tucson, Fr. Robert L. Bettinger, PHD, Episcopa- Fayetteville, Fayetteville, AR. AZ. lian, San Diego, CA. Rev. Dr. Raymond Hearn, Presbyterian, Rev. Kimberly Murman, Presbyterian Rev. Elizabeth A. Brick, United Methodist, Hot Springs Village, AR. Church (USA), Mesa, AZ. St. Andrew’s United Methodist Church, Sac- Rev. Robert Klein, Unitarian Universalist, Rev. Briget Nicholson, United Church of ramento, Sacramento, CA. Unitarian Universalist Church of Little Christ, First, Tucson, AZ. Rev. David Brickman, Interfaith Temple, Rock, Little Rock, AR. Rev. James Parkhurst, United Methodist, Hollywood, CA. Rabbi Eugene H. Levy, Jewish, B’nai Phoenix, AZ. Rabbi Rick Brody, Jewish, Temple Ami Israel, Little Rock, AR. Rev. David W. Ragan, United Church of Shalom, Los Angeles, CA. Rev. Samuel C. Loudenslager, Episcopa- Christ, Phoenix, AZ. Rev. Mary Sue Brookshire, Baptist/UCC, Rev. Rod Richards, Unitarian Universalist, lian, St. Michael’s Episcopal Church, UCC La Mesa, La Mesa, CA. Bigelow, AR. UU Church of SE Arizona, Bisbee, AZ. Rev. Clark. M. Brown, Lutheran (ELCA), Rev. Ann Rogers-Witte, United Church of Rev. Betty Grace McCollum, Unitarian St. Timothy Lutheran, Monterey, CA. Christ, Shadow Rock UCC, Phoenix, AZ. Universalist, Emerson, AR. Rabbi Jeffrey Brown, Reform Judaism, Rev. Liana Rowe, UCC, Phoenix, AZ. Rev. Phillip R. Plunkett, Episcopal, Little Temple Solel, Cardiff, CA. Rev. Ron Rude, Evangelical Lutheran Rock, AR. Ms. Eileen O. Brownell, Religious Science, Church in America, Tucson, AZ. Rev. Donna L. Rountree, Christian Church Rev. Anne Sawyer, Episcopal, St. An- Chico, Chico, CA . (Disciples of Christ), Scott, AR. Rev. Richard E. Bruner, United Methodist, drew’s, Tucson, AZ. Rev. Anne Russ, PCUSA, Grace Pres- Rev. Kelli M. Shepard, Lutheran, Faith Lu- Claremont UMC, Hesperia, CA. byterian, Little Rock, AR. theran, Tempe, AZ. Paul A. Buch, Jewish, Temple Beth Israel, Rev. Dan R. Thornhill, Christian Church Rev. Gerry Straatemeier, MSW, Religious Pomona, CA. (Disciples of Christ), Parkview Christian Science, Tucson, AZ. Rev. Donna Byrns, Church of Truth, Pasa- Church (Disciples of Christ), Little Rock, Rev. James Strader, Episcopal, University dena, CA. AR. of Arizona Episcopal Campus Ministry, Tuc- Rev. Jolene J. Cadenbach, United Church Rev. Kenneth Reuel Ahlstrand, Evangelical son, AZ. of Christ, Arcadia Congregational, Arcadia, Lutheran Church in America, Beautiful Sav- Rabbi Andrew Straus, Jewish, Temple CA. ior, Oro Valley, AZ. Emanuel of Tempe, Tempe, AZ. Rev. Anite J. Cadonau-Huseby, Christian Rev. Rosemary G. Anderson, United Meth- Rev. Charlotte Strayhorne, Independent, Church (Disciples of Christ), Danville, CA. odist, Apache Junction, AZ. Casa de Cristo Evangelical Church, Phoenix, Br. Richard Jonathan Cardarelli, SSF, An- The Rev. Susan Anderson-Smith, Epis- AZ. glican, San Francisco, CA. copal, St. Philip’s In the Hills, Tucson, AZ. Rabbi Lisa Tzur, Jewish, Temple Gan Rev. Helen Carroll, Unitarian Universalist, Rev. Leslie S. Argueta-Vogel, Presbyterian Elohim, Scottsdale, AZ. Atascadero, CA. (USA), Phoenix, AZ. Rev. Dr. Stephen Wayles, United Church of Rev. Jan Chase, Unity, Unity of Pomona, Rev. Curtis A. Beardsley, Independant Christ, 1st Congregational UCC, Phoenix, Pomona, CA. Catholic, Reyna del Tepeya, Apostolic AZ, Phoenix, AZ. Rev. Marilyn Chilcote, Presbyterian, First Catholic Church of Antioch, Phoenix, AZ. Rev. Fletch Wideman, United Church of Presbyterian, Oakland Oakland, CA. Rev. Franklyn Bergen, Episcopalian, Christ, Shadow Rock UCC, Glendale, AZ. Rev. Kelly Dahlgren Childress, United St.Andrew’s Tucson, AZ, Tucson, AZ. Rev. Susan K. Wintz, MDiv, BCC, Pres- Church of Christ, Oakland, CA. Rabbi Alan Berlin, Jewish, Scottsdale, AZ. byterian Church (USA), Mesa, AZ. Rev. Abbot Neil V. Christensen, c.s.e.f., Rev. Andre R. Boulanger, MA, STL, Roman Deborah J. Davis, Jewish, Humanistic Jew- Th.D., Catholic, Community of Sts. Eliza- Catholic, Phoenix, AZ. ish Congregation, San Diego, CA. beth of Hungary & Farancis de Sales, Inter- Rev. Larry David Bridge, Christian Church Rev. Luke Adams, Independent Catholic denominational, Sacramento, CA. (Disciples of Christ) & United Church of Churches International, Order of St. Luke Rev. Jan Christian, Unitarian Universalist, Christ, Scottsdale Congregational United the Healer, Oakland, CA. UU Church of Ventura, Ventura, CA. Church of Christ, Scottsdale, AZ. Rev. Joseph M. Amico, United Church of Rev. Maureen Christopher, Religious Rabbi Mari Chernow, Jewish, Temple Chai, Christ, Sunland, CA. Science, Hospice Chaplain, Oxnard, CA. Phoenix, AZ. Rev. John Anderson, Presbyterian, San Rev. William M. Clyma, III, New Church- Rev. Rula Colvin, Methodist, Gilbert, AZ. Francisco, CA. Inclusive Anglican Reform, Church of St. Rev. James Dew, Evangelical Lutheran Rev. Charlotte L. Asher, United Church of Savior, San Francisco, CA. Church in America, Santa Cruz Lutheran Christ, Redwood City, Redwood City, CA. Rev. Kenneth W. Collier, PhD, Unitarian Church, Tucson, AZ. Rev. Joy Atkinson, Unitarian Universalist, Universalist, Unitarian Society of Santa Rev. Barbara D. Doerrer-Peacock, United Berkeley, CA. Barbara, Santa Barbara, CA. Church of Christ, South Mountain Commu- Susan J. Averbach, Jewish Humanist, Kol Rabbi Neil Comess-Daniels, Jewish, Beth nity Church, Tempe, AZ. Hadash, San Francisco, CA. Shir Sholom, Santa Monica, CA. Rev. Richard Doerrer-Peacock, United Fr. Michael A. Backlund, PhD, The Epis- Rev. Catherine Costas, Episcopalian, Good Church of Christ, South Mountain Commu- copal Church, St. Paul’s Church, Sac- Shepherd Episcopal Church, Mountain View, nity Church, Tempe, AZ. ramento, Angels Camp, CA. CA.

VerDate Sep 11 2014 13:17 May 03, 2017 Jkt 049102 PO 00000 Frm 00190 Fmt 0688 Sfmt 0634 E:\FDSYS\BOUNDRECORD\BR18JY06.DAT BR18JY06 ejoyner on DSK30MW082PROD with BOUND RECORD 14806 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE, Vol. 152, Pt. 11 July 18, 2006 Rev. Lyn Cox, Unitarian Universaiist, UU Rabbi Evan Goodman, Jewish, Congrega- Rev. Peter D. Krey, PhD., E.L.C.A., Christ Society of Sacramento, Sacramento, CA. tion Beth Israel-Judea, San Francisco, CA. Lutheran, Albany, CA Rev. Stuart P. Coxhead, Jr., Episcopal, Rev. Thomas H. Griffith, United Meth- Rabbi Brett Krichiver, Jewish, Stephen S. Burlingame, CA. odist, Woodland Hills United Methodist Wise Temple, Los Angeles, CA. Rev. Susan H. Craig, Presbyterian Church Church, Woodland Hills, CA. Rev. Kathleen F. La Point-Collup, United (USA), Pasadena, CA. Rev. Anthony Guillen, Episcopal, Ventura, Methodist, Elk Grove UMC, Elk Grove, CA. Fr. Norman L. Cram, Episcopal, Sonoma, CA. Rev. Peter Laarman, United Church of CA. Rev. Caroline J. Hall, Episcopalian, St Christ, Los Angeles, CA. Rev. Robert Warren Cromey, Episcopalian, Benedicts Los Osos, Los Osos, CA. Rabbi Gail Labovitz, Jewish-Conservative, Trinity, SF, San Francisco, CA. Rev. Jim Hamilton, United Methodist, Re- University of Judaism, Los Angeles, CA. Rev. Sandra R. Decker, Interfaith, Ken- dondo Beach, CA. Rabbi Howard Laibson, Jewish, Seal sington, CA. Dr. Frank S. Hamilton, Presbyterian Beach, CA. Rev. Nancy S. DeNero, UCC, Mount Holly- Church (USA), Santa Rosa, CA. Rev. Darcey Laine, Unitarian Universalist, wood Congregational UCC, Pasadena, CA. Rev. Sally Hamini, Unitarian Universalist, Unitarian Universalist Church of Palo Alto, Rev. Kristi L. Denham, United Church of UU Church of Buffalo, Berkeley, CA. Palo Alto, CA. Christ, Congregational Church of Belmont, Rev. M. Elisabet Hannon, United Church of Rev. Jeffrey P. Lambkin, Sr., Unitarian San Mateo, CA. Christ, Wesley United Methodist Church, Universalist, Unitarian Universalist Church Rabbi Lavey Derby, Jewish, Kol Shofar, Fresno, CA. in Idaho Falls, Richmond, CA. Mill Valley, CA. Rev. Pharis Harvey, United Methodist, Rev. Scott Landis, United Church of Rev. Brian K. Dixon, Alliance of Baptists, Corralitos, CA. Christ, Mission Hills, San Diego, CA. Dolores Street Baptist Church, San Fran- Dr. Kathy Hearn, United Church of Reli- Rev. Joseph A. Lane, Episcopal, Good cisco. CA. gious Science, La Jolla, CA. Shepherd Episcopal Church, Belmont, CA. Rabbi Joel C. Dobin, D.D., Reform, Walnut Rev. Patricia D. Hendrickson, Episcopal Rev. Peter R Lawson, Episcopalian, St. Creek, CA. Thousand Oaks, CA. James’, San Francisco, Valley Ford, CA. Rev. James Dollins, United Methodist, San Rev. Carol C. Hilton, Unitarian Univer- Rabbi Steven Z. Leder, Jewish, Wilshire Dieguito UMC, Vista, CA. salist, Palomar U.U. Fellowship, Vista, CA, Boulevard Temple, Los Angeles, CA. Rev. Richard F. Drasen, Religious Science, Oceanside, CA. Rabbi Michael Lerner, Jewish, Beyt Palm Springs Church for Today, Palm Rev. Daniel M. Hooper, Evangelical Lu- Tikkun Synagogue, Berkeley, CA. Springs, CA. theran, Hollywood Lutheran Church, Los An- Rev. John L Levy, Religious Science, Palm Rev. Michael G. Dresbach, Episcopal, San geles, CA. Springs, CA. Cristbal, Panama, San Jose, CA. Rev. H. James Hopkins, American Baptist, Rev. Kirsten M. Linford, Disciples of Rev. Doris L. Dunn, United Church of Lakeshore Avenue Baptist Church, Oakland, Christ/United Church of Christ, Westwood Christ, Citrus Heights, CA. CA. Hills Congregational UCC, Los Angeles, CA. Rev. Harriet B. Linville, Episcopal, Morro Rev. Dale K. Edmondson, American Bap- Rev. Ricky Hoyt, Unitarian Universalist, Bay, CA. tist, San Leandro, CA. Santa Clarita, Los Angeles, CA. Rev. Dr. Robert Lodwick, Presbyterian Br. Kenneth Ehrnman, EACA, Laguna Rev. Thomas B. Hubbard, Episcopal, Clare- Church (USA), Pasadena Presbyterian Woods, CA. mont, CA. Church, Pasadena, CA. Rev. Michael Ellard, Metropolian Commu- Rev. Joan G. Huff, Presbyterian Church Rabbi Michael Lotker, Jewish, Temple Ner nity Churches, MCC San Jose, San Jose, CA. (USA), 7th Avenue Presbyterian Church, San Rev. Brian Elster, Evangelical Lutheran Ami, Northridge, CA. Francisco, CA. (ELCA), Lutheran Church of Our Redeemer, Rev. Petra Malleis-Sternberg, United Rev. Bill Hutchinson, United Church of Oxnard, CA. Church of Christ, First Congregational Christ, Sonoma, CA. Rev. Richard K. Ernst, United Methodist, United Church of Christ, San Bernardino, Rev. Scott T. Imler, United Methodist Loomis, CA. CA. Church, Crescent Heights UMC, West Holly- Rev. Alejandro Escoto, MCCLA’s Latino Rev. Tessie Mandeville, Universal Fellow- wood, CA. Congregation, West Hollywood, CA. ship of Metropolitan Community Churches, Rev. Rebecca Irelan, United Methodist, Rev. Stefanie Etzbach-Dale, Unitarian Uni- MCC San Francisco, San Francisco, CA. Novato UMC, Novato, CA. versalist, Unitarian Universalist Fellowship Rev. Dr. Robert Mattheis, Lutheran Rev. Steve C. Islander, United Methodist, of Kern County, Bakersfield, CA, Santa (ELCA), Our Savior, Lafayette, CA, Lodi, Estero Bay UMC, Atascadero, CA. Monica, CA. CA. Rabbi Steven Jacobs, Jewish, Woodland Rev. Martha Fahncke, Christian, Temple Rev. Patricia E. McClellan, OMC, Celtic Hills, CA. City, CA. Christian, St. Columba’s Celtic Christian Rev. John Fanestil, United Methodist, La Rev. Mark J. Jaufmann, Ecumenical Church, Pinole, CA. Mesa, CA. Catholic, St. Andrew & St. Paul Ecumenical Rev. David Elwood McCracken, United Rev. Carol C. Faust, Protestant—Universal Catholic, Community, Woodland Hills, CA. Church of Christ, Sonoma, CA. Life, Oakdale, CA. Rev. Bryan Jessup, Unitarian Universalist, Rev. Gregory W. McGonigle, Unitarian Rev. Robert H. Fernandez, Presbyterian Fresno California, Fresno, CA. Universalist, Davis, CA. (USA), San Francisco, CA. Rev. Beth A. Johnson, Unitarian Univer- Rev. Steven E Meineke, UCC, Solana Rev. Lydia Ferrante-Roseberry, Unitarian salist, Palomar Unitarian Universalist Fel- Beach, CA. Universalist, Oakland, CA. lowship, Vista, CA. Rabbi Norman Mendel, Jewish, San Luis Rev. Marylee Fithian, United Methodist, Rev. Jay E. Johnson, PhD, Episcopal, Obispo, CA. Guerneville, CA. Church of the Good Shepherd, Berkeley, Rev. Barbara Meyers, Unitarian Univer- Rabbi Joel R. Fleekop, Jewish, Shir Richmond, CA. salist, Mission Peak Unitarian Universalist Hadash, Los Gatos, CA. Rev. Kevin A. Johnson, UCC and Meth- Congregation, Fremont, CA. Msr. Carlos A. Florido, OSF, Orthodox odist, Bloom in the Desert Ministries, Palm Rev. Eleanor Meyers, United Church of Catholic, San Francisco, CA. Springs, CA. Christ, Claremont, CA. Rev. John C. Forney, Episcopal, Progres- Rev. Allan B. Jones, United Methodist, Rev. Ralph Midtlyng, ELCA, All Saints Ev. sive Christians Uniting, Chino, CA. Christ Church United Methodist, Santa Lutheran, Granada Hills, CA. Rev. Ernest M. Fowler, United Church of Rosa, CA. Rev. Rosamonde Miller, Gnostic, Palo Christ, 1st Congregational Church, Long Rev. Nancy Palmer Jones, Unitarian Uni- Alto, CA. Beach, CA, Laguna Woods, CA. versalist, First Unitarian Church of San Rev. John S Millspaugh, Unitarian Univer- Rev. Jerry Fox, United Methodist, San Jose, San Jose, CA. salist, Tapestry, a Unitarian Universalist Jose, CA. Rev. Robert Angus Jones, Methodist, Oak- Congregation, Mission Viejo, CA. Rabbi Karen L. Fox, Jewish, Los Angeles, land, CA. Rev. Clair E Mitchell, United Methodist, CA. Rev. Sally J. Juarez, PCUSA, Oakland, CA. Westwood—LA, CA, Los Angeles, CA. Rev. David French, United Methodist, Rabbi Yoel Kahn, Jewish, JCCSF, San Rev. Dr. Rick Mitchell, Disciples of Christ, Temecula, CA. Francisco, CA, Concord, CA. Rev. Mary M. Gaines, Episcopal, St. Rev. Sheila M. Kane, United Methodist, Rev. Douglas J. Monroe, United Methodist, James, SF, San Francisco, CA. Riverside, CA. 1st UMC of Napa, Napa, CA. Rev. Bruce R. Gililland, Alliance of Chris- Evan Kent, Jewish, Temple Isaiah, Los An- Rev. Richard O. Moore, United Church of tian Churches, Sunnyvale, CA. geles, CA. Christ, Claremont, CA. Rev. Deborah Beach Giordano, Independent Rev. David L. Klingensmith, United Rev. Ronald S. Moore, Lutheran, San Methodist, inklings, Castro Valley, CA. Church of Christ, Fresno, CA. Leandro, CA. Rabbi Eva Goldfinger, Humanistic Juda- Rev. Patricia L. Klink, Religious Science, Rev. Amy Zucker Morgenstern, Unitarian ism, Adat Chaverim Valley Congregation for Fillmore Church of Religious Science, Fill- Universalist, Unitarian Universalist Church Humanistic Judaism, Valley Glen, CA. more, CA. of Palo Alto, Palo Alto, CA.

VerDate Sep 11 2014 13:17 May 03, 2017 Jkt 049102 PO 00000 Frm 00191 Fmt 0688 Sfmt 0634 E:\FDSYS\BOUNDRECORD\BR18JY06.DAT BR18JY06 ejoyner on DSK30MW082PROD with BOUND RECORD July 18, 2006 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE, Vol. 152, Pt. 11 14807 Rev. Keith Mozingo, Metropolitan Commu- Rev. Katherine Salinaro, Episcopal, Her- Rev. Neil G. Thomas, Metropolitan Com- nity Churches, Metropolitan Community cules, CA. munity Churches, Metropolitan Community Church Los Angeles, West Hollywood, CA. Rev. Blythe Sawyer, UCC, UCC Petaluma, Church Los Angeles, West Hollywood, CA. Rev. Paul Mullins, ELCA, Grace, San Fran- Petaluma, CA. Rev. Janelle L. Tibbetts, PCUSA, Burbank, cisco, CA. Rev. Maxine S. Schiltz, Religious Science, CA. Rabbi Leonard Z Muroff, Jewish, Temple Lancaster, CA. Rev. Harold A. Tillinghast, United Meth- Beth Zion-Sinai, Agoura Hills, CA. Rev. David F. Schlicher, UCC, College odist, Eureka, CA. Rabbi Tracy Nathan, Jewish, Congregation Community Congregational Church UCC, Rev. Dr. Lynn Ungat, Unitarian Univer- Beth Sholom, San Francisco, CA. Fresno, CA. salist, Church of the Larger Fellowship, Cas- Rev. Arlene K. Nehring, United Church of Rev. Rick Schlosser, United Methodist, tro Valley, CA. Christ, Eden United Church of Christ, Hay- Clearlake Oaks Community UMC, Sac- Rev. Valerie A. Valle, Ph.D., Episcopalian, ward, CA. ramento, CA. St. Alban’s, Brentwood, Brentwood, CA. Rev. Penny Nixon, Metropolitan Commu- Rev. Kathryn M. Schreiber, UCC, United Rev. Clyde Vaughn, United Methodist, nity Churches, San Francisco, CA. Church of Hayward, UCC, Hayward, CA. Aptos, California, Aptos, CA. Rev. Julia H. Older, Unitarian Univer- Rev. Craig Scott, Unitarian Universalist, Rev. Felix C. Villanueva, UCC, UCC La salist, UUFRC, Redwood City, CA. Berkeley, CA. Mesa, La Mesa, CA. Rev. Kathleen France O’Leary, United Rabbi Judith A. Seid, Jewish, Tri-Valley Rev. Joseph Walters, Christian Church Methodist, Arcata UMC, McKinleyville, CA. Cultural Jews-CSJO, Pleasanton, CA. (Disciples of Christ), First Christian Church, Rev. G. Kathleen Owens, Unitarian Univer- Rabbi Richard Shapiro, Jewish-Reform, Fremont, CA. salist, Pasadena, CA. Temple Sinai, Rancho Mirage, CA. Rev. Mary Walton, United Methodist Rev. Susan Parsley, Christian, Disciples of Rev. Andy Shelton, Community of Christ, Church, Long Beach, CA. Christ, San Francisco, CA. Novato, CA. Rabbi Martin Weiner, Reform Judaism, Rev. Larry Patten, United Methodist, Wes- Rabbi John M. Sherwood, Jewish, Temple Sherith Israel, San Francisco, CA. ley United Methodist, Fresno, CA. Beth Torah, Oxnard, CA. Rev. S. Kay Wellington, UCC, Benicia Com- Rev. Fhyre Phoenix, Universal Life Rev. John L. Shriver, Presbyterian, Wal- munity, Concord, CA. Church, Arcata, CA. nut Creek, CA. Rev. Faith Whitmore, United Methodist, Rev. Giovanna Piazza, Ecumenical Catho- Rev. Linda Siddall, Religious Science, San St. Mark’s UMC, Sacramento, CA. lic, Sophia Spirit, Santa Ana, CA. Mateo, CA. Rev. Bets Wienecke, Unitarian Univer- Rev. Gayle Pickrell, United Methodist, Rev. Grace H. Simons, Unitarian Univer- salist, Carpinteria, CA. Christ Church UMC, Santa Rosa, CA. salist, UU Fellowship of Stanislaus County, Rev. Ned Wight, Unitarian Universalist, La Rev. Fred Rabidoux, Unitarian Univer- Modesto, CA. Mesa, CA. salist, San Francisco, CA. Fr. Duane Lynn Sisson, Episcopalian, St. Rev. Karen L. Wiklund, Universal Life Rabbi Sanford Ragins, Jewish, Leo Baeck Giles, Oakland, CA. Church, Lompoc, CA. Temple, Los Angeles, CA. Rev. David A. Smiley, Disciples of Christ, Rev. Warren R. Wilcox, United Church of Rev. Lindi Ramsden, Unitarian Univer- San Luis Obispo, CA. Christ, Grover Beach, CA. salist, Unitarian Universalist Legislative Rev. Channing Smith, Episcopal, Trans- Rev. Lee E. Williamson, United Methodist, Ministry, CA, Sacramento, CA. figuration Episcopal Church, Belmont, CA. California-Nevada Conference, Hayward, CA. Rev. Chris Rankin-Williams, Episcopal, Fr. Richard L. Smith, Ph.D., Episcopal, St. Rev. Dr. Kimberly Willis, United-Meth- Ross, CA. John the Evangelist, San Francisco, CA. odist, Bakersfield, CA. Rev. Dr. George Regas, Episcopal, All Rev. Stanley A. Smith, Protestant, Car- Rev. Paul D. Wolkovits, Roman Catholic, Saints Church, Pasadena, CA, Pasadena, CA. mel, CA. Los Angeles, CA. Fr. John B. Reid, Eastern Orthodox, St. Rev. Dr. Ronald Sparks, United Church of Rev. Mark Zangrando, Catholic, Jesuit, Michael’s Church, West Covina, CA. Christ, Community Church, California City, West Hollywood, CA. Rev. Holly Reinhart-Marean, United Meth- CA. Rev. Oberon Zell, Church of All Worlds, odist, Sierra Madre United Methodist The Rev. Jeffrey Spencer, United Church of Cotati, CA. Church, Sierra Madre, CA. Christ, Niles Congregational UCC, Fremont, Rev. David Zollars, Presbyterian, Comm. Rev. Thomas Reinhart-Marean, United CA. Pres. Pittsburg, Pittsburg, CA. Methodist, Sierra Madre UMC, Sierra Madre, Rev. Terry C. Springstead, Mar Thoma Or- Rabbi Laurie Coskey, Reform Judaism, CA. thodox Catholic Church, Ridgecrest, CA. San Diego, CA. Rev. Dr. Mark Richardson, United Meth- Rev. Betty R. Stapleford, Unitarian Uni- Pastor Janice Adams, Presbyterian, Cal- odist, Trinity UMC, Los Osos California, Los versalist, Conejo Valley UU Fellowship, vary Presbyterian, Bayfield, CO. Osos, CA. Thousand Oaks, CA. Rev. George C. Anastos, United Church of Rabbi Dorothy Richman, Jewish, Berkeley, Rabbi David E. S. Stein, Jewish, Redondo Christ, First Plymouth Congregational CA. Beach, CA. Church, Englewood, CO. Mrs. Maria Riter Wilson, The Contem- Rabbi Stephen Julius Stein, Jewish, Rev. Richard Baer, Buddhist, The Open porary Catholic Church, San Dimas, CA. Wilshire Boulevd Temple, Los Angeles, CA. Circle, Littleton, CO. Rev. Philip H. Robb, Episcopal, St. John’s, Rabbi Gershon Steinberg-Caudill, Jewish, Rabbi Eliot Baskin, Jewish, Har Shalom, San Bernardino, Grand Terrace, CA. Ohr Shekinah Havurah, El Cerrito, CA. Greenwood Village, CO. Br. Stuart G. Robertson, Presbyterian Rabbi Ronald Stern, Jewish, Stephen S. Rev. Bonnie L. Benda, United Methodist, Church (USA), Grace Sacramento, Car- Wise Temple, Los Angeles, CA. Cameron, Denver, CO. michael, CA. Rev. Robert Stewart, Presbyterian (USA), Rev. Sharon A. Benton, Christian, Plym- Rev. Dr. Wayne Bradley Robinson, United San Francisco, CA. outh Congregational Church, Fort Collins, Church of Christ, Pioneer UCC, Antelope, The Rev. B.J. Stiles, United Methodist, CO. CA. Cal-Nev UMC Conference, San Francisco, CA. Rev. John P. Blinn, United Methodist, Rabbi Sanford Rosen, Jewish, Peninsula Rev. Jerald Stinson, United Church of Pueblo, CO. Temple Beth El, Fullerton, CA. Christ, First Congregational Church of Long Rev. Nelson Bock, Lutheran (ELCA), Our Rabbi John Rosove, Judaism, Temple Beach, CA, Long Beach, CA. Savior’s Lutheran, Denver, Denver CO. Israel of Hollywood, Los Angeles, CA. Rev. Janine C. Stock, Independent Catho- Rev. Rebecca Booher, Interfaith/Unitarian Rev. Kathleen D. Ross Bradford, Episcopal, lic, All Saints Parish, Carlsbad, CA. Universalist, UU Church of Pueblo, Pueblo, St. Alban’s, Antioch, CA. Rev. Roger D. Straw, United Church of CO. Rev. Carol S. Rudisill, Unitarian Univer- Christ, Benicia, CA. Rabbi Stephen Booth-Nadav, Reconstruc- salist, Sierra Madre, CA. Rev. Susan M. Strouse, Lutheran, First tionist/Jewish, Bnai Havurah:CJRF, Denver, Rev. Dr. Victoria Rue, Roman Catholic, United Lutheran, Berkeley, CA. CO. Watsonville, CA. Rev. Rexford J. Styzens, Unitarian Univer- Rev. Betty J. Bradford, United Methodist, Rev. Diane B. Russell, Religious Science, salist, Long Beach, CA. Denver, CO. Bonita, Chula Vista, CA. Rev. Gerald V. Summers, United Meth- Rev. Patrick Bruns, United Methodist, Rev. Susan L. Russell, Episcopal, All odist, Chico, CA. Brentwood United Methodist Church, Den- Saints Church, Pasadena, Pasadena, CA. Rev. Neil A. Tadken, Episcopal, St. James’ ver, CO. Rev. Kenneth Ryan-King, Episcopalian, Church, L.A., West Hollywood, CA. Rev. Russell V. Butler, United Methodist, San Jorge, Oakland, CA. Msr. Suzanne Tavernetti, Episcopal, King Arvada United Methodist, Arvada, CO. Rev. Franklin D. Sablan, United Meth- City, CA. odist, Wilshire UMC, Los Angeles, CA. Rev. Richard E. Taylor, Ph.D., American Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield Rabbi Joseph Baruch Sacks, Conservative Baptist, Eureka, CA. myself such time as I might consume. Judaism, Congregation Beth Shalom of Co- Rev. Wendy J. Taylor, United Church of Mr. Speaker, I also will submit into rona, Los Angeles, CA. Christ, San Mateo, CA. the RECORD at this point some groups

VerDate Sep 11 2014 13:17 May 03, 2017 Jkt 049102 PO 00000 Frm 00192 Fmt 0688 Sfmt 0634 E:\FDSYS\BOUNDRECORD\BR18JY06.DAT BR18JY06 ejoyner on DSK30MW082PROD with BOUND RECORD 14808 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE, Vol. 152, Pt. 11 July 18, 2006 who want to go on the record as being putting this important question back in the States Supreme Court, which raises the in support of this. hands of the American people rather than in stakes in the upcoming vote on House Joint the hands of a number of unelected judges, Resolution 88. COALITIONS FOR AMERICA, whose bias leads them to redefine marriage I am hopeful that the House of Representa- Washington, DC, July 17, 2006. contrary to its basic meaning and structure. tives will follow the lead of the American DEAR REPRESENTATIVE, I want you to know people and respond decisively to the threat that I am in fu11 support of your efforts and Respectfully submitted, posed by judicial activists to redefine tradi- appreciate your leadership role in helping to Dr. GARY L. CASS, tional marriage. I look forward to working defend traditional marriage by sponsoring Executive Director, with you in the future on this important House Joint Resolution 88, a constitutional Center for Reclaiming America. issue. amendment to define marriage as the union Sincerely, of one man and one woman. AMERICAN ASSOCIATION As a conservative, amending the Constitu- OF CHRISTIAN SCHOOLS, GARY L. BAUER. tion is not something I or others should take Chattanooga, TN, July 14, 2006. THE ETHICS & RELIGIOUS LIBERTY lightly, but with the continuous assault DEAR CONGRESSMAN: Multiple studies have from the left on traditional marriage ‘‘day in shown that children are healthier when they COMMISSION OF THE SOUTHERN and day out’’ it is an issue that must be ad- have both a mom and a dad married to each BAPTIST CONVENTION, dressed, I believe, by amending the Constitu- other. Risks such as physical abuse, verbal Nashville, TN, July 14, 2006. tion. abuse, and poverty decrease when children Hon. MARILYN MUSGRAVE, Sincerely, live in a family with a mother and a father. House of Representatives, Washington, DC. PAUL M. WEYRICH, To intentionally increase a child’s risk of DEAR CONGRESSWOMAN MUSGRAVE: Re- National Chairman. abuse by depriving him/her of a natural fam- ily structure is unconscionable. A federal cently Alabama, by the approval of 81 per- cent of the people, became the 20th state to POSITION STATEMENT OF FOCUS ON THE FAM- marriage amendment will protect this fam- affirm a state constitutional amendment on ILY ON THE MARRIAGE PROTECTION AMEND- ily structure, and thereby protect the insti- marriage. A total of 45 states have now MENT, H.J. RES. 88 tution that is foundational to our strong so- passed amendments or laws prohibiting Marriage is a sacred, legal, and social ciety. same-sex marriage. Clearly, Americans do union ordained by God to be a lifelong exclu- Despite the overwhelming support of not want to see this most basic institution sive relationship between one man and one Americans for the protection of marriage, a open to any arrangement other than that of woman. Focus on the Family holds this in- few judges are taking liberties to change the one man and one woman. stitution in the highest esteem, and strongly definition of marriage through the courts. As Unfortunately, recent court decisions have opposes any legal sanction of marriage coun- President Bush said, ‘‘After more than two demonstrated that state constitutional terfeits, such as the legalization of same-sex centuries of American Jurisprudence, and amendments can be struck down at the whim ‘‘marriage.’’ History, nature, social science, millennia of human experience, a few judges of an overreaching judge. Last year, a federal anthropology, religion, and theology all coa- and local authorities are presuming to judge struck down Nebraska’s state marriage lesce in vigorous support of traditional mar- change the most fundamental institution of amendment—despite its passage by over 70 riage as it has always been understood: a civilization.’’ The Founders did not intend percent of voters in 2000—and more recently, lifelong union of male and female for the for the Judiciary to overrule the will of the a Georgia court deemed the state’s marriage purpose of creating stable families. people by judicial fiat, especially when that amendment unconstitutional—in the wake of The Marriage Protection Amendment is will extends to preserving a sacred and es- 76 percent of voters favoring the amendment necessary to protect the institution of mar- sential institution of our society. in 2004. Fortunately, the Georgia ruling has riage. To date, three courts have overturned The American Association of Christian been overturned, but that case still serves as state marriage protection amendments and Schools urges you to join your colleagues in a reminder that an amendment to the U.S. in one state—Massachusetts—judicial fiat supporting and voting for a Federal Con- Constitution is the only sure means to safe- has forced the state to issue same-sex ‘‘mar- stitutional Amendment that protects mar- guard marriage from radical judges. riage’’ licenses. Currently, ten states face riage. Respectfully, challenges to their marriage protection laws. Yours for the children, RICHARD D. LAND, Just one such lawsuit needs to reach the Su- KEITH WIEBE, President. preme Court before marriage is redefined for President. all Americans. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the A plethora of federal and state law includ- ELDON AMERICAN VALUES, gentleman from Florida (Mr. W ). ing tax law, employment law, social secu- Arlington, VA. Mr. WELDON of Florida. Mr. Speak- rity, wills and estates, depend on a DEAR REPRESENTATIVE MUSGRAVE: Thank er, I rise in strong support of the mar- foundational definition of marriage for prop- you for your leadership in defense of tradi- riage protection amendment, and I er application. Without a national definition tional marriage and for sponsoring House want to thank Congresswoman of marriage upheld in the Constitution, con- Joint Resolution 88, a constitutional amend- MUSGRAVE for her bravery and leader- sistent administration of law will soon be ment to define marriage as the union of one impossible. ship on this critical issue. man and one woman. While conservatives be- Due to the foundational importance of Marriage is an honored institution in lieve amending the Constitution should marriage in American society it must be de- this country, and voters have consist- fined nationally. The only question is, Who never be taken lightly, the Constitution’s ently voiced their support for pro- framers created an amendment process for a will define marriage? Will it be tyrannical tecting traditional marriage. Many judges acting through the courts to write a reason. Sometimes we must address issues that affect us all, and marriage is just such State legislatures have already taken radical new definition of marriage or the action and laws have been passed to es- American people, acting through their elect- an issue. ed legislators to pass a Marriage Protection I was encouraged to learn recently that tablish marriage as the union of one Amendment? We believe the people should New York’s highest court upheld the legisla- man and one woman. decide. ture’s right to pass laws protecting mar- Unfortunately, we have seen activist Focus on the Family calls on all Members riage, based largely on ‘‘. . . the undisputed courts taking the legislative power of Congress to cosponsor and vote in support assumption that marriage is important to away from elected officials and revers- of the Marriage Protection Amendment, H.J. the welfare of children.’’ As the court stated, ing important laws and, in particular, Res. 88. ‘‘. . . The Legislature could rationally be- lieve that it is better, other things being marriage protections. Recent court de- cisions are threatening traditional CENTER FOR RECLAIMING equal, for children to grow up with both a AMERICA FOR CHRIST, mother and a father. Intuition and experi- marriage, and I might add that there Fort Lauderdale, FL, July 14, 2006. ence suggest that a child benefits from hav- are groups in this country who have Hon. MARILYN MUSGRAVE, ing before his or her eyes, every day, living made that their agenda. They want to House of Representatives, models of what both a man and woman are redefine the institution of marriage in Washington, DC. like.’’ the United States, and they do not DEAR MRS. MUSGRAVE: We firmly believe Today, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals want to do it through the political re-instated Nebraska’s popularly-enacted that marriage is more than a private emo- process, but they want to do it through tional relationship. It is for the common marriage protection amendment based on good of society that marriage remains exclu- the recognition that marriage is ‘‘rationally the courts; and that is why we are here sively the union of a man and a woman. related to legitimate state interests.’’ While today having this debate. We agree that the Constitutional amend- this decision is good news, it also means that Our goal is to preserve the most basic ment process is a fair and democratic way of this case might be headed to the United fundamental unit of our society, of

VerDate Sep 11 2014 13:17 May 03, 2017 Jkt 049102 PO 00000 Frm 00193 Fmt 0688 Sfmt 0634 E:\FDSYS\BOUNDRECORD\BR18JY06.DAT BR18JY06 ejoyner on DSK30MW082PROD with BOUND RECORD July 18, 2006 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE, Vol. 152, Pt. 11 14809 every society on the planet, the family. We are told always by the other side that I believe are part of what is pre- It has been consistently proven that of the aisle that we should protect the served in this amendment and why I children benefit the most from being rights of States, but as I said a few mo- believe we need to support this, if any- raised in a home with a father and a ments ago, family law, the marriage thing, for the sake of those children mother present. Some people argue law, divorce law, visitation law, child who need this kind of support in their that traditional marriages and families custody law have always been a matter lifetime. are failing anyway and they are not for the States. Why are we preempting b 1330 worth protecting. I say if children are those State laws? benefiting from traditional families, We are told we are preempting The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gen- tlewoman from Colorado is recognized we always must fight. It is always unelected judges, that that amendment for 11⁄2 minutes. worth protecting. is an amendment to the Constitution of Mrs. MUSGRAVE. Mr. Speaker, I This is why I stand today, urging my the United States, that it would pre- just want to say to Mr. NADLER, your colleagues to support this important empt not just judges elected or ap- statements about hospital visits and amendment. This issue will not go pointed. It would preempt the State those things, that was a misstatement. away, and that is about protecting the legislative action; it would preempt ac- That is not what this amendment does. clergy so that they can marry men and tion by the people in a referendum. There are State legislatures that have women and not be forced by courts to That is not democratic, with a small D. the authority to handle all of the bene- do something other than what they This, Mr. Speaker, is a political fits that you have talked about, and want to do. stunt. It is a political stunt at the ex- that is what the amendment clearly Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield pense of a minority, of an unpopular states. myself the balance of my time. minority. That is all it is. We know it I would just like to say, we can look Mr. Speaker, there have been a num- is not going to pass. We know the Sen- at places like the Netherlands, where ber of points made in this debate today ate already rejected it. So this is just a since 1997 they have had registered with doubtful validity. We are told we political stunt. partnership, and gay marriage since should pass this amendment to protect I appeal to my colleagues, vote ‘‘no’’ 2001. In effect, that is probably the best marriage. But against what threat? If on this amendment. Leave family law place to look at what gay marriage has Henry and Steve want to get married, where it always has been, with the done. The out-of-wedlock births have maybe that is a good idea, maybe it is State, and do not desecrate our Con- escalated. The divorce rate is esca- a bad idea, but it does not threaten the stitution, do not desecrate our most sa- lating. In fact, many people in Scan- marriage of anyone else, of any man or cred document, our civil religion, by dinavia don’t think that marriage is woman who wants to get married. It inserting it into an amendment to deny even relevant today. does not affect them in any way. Di- a basic right to an unpopular group I would say today if marriage can vorce is a threat. Some of our other just because we want to make a polit- mean anything, eventually marriage threats are threats, but gay marriage ical point at the expense of that un- will mean nothing. is not a threat to a straight marriage. popular group in an election year. Within the institution of marriage, We are told we have to protect chil- Make no mistake, that is what this society offers special support and en- dren, but children are already in the amendment is. That is all it is. It does couragement to the men and women custody of straight people, of gay peo- not protect marriage. It does not pro- who together make children. Because ple, of gay couples, of individuals. If we tect children. It just makes a political marriage is deeply implicated in the want to protect children, we should point at the expense of an unpopular interest of children, it is obviously a give a legal basis to the partnership of group, and we should not desecrate our matter of public concern. Children de- the two people who have custody of Constitution by so doing. pend on society to create institutions them. Now, we are not saying that it Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance to keep them from chaos. That is why might not be preferable to have a tradi- of my time. we have the obligation to give special tional custody arrangement, maybe it Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise support and encouragement to an insti- is, but this does not affect that in any to close and I just want to split the tution that is necessary to the well- way. time between Mr. MURPHY and Mrs. being of children. Nor do we say because we want to MUSGRAVE. I urge my colleagues to support pub- protect children that we prohibit elder- I yield 1 minute to the gentleman lic policy that strengthens marriage ly couples from getting married or from Pennsylvania (Mr. MURPHY). and vote in favor of this amendment. sterile couples from getting married Mr. MURPHY. I thank the Speaker Marriage is for Children: because procreation is the purpose of and the Members on this as I speak in 1a) In setting up the institution of marriage, marriage. So this is a red herring. favor of this amendment. society offers special support and encourage- We had a whole religious discussion. As a person who has spent my career ment to the men and women who together The fact is churches can define mar- as a child psychologist and have dealt make children. Because marriage is deeply riage in their point of view, any way with many children who have struggled implicated in the interests of children, it is a they want. We are not telling a church with many problems in families, I have matter of public concern. Children are help- you must consider this couple married seen families ripped apart by so many less. They depend upon adults. Over and from a religious point of view. We are things that sometimes law has tried to above their parents, children depend upon so- not telling the church how to define deal with. Instead, I think over the ciety to create institutions that keep them from the sacrament. We are talking about years we have cut the strength of mar- chaos. Children cannot articulate their needs. civil marriage, and churches can do riage and relationships by the law and Children cannot vote. Yet children are society. what they want and regard as married weakened the institution. We have They are us, and they are our future. That is whom they want, but we are talking tried to deal with relationships with why society has the right to give special sup- about what the government recognizes. no-fault divorce, with child custody, port and encouragement to an institution that We are also told that this is to pro- with so many other avenues; and it has is necessary to the well being of children— tect marriage, but the amendment not helped. even if that means special benefits for some, talks about not only marriage by, but What I do say is, yes, children may and not for others. Single people are denied the incidents thereof, to clearly pro- be resilient and they have been able to the benefits of married couples, for example. hibit specific rights that a State may deal with all sorts of difficulties they But this is permitted because married parent- choose to give to a gay couple, the have faced, but the bottom line is this: hood is essential to society. The law has al- right of inheritance, a right of visita- I believe very strongly children need a ways permitted the state to give special sup- tion when one is sick in the hospital. mother and a father in the home. They port to critical institutions, if those institutions Why should we tell the States they need strong relationships with men and serve a compelling interest of society. Mar- cannot do that at their wisdom? women both, and they are the ones riage is exactly such an institution. Marriage is

VerDate Sep 11 2014 13:17 May 03, 2017 Jkt 049102 PO 00000 Frm 00194 Fmt 0688 Sfmt 9920 E:\FDSYS\BOUNDRECORD\BR18JY06.DAT BR18JY06 ejoyner on DSK30MW082PROD with BOUND RECORD 14810 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE, Vol. 152, Pt. 11 July 18, 2006 designed to maximize the chances that each wedlock birthrates in Northern Europe. Yet That level of family instability is very bad for child will be provided with a mother and a fa- out-of-wedlock birthrates have been rising at children. So the European experience actually ther, in a stable family setting, during the an unusually rapid rate in the Netherlands proves that it’s better when parents get mar- years when children are too young to fend for ever since registered partnerships, and then ried. themselves. To redefine marriage in such a formal gay marriage, were established. (b) Some folks say that marriage was in way as to remove its essential connection to In the last decade, no other West European trouble in Scandinavia even before same-sex parenthood is to take away its very purpose. country has seen its out-of-wedlock birthrate partnerships came along. Well, that’s true, al- (1b) Only a man and a woman have the rise as fast as Holland’s. And there were no though in most parts of Scandinavia marriage power between them to create children. Mar- other major legal or social changes during the continued to decline after same-sex partner- riage as an institution helps to turn the love of last decade that might explain Holland’s rising ships came along. We all know that marriage a man and a woman into an instrument for the out-of-wedlock birthrate in some other way. So has been in trouble for some time in America, nurture and protection of children. If we rede- it looks very likely that registered partnerships and in many other countries, for a wide variety fine fathers, mothers, and parenthood out of and same-sex marriage have helped to hasten of reasons. But if you want to see a clear case marriage, then this precious institution will be the unusually rapid decline of marriage in the where marriage was relatively strong, and only lost. Netherlands. went into serious decline after the introduction The European Experience With Gay Mar- Gay marriage has helped send a message of same-sex partnerships, just look at Holland. riage: to parents in Scandinavia and Holland that (See 1a in the previous section for more on Can it be a coincidence that Scandinavia, being married doesn’t have much of anything Holland.) the region with the highest out-of-wedlock to do with being a parent. Nowadays, a lot of (c) Some folks claim that the Dutch example birthrates in the world, was the very first place parents in Scandinavia and Holland put off isn’t a problem because out-of-wedlock birth- to recognize same-sex unions? Marriage was getting married until after they’ve had a child rates have been rising almost as rapidly in already in serious decline in Sweden and Nor- or two, if they don’t break up first—which Eastern Europe as in Holland. But the decline way when same-sex partnerships arrived, and many do. Increasingly, parents in these coun- of marriage in Eastern Europe is rooted in the since that time marital decline in those coun- tries don’t get married at all anymore. If mar- economic chaos that followed the collapse of tries has advanced still further. But the clear- riage is disappearing in the parts of the world communism. The amazing thing is that a pros- est example of the effect of same-sex mar- that have had something like gay marriage perous Western European country like The riage is the Netherlands, where they have had longer than anywhere else, I don’t want to Netherlands is experiencing the same sort of registered partnerships since 1997 and full take a chance on gay marriage here. marital decline we’re seeing in countries re- gay marriage since 2001. In the Netherlands, 1b) Marriage is not meant solely, or even covering from the collapse of their entire social out-of-wedlock birthrates were low until the ar- mainly, for husbands and wives. Marriage ex- system. rival of registered partnerships and gay mar- ists as a public institution because children (d) Some folks say that out-of-wedlock birth- riage. But since the advent of registered part- need mothers and fathers. Once marriage is rates in Sweden haven’t gone up all that much nerships and same-sex marriage, the out-of- treated as a mere celebration of the love of since registered partnerships came along in wedlock birthrate has risen faster and longer two adults, there is no reason for it to nec- 1994. But they’re not counting from 1987, in the Netherlands than in any other west Eu- essarily happen before children are born in- when Sweden introduced the very first same- ropean country. stead of after. And if marriage could just as sex partnerships in the world. Just because (1a) What is marriage? Marriage is society’s well happen after children are born, it doesn’t these first same-sex partnerships didn’t in- way of supporting the men and women who really need to happen at all. European parents clude all the rights of marriage doesn’t mean together make children. Children can’t fend for have increasingly stopped marrying because that they weren’t a huge legal and symbolic themselves. That’s why the public has always they no longer think of marriage as an institu- step. Amazingly, in 1987, at the very same taken an interest in marriage. By supporting tion meant to bind children to mothers and fa- time that Sweden introduced the first same- the institution of marriage, the state encour- thers. Gay marriage helps Europeans to see it sex partnerships in the world, Sweden also ages the rearing of children under the secure that way, making them consider marriage granted just about all the rights of marriage to care of a mother and father. But what would nothing more than the expression of mutual unmarried heterosexual couples. So from happen if we said marriage doesn’t have any- affection between two adults. But this view 1987 on, Sweden’s parliament sent out a pow- thing to do with mothers, fathers, and chil- translates into marrying long after children are erful message that married parenthood isn’t dren? What would happen if we said marriage born—if parents don’t break up first. It means important. Same-sex partnerships were part of is really just about a couple of adults who love rising rates of family dissolution. That’s what’s that message from the start. each other—whether they’re men and women happening in Europe. Do we want it to happen (e) Some folks say that marriage in Den- or not? in America? That the family is the bedrock of mark hasn’t suffered since they adopted Well, just look at Scandinavia and Holland. society is more than just a cliche. In Scan- same-sex partnerships in 1989. Well, it’s true Over in Scandinavia they’ve had various forms dinavia, where they’ve had de facto gay mar- that the Danish out-of-wedlock birthrate hasn’t of same-sex partnership nearly two decades. riage for some time, marriage is dying, and a risen since they adopted same-sex partner- And they’ve had gay marriage in Holland for huge welfare state has taken over for parents. ships, like it has in Sweden, Norway, and Hol- several years. But marriage in Scandinavia is If the family goes here in America, then we land. But that’s a bit misleading. Actually, the dying, and marriage in Holland is growing pro- will either have the social chaos of more crime rate of unmarried parenthood has increased gressively weaker every year. A majority of and fatherless kids, or we will have to vastly among young people in Denmark, who are children in Sweden and Norway are now born expand our welfare state. So this issue touch- adopting the same practice of cohabiting par- out-of-wedlock. In some parts of Norway, as es on the deepest problems of governance. enthood favored in other Scandinavian coun- many as eighty percent of first-born children America’s system of limited government works tries. But the increased rate of unmarried par- and two-thirds of subsequent children are now because the family does what the state does enthood among young Danes has been tem- born out-of-wedlock. True, much of that de- not. Weaken the family, and government is porarily offset by marriages among older cline took place even before same-sex part- bound to expand to take its place. That is ex- Danes. nerships came into effect. But in both Sweden actly what’s happened in Scandinavia. You see, there are virtually no housewives and Norway, marriage continued to decline fol- Responding to Critics of the Scandinavia/ left in Denmark. The need to support the huge lowing the introduction of same-sex partner- Holland argument: Danish welfare state forces nearly all Danish ships. Can it be a coincidence that the region (1) I know some folks have said that same- women to work. And it was only in the late of the world where marriage has traditionally sex partnerships haven’t had any bad effects 1980’s and 1990’s that Denmark created a pa- been weakest was the first place to experi- on marriage in Europe, but I don’t find their ar- rental leave policy and other changes that al- ment with something like same-sex marriage? guments convincing. lowed large numbers of women to take time The negative effects of gay marriage on (a) For one thing, some of these folks actu- off of work to become mothers. That policy marriage are even clearer in the Netherlands. ally deny that Europe’s high out-of-wedlock change unleashed huge pent-up demand Prior to the introduction of registered partner- birthrates are a problem at all. That’s just not among Danish women to have children, and ships and later gay marriage, Holland was true. In Europe, cohabiting parents break up at that led to a temporary increase in the mar- known for having one of the lowest out-of- two-to-three times the rate of married parents. riage rate among older Danes. But all that

VerDate Sep 11 2014 13:17 May 03, 2017 Jkt 049102 PO 00000 Frm 00195 Fmt 0688 Sfmt 9920 E:\FDSYS\BOUNDRECORD\BR18JY06.DAT BR18JY06 ejoyner on DSK30MW082PROD with BOUND RECORD July 18, 2006 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE, Vol. 152, Pt. 11 14811 time, younger Danes have been taking up the amists as heroes. But it’s happened. And next tant as that is. The very ability of religiously af- practice of unmarried parenthood that is al- week the BRAVO Channel is going to run a filiated organizations to exist and operate is ready so popular in the rest of Scandinavia. sympathetic documentary about a relationship under threat. The Slippery Slope to Polygamy, Polyamory between a woman and two bisexual men. It’s Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to op- (Group Marriage) and Parental Cohabitation: called ‘‘Three of Hearts,’’ and it’s already pose the Federal Marriage Amendment, H.J. (1) Once we say that same-sex couples can played in movie theaters across the country. Res. 88. marry, it’s going to be impossible to deny that The truth is, this is only the beginning. Ad- Just a few yards down the hall from where right to polygamists and believers in group vocates for multi-partner unions are out there, we are debating this discriminatory constitu- marriage. After all, gay marriage is being ad- but many of them are waiting for same-sex tional amendment today, in the Rotunda of vocated on grounds of relationship equality. marriage to be legalized before they make this great Capitol, stands a bust of Dr. Martin So if all relationships are equal, why is group their move to gain public acceptance. News- Luther King, Jr. Every time I walk through the marriage forbidden? And don’t think it can’t week has already said that ‘‘polygamy activists Rotunda, I remember Dr. King’s struggle and happen here. We already know that there are are emerging in the wake of the gay marriage what his life meant for me and for all Ameri- thousands of practicing polygamists in some movement.’’ Well, just wait till gay marriage is cans. For too long, the inalienable constitu- Western states. But did you also know that actually legalized. If that happens, you can bet tional rights of all Americans were denied to there are groups of ‘‘polyamorists’’ all over the we’ll see plenty more movies and television many of our neighbors. As the leader of the country? Just go to the Internet and run a shows along the lines of ‘‘Big Love’’ and civil rights movement, Dr. King helped secure google search on the word ‘‘polyamory.’’ The ‘‘Three of Hearts.’’ The people on the so- equal rights for all Americans regardless of the polyamorists have already had one court case called ‘‘cutting edge’’ of culture in Europe and color of their skin. trying to gain recognition for a marriage of a Canada have already made it clear that multi- One of the things that Dr. King fought woman and two men. They’re just waiting for partner unions are their next crusade, and it’s against were the anti-miscegenation laws that gay marriage to pass to begin agitating for le- happening in America even as we speak. The existed at some point in 49 states. These laws galized group marriage. And after granting gay only way to put a stop to it is to define mar- prohibited interracial marriage and they were marriage on equal protection grounds, how is riage as the union of a man and a woman. still in effect in sixteen states when the Su- a court going to deny them? There are plenty The Threat to Religious Freedom: preme Court ruled them unconstitutional in of polyamorists out there, but the problem (1) It’s becoming increasingly apparent that 1967 because they denied the liberty of Amer- goes further than that. We now have an advo- gay marriage poses a significant threat to reli- ican citizens. Legal bans on interracial mar- cacy group called the ‘‘Alternatives to Mar- gious liberty. Scholars on both the left and riage were defended with all the kinds of argu- riage Project’’ which supports polyamory and right agree that same-sex marriage has raised ments used by proponents of bans on same other innovations like parental cohabitation. the specter of a massive and protracted battle sex marriage: They would say that interracial The Alternatives to Marriage Project is fre- over religious freedom. In states that adopt marriages are contrary to the laws of God or quently quoted in the mainstream media. And same-sex marriage, religious liberty is clearly contrary to centuries of social tradition or believe it or not, the most powerful faction of going to lose. Gay marriage proponents argue harmful to the institution of marriage or harm- ful to children. Would any Member of this body family law scholars in our law schools favors that sexual orientation is like race, and that now defend those bans? Those bans were legal recognition of both polyamory and paren- opponents of same-sex marriage are therefore discriminatory and took away the rights of tal cohabitation. There are even law review ar- like bigots who oppose interracial marriage. American citizens—in short they were what ticles out now advocating both. And the influ- Once same-sex marriage becomes law, that the Constitution was designed to prohibit. No ential American Law Institute has even come understanding is likely to be controlling. Legal one longs for anti-miscegenation laws today. out with proposals which would grant nearly same-sex marriage will be taken by courts as We as a nation have learned from our mis- equal legal recognition to cohabiting and mar- proof that a ‘‘public policy’’ in support of same- takes. ried parents. If we allow marriage to be radi- sex marriage exists. Or have we? cally redefined now, we will not be able to So in states with same-sex marriage, reli- We remember Dr. King for what he stood stop these further changes. giously affiliated schools, adoption agencies, for, not just for who he was. As he said, ‘‘man (2) Now I know that some folks scoff at the psychological clinics, social workers, marital is man because he is free to operate within claim that same-sex marriage could lead to counselors, etc. will be forced to choose be- the framework of his destiny. He is free to de- polygamy. But just look at what’s happened tween going out of business and violating their liberate, to make decisions, and to choose be- around the world in the past year or so. In own deeply held beliefs. If a religious social tween alternatives. He is distinguished from Sweden, which passed the first same-sex service agency refuses to offer counseling de- animals by his freedom to do evil or to do partnership plan in the world, we’ve had a se- signed to preserve the marriage of a same- good and to walk the high road of beauty or rious proposals floated by parties on the left to sex couple, it could lose its tax-exempt status. tread the low road of ugly degeneracy.’’ abolish marriage and legalize multi-partner Religious schools would either have to tolerate Today, I ask, will we do evil or will we do unions. In the Netherlands, the first country in conduct they believed to be sinful, or face a good? Will we keep the spirit of the Founding the world to have full and formal same-sex cut-off of federal funds. It’s already happening, Fathers alive? Will we respect and honor the marriage, a man and two bisexual women as we’ve seen with the recent withdrawal of foundations of our constitutional government signed a triple cohabitation contract. When a Boston’s Catholic Charities from the adoption or will we chart a new course and, in the conservative political party asked the Dutch business. name of protecting an institution that is under government to withdraw recognition from that Free speech could also be under threat, as no threat, shred the very premise of our Con- contract, the government refused. In fact, the sexual-harassment-in-the-workplace principles stitution. Dutch Justice Minister said it was actually a are used by nervous corporate lawyers to Our Constitution is the source of our free- good thing that the law was beginning to pro- draw speech prohibitions on the marriage dom in this great country. For almost 220 vide support for multi-partner relationships. In issue. Fear of litigation will breed self-censor- years, the Constitution—mankind’s greatest in- Canada, two out of four reports commissioned ship. One expert predicts ‘‘a concerted effort vention—has allowed our diverse people to by the last government recommended the de- to take same-sex marriage from a negative live together, to balance our various interests, criminalization and regulation of polygamy. right to be free of state interference to a posi- and to thrive. It has provided each citizen with True, the revelation of those reports helped tive entitlement to assistance by others.’’ broad, basic rights. The inherent wisdom of Canada’s Conservative Party win the last elec- Some folks say the answer to this problem the Constitution is that it doesn’t espouse a tion. But the fact remains that many of Can- is special exemptions from the law for reli- single viewpoint or ideology. Rather it protects ada’s legal elites want to see the abolition of gious conscience. But conscience exemptions all individuals as equal under the law. traditional marriage and official recognition for would be very difficult to enact. And in Europe, In more than 200 years, the Constitution multi-partner unions. which has tried this in places, conscience ex- has been amended on only 27 occasions. And of course, in America we’ve got ‘‘Big emptions are breaking down and failing to pro- With the exception of Prohibition—which was Love,’’ a popular television show on HBO vide protection for the traditionally religious. later repealed—these amendments have af- about polygamy. Even a year ago, no-one The lesson in all this is clear. There’s a lot firmed and expanded individual freedoms and would have believed it if someone had said more at stake in the battle over same-sex rights. Yet, this proposed amendment threat- we’d soon have a television show with polyg- marriage than the marriage issue itself, impor- ens to lead us in a dangerous new direction.

VerDate Sep 11 2014 13:17 May 03, 2017 Jkt 049102 PO 00000 Frm 00196 Fmt 0688 Sfmt 9920 E:\FDSYS\BOUNDRECORD\BR18JY06.DAT BR18JY06 ejoyner on DSK30MW082PROD with BOUND RECORD 14812 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE, Vol. 152, Pt. 11 July 18, 2006 This amendment would restrict freedoms, and tional amendments to voters in 2006 or 2008. My perception of gay people evolved further codify discrimination into our guiding charter. The 16 states that approved constitutional during my first campaign for Congress, when We must think deeply about the ramifica- amendments since 2004 did so by an average I worked with a magnificent young man named tions of allowing such an amendment to be 72 percent voter majority. Carl Brown. ratified. It would create a group of second- Even voters in Massachusetts—the first He became my friend and he gave me an- class citizens who lack equal rights due to the state to have its supreme court unilaterally de- other gay face to know. Carl has since passed private, personal choices they and their loved clare same-sex marriage as constitutional— away, but I remember him as a person of ex- one have made. It would also transfer to the may have the opportunity to uphold marriage. ceptional dignity and grace. federal government the right to recognize mar- The state’s high court ruled last week that leg- My teacher, my wife’s best friend and Carl riages, a power that had previously been re- islative efforts to put a same-sex marriage ban helped me understand their lives and I think tained by the States. on the 2008 ballot could move forward. Re- made me a better person in the process. This amendment is not only discriminatory cent court rulings in New York, Tennessee The Constitution of the United Staets— and inhumane, it is also illogical. How does and Georgia have also upheld marriage rights. which established our government, grants us this actually protect marriage? What is it ex- The Federal Marriage Protection Amend- free speech and gives all citizens the right to actly about same sex marriage that is putting ment under consideration today would prohibit vote—should not be dishonored by this effort heterosexual marriage at risk? Do the pro- any governmental entity—whether in the legis- to write indiscrimination. ponents of the ban on same sex marriages lative, executive or judicial branch at all levels I am sensitive to some of my colleague’s want to annul all childless marriages or require of government—from altering the definition of concerns about potential biblical and social im- all newlyweds to promise to have children? Do marriage. It does not discriminate against ho- plications of legalizing same-size marriage, but the proponents of this ban think for a moment mosexuals; it upholds and recognizes the im- I oppose this proposed amendment because I that the marriage of loving people of the same portance of marriage between a man and a believe the Constitution is not the proper in- sex are the case of America’s high divorce woman for the well-being of children and soci- strument to set—or reject—such policy. That rate among heterosexuals. It seems to me that ety at large. debate should happened in our state legisla- other factors than this are responsible for the Mr. Speaker, the American people want the tures. high divorce rate. Marriage Protection Amendment to be ap- Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, over I certainly agree that the institution of mar- proved. Their will is clearly reflected through the years, this Nation has worked hard to take riage and a cohesive family unit are vital to the overwhelming majorities voting for mar- discrimination out of the Constitution, and the health of our communities and the success riage protection initiatives in the states. We today, the House is voting to put it back in. of our society. Unfortunately, the amendment have a responsibility to children and families I can recall just a few short years ago that we are debating today does nothing to nationwide to send a clear message today that there were laws inscribed in some State con- strengthen the bonds of matrimony, nor does marriage will be upheld and protected. We stitutions saying that blacks and whites could it strengthen families or enhance our commu- also have a sacred duty to future generations not marry. We changed that. nities. In fact, it divides our communities, and to preserve marriage as the fundamental Today, we look back on those days, and we shows contempt to a minority population. building block of society. laugh. There will come a time when genera- I urge my colleagues to join me in sup- Throughout history, we have only moved for- tions yet unborn will look back on this Con- porting H.J. Res. 88 today. gress, look back on this debate, and laugh at ward when our society has come together to Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Speaker, today we are de- us. This is not a good day in America. This is build a more perfect union, not intentionally di- bating a Constitutional amendment drafted not a sad day in the House of the people. vide American against American. to protect my marriage or my family—I see no No one should be denied the opportunity to This is unbelievable. It is unreal. I thought reasonable way to argue it would—but rather choose his or her life partner. It is a basic as a Nation and as a people we had moved to explicitly deny a portion of our society the human right. It is a deeply personal decision. so far down the road toward one family, one right to marry and the benefits that accompany Attacking gay couples who want to share life- House, one America. To pass this legislation that kind of partnership. long obligations and responsibilities under- I do not advocate the legalization of gay would be a step backward. mines the spirit of community that this amend- marriage, but our Constitution is simply not the The institution of marriage is not begging ment purports to strengthen. proper place to set this kind of social policy. this Congress for protection. No one is running In 50 years will we build a statue to honor I believed back in 1996, when I voted for through the halls of Congress. No one is run- the great advances for our society that this the Defense of Marriage Act, and I still believe ning around this building saying protect us. amendment provided, as we do for the life of today, the decision about whether to recognize Whose marriage is threatened? Whose mar- Dr. King? No. In the long shadow of history, gay marriage should be left to the states. riage is in danger if two people, in the privacy this amendment and the philosophy behind it I can’t help but wonder . . . Why are we of their own hearts, decide they want to be will be remembered alongside anti-miscegena- doing this? What are we so afraid of? committed to each other? Whose marriage is tion laws as offending the spirit of America Gay men and women pass through our lives threatened? Whose marriage is in danger if and our founding principles. every day. There are wonderful teachers and we decide to recognize the dignity, the worth I hope that my colleagues will recognize the leaders and role models who happen to be and humanity of all human beings? tremendous cost this amendment will have for gay and sometimes we don’t even know The Constitution is a sacred document. It our freedoms and I respectfully urge them to they’re gay. defines who we are as a nation and as a peo- oppose it. I wouldn’t be a Member of Congress today ple. Over the years, we have tried to make it Mr. TERRY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support if it weren’t for an extraordinary teacher I had more and more inclusive. We cannot turn of H.J. Res. 88, the Marriage Protection in High School 40 years ago. I learned years back. We do not want to go back. We want to Amendment. later he was gay and that he had commuted go forward. Today it is gay marriage; tomor- Last Friday, the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals from Connecticut to Washington, DC, every row it will be something else. upheld the Nebraska constitutional amend- weekend in part to protect his privacy and his Forget about the politics; vote your con- ment protecting marriage between one man job. science. Vote with your heart, vote with your and one woman, and affirming the legal pro- When I went to college, my understanding soul, vote with your gut. Do what is right and tections and benefits reserved to this funda- of gay people was impacted again by my defeat this amendment. mental union. The amendment was approved wife’s best friend. One day, she told us she Mr. STARK. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong by an overwhelming 70 percent majority in too had found the love of her life. We were opposition to House Joint Resolution 88, the 2000. eager to meet the boyfriend she was so madly so-called Marriage Protection Amendment, Nationwide, 45 states have defined mar- in love with, but we soon learned her love was which proposes an amendment to the U.S. riage as the union of one man and one not a he, but a she. Constitution to ban same-sex couples from woman or expressly prohibited same-sex mar- Once we got over our surprise and our getting married or receiving any of the rights riage. Twenty states approved constitutional ways of thinking about relationships, we were of marriage. amendments upholding marriage; six states able to sincerely rejoice in the joy they brought The right-wing political machine is churning will vote on an amendment in November; and each other because we knew what a dear and out divisive legislation at a record pace as we eight states are considering sending constitu- good person our friend is. get close to the election, but this is a particular

VerDate Sep 11 2014 13:17 May 03, 2017 Jkt 049102 PO 00000 Frm 00197 Fmt 0688 Sfmt 9920 E:\FDSYS\BOUNDRECORD\BR18JY06.DAT BR18JY06 ejoyner on DSK30MW082PROD with BOUND RECORD July 18, 2006 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE, Vol. 152, Pt. 11 14813 low point. We can all have a good laugh at the amending the Constitution. We have heard each State the discretion to determine whether pandering Republican majority when they nothing from our concerned citizens and from to recognize a same-sex marriage license claim that banning flag burning will make us our Constitutional scholars. issued by another State. I strongly support more patriotic or that school prayer will pre- The issue before us today is not whether DOMA because it protects the right of States vent teenage pregnancy, but this proposal you are for or against gay marriage. It is to self-determination. would, for the first time ever, target a specific whether or not we should Federalize marriage On July 22, 2004, I supported the Protection group of Americans in our most sacred docu- and take away the right of the States to define of Marriage Act which would have permitted ment, and permanently ban them from having marriage. States to reject same-sex marriages from equal rights under the law. Now Mr. Speaker, I supported the Defense other States without interference by Federal The proposed amendment not only bans of Marriage Act and continue to do so. At this courts. marriage, but any of the ‘‘legal incidents there- point, the Defense of Marriage Act remains Since the passage of DOMA, 45 states, of,’’ meaning that the proponents think our the law of the land. It works. Nothing yet such as Florida, have banned gay marriage by founding document should keep gay and les- threatens this law. Nothing more needs to be statute or in their Constitutions, and numerous bian couples from filing a joint tax return, in- done on this matter. court decisions have upheld these laws. heriting property, or visiting their partner in the Those proposing this amendment rely on Where judicial activism has threatened tradi- hospital. I vehemently oppose this discrimina- hypothetical dangers to try and push through tional marriage, the people have acted to pro- tion. a dramatic, but mischievous change to our tect it, such as in the State of Massachusetts, Oh, and I forgot to mention that this amend- Constitution. I am opposed to taking away the where a ballot initiative is being circulated to ment has already failed once in the House right of each State to have its citizenry decide overturn a court ruling allowing for same-sex and twice in the Senate, so today’s vote is all how to define marriage. It seems to me too marriage. a terrible waste of time. What we should be many people are meddling in this matter for Moreover, it is my belief that the U.S. Su- doing is passing legislation to address real political reasons. Let the States continue to preme Court will ensure that States’ rights and problems in America today. Rather than insult decide sound public policy on this subject. the institution of traditional marriage are a group of people as deserving of protection We must never rush to amend our Constitu- upheld. Additionally, as a result of past Su- under law as any other, Congress should work tion. Mr. Speaker, I oppose this bill and ask preme Court decisions, exemptions have been to reduce domestic violence, provide high for my colleagues to vote against this iniqui- made to the ‘‘Full Faith and Credit Clause’’ quality childcare to all families, and make the tous, politically inspired, and destructive legis- that apply to DOMA. If the Supreme Court, at minimum wage a living wage. These actions lation. any point in the future, did attempt to redefine would actually prevent divorce in America and The Constitution is not a laundry list to be marriage as something other than the union strengthen our families. amended on whim or caprice. It is a great, between one man and one woman, I want to Citizens of the United States are guaranteed noble and living document, not to be trivialized be clear that I would determine it an extreme equal treatment under the law, even if voters by amendments which are unnecessary. This circumstance and would at that time advocate in red states don’t like them. I urge my col- amendment is for useless political purposes a Constitutional Amendment. leagues to vote against this nonsense. and should be defeated as an affront to our Congress must be diligent in its efforts not Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong great and majestic Constitution. to overstep and impede on more than two opposition to H.J. Res. 88, the so called Fed- Mr. MARIO DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. centuries of a successful Republic without ab- eral Marriage Amendment. This bill would turn Speaker, as a proud husband and father, I solute necessity. I strongly believe that mar- over 200 years of State jurisprudence on its value family above all else and strongly sup- riage should only be the union between one head, attempting to Federalize marriage. port the traditional family: the union of a man man and one woman, but I do not believe that This resolution is another attempt to man- and a woman. This union is the cornerstone of the threshold for constitutional change has date one definition of marriage upon the our society, and plays a vital and unique role been reached. States. I ask my colleagues if we take away in our children’s lives and in our communities. Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, I rise to express my this right from the States, what’s next? Where Today, we considered H.J. Res. 88, The disappointment that this body has brought the does it stop? Take away local decisions for Marriage Protection Amendment. This legisla- Marriage Protection Act to the Floor at a time education or child custody issues. Between tion seeks to alter the United States Constitu- when American families are dealing with sky- the consideration of this bill and the court tion—the bedrock of democracy and the basis rocketing health costs, rising gas prices, and stripping bills that we will take up this week, it of our Republic for 217 years—to define mar- loved ones who are serving the Nation over- leads me to believe, Mr. Speaker, this is just riage as the union between one man and one seas. Mr. Speaker, is the matter before us another cynical political ploy by the majority woman. The U.S. Constitution embodies the today truly the most important subject for Con- during an election year. federalist principles this country was founded gress to debate? Like Vice President CHENEY and former on and should be held to the highest standard. This is not to say that I believe the issue of Representative Bob Barr, I believe the voters It should only be altered in the most extreme gay marriage to be unworthy of discussion. I of each State should decide for themselves circumstances. I believe opening this docu- understand that some people firmly regard gay who can and cannot marry. It has always ment to allow such a narrow definition could marriage as a civil right while others find it been a State function. It should remain so. To lead to unintended consequences in the near antithetical to their religious or moral beliefs. take away that right of the State to decide this and far future. Our commitment to federalist Reasonable people can disagree on this issue, we endanger basic principles of the principles and to this great Republic must su- issue, and it is a subject which our country Federal system in which we live. As our Con- persede all debates of the day. must continue to discuss. In America, how- stitution so eloquently states in the Tenth Furthermore, I strongly believe that one of ever, the authority to grant legal status to a Amendment of our Federal Constitution, ‘‘The the most important powers reserved to the marriage has been a function reserved for the powers not delegated to the United States by States as a result of the 10th Amendment is States, and different States have different laws the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the the act of regulating marriage and family law. regarding issues ranging from blood-testing to States, are reserved to the States respec- This right of States to self-determination has waiting periods before marriage. tively, or to the people.’’ protected and sustained our Republic for more Some, including the proponents of this bill, Mr. Speaker, amendment of our Constitution than 200 years. will argue that an amendment to the U.S. Con- has happened only 17 times since the Bill of While serving in the Florida Senate in 1997, stitution is necessary to keep one State from Rights was passed. Some of those amend- I voted to support a statute stating that mar- forcing another to accept same-sex marriages. ments do not look so good today. Many of riage is the union of one man and one In fact, this is not necessary because of the those not adopted now look worse. We should woman. This statute became State law and 1996 Defense of Marriage Law, which pro- not lightly tamper with the perfection, beauty was in response to action taken by the U.S. vides that States, U.S. territories, or Indian and majesty of our great Constitution. Congress to ensure the right of the States to tribes do not have to recognize same-sex mar- There have been no Committee hearings, define marriage. riages granted by other States. Further, the no time to look at different amendment pro- In 1996, the U.S. Congress passed the De- Act defines marriage, for the purpose of Fed- posals, and no opportunity to have the impor- fense of Marriage Act, DOMA, which was sub- eral benefits and rules, as the legal union be- tant deliberations that should take place when sequently signed into law. DOMA provides tween one man and one woman. Therefore,

VerDate Sep 11 2014 13:17 May 03, 2017 Jkt 049102 PO 00000 Frm 00198 Fmt 0688 Sfmt 9920 E:\FDSYS\BOUNDRECORD\BR18JY06.DAT BR18JY06 ejoyner on DSK30MW082PROD with BOUND RECORD 14814 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE, Vol. 152, Pt. 11 July 18, 2006 the Wisconsin law which recognizes marriage but civil contracts that a state may choose to No Congress ever has seen fit to amend the as a relationship between a husband and wife recognize as a matter of comity, not as a con- Constitution to address any issue related to is protected. stitutional requirement. marriage. No Constitutional Amendment was Mr. Speaker, when it comes to amending As if this were not enough, in 1996 Con- needed to ban polygamy or bigamy, nor was the United States Constitution, I am very con- gress passed and President Clinton signed a Constitutional Amendment needed to set a servative. Like Republican Senator CHUCK into law the Defense of Marriage Act. That law uniform age of majority to ban child marriages. HAGEL, conservative columnist George F. Will, says ‘‘No State, territory, or possession of the So why do proponents argue that we must and the Republican author of the Defense of United States, or Indian tribe, shall be required take this unprecedented step now to ban Marriage Act, Bob Barr, I am opposed to to give effect to any public act, record, or judi- same-sex marriages? amending the Constitution for the purpose of cial proceeding of any other State, territory, They claim that without the Amendment, outlawing gay marriage. In its 2I5-year history, possession, or tribe respecting a relationship states will be forced to recognize same-sex the Constitution has been amended only 27 between persons of the same sex that is treat- marriages performed in other states. Yet the times, and we must not add amendments lim- ed as a marriage under the laws of such other Defense of Marriage Act not only prohibits fed- iting rights rather than expanding them. State, territory, possession, or tribe, or a right eral recognition of same-sex marriages, it al- DICK CHENEY has stated ‘‘With respect to or claim arising from such relationship.’’ lows individual states to refuse to recognize my views on the issue, I stated those during Not everyone supported that bill at the time. such unions performed in other states. And in the course of the 2000 campaign, that I But it did pass, and now that law is on the the nearly 10 years that have passed since its thought when it came to the question of books and has not been successfully chal- enactment, DOMA never has been invalidated whether or not some sort of legal status or lenged. in any court in the country. The authors of legal sanction were granted to a same-sex re- Given this history, I am not convinced that DOMA took the greatest pains to write a law lationship that that was a matter best left to this constitutional amendment is necessary to that is constitutional and will withstand judicial the States. That was my view then. That’s my prevent the full faith and credit clause being challenges. view now.’’ (Scripps Howard News Service, used to compel a state to recognize a same- Proponents also claim that amending the January 9, 2004). As recently as August, sex marriage. Constitution is the only way to prevent so- 2004, Vice President DICK CHENEY, speaking Moreover, when you focus on the language called activist judges from legislating matters of gay marriage, affirmed that, ‘‘marriage has of the proposed amendment it becomes clear of same-sex marriage. Yet amending the Con- historically been a relationship that has been that protecting states is not its real purpose. stitution to address marriage could invite fed- handled by the States.’’ Like Vice President That purpose could be achieved by an eral judicial review not only of marriage, but of CHENEY, I do not believe the U.S. Congress amendment to the full faith and credit clause— divorce, child custody, inheritance, adoption, needs to intrude on this State issue. Because perhaps by putting language along the lines of and other issues of family law. Not only would of my great respect for the Constitution, and the Defense of Marriage Act into the constitu- this violate the principles of federalism, it for the Federal nature of the government tion itself. But that is not what is being pro- would create very bad public policy. which the document dictates, I oppose this posed here. Mr. Speaker, no legislature in the country resolution, and I urge my colleagues on both Instead, this amendment would restrict has established same-sex marriage in statute. sides of the aisle to do the same. Because of states, by establishing a single definition of In fact, 45 states, including Illinois, have illness, I was unable to cast my vote on to- marriage—the only definition that any state adopted laws limiting marriage to one man day’s amendment; had I been able to, I would could recognize. and one woman. have voted ‘‘no.’’ And, unlike other constitutional amend- I urge my colleagues to have faith in our Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I can- ments, it would not protect individuals either. It system of government, keep marriage out of not support changing the Constitution along would write into the Constitution a new limit on the Constitution, and allow the states to con- the lines of this proposal—so I will not vote for what legal rights they could hope to have pro- tinue to exercise what is best left to them. this resolution. tected by a state or the federal government. Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong Under our federal system, there are many If adopted, this amendment would restrict in- support of House Joint Resolution 88. Most matters where the states have broad latitude dividual liberties instead of expanding them. Americans believe that marriage should be de- to shape their laws and policies in ways their So, I think it is clear the real purpose of this fined as the legal union of one man and one residents think fit, subject to the U.S. Constitu- amendment is to lay a foundation for discrimi- woman. But as we have seen in the past sev- tion’s provisions protecting individual rights. nation against some Americans on the basis eral years, attacks on marriage by unelected And one of those areas has been family law, of their sexual orientation. In good conscience, and unaccountable judges threaten to destroy including the regulation of marriage and di- I cannot support that. this long-standing and widely accepted institu- vorce. But this amendment would change that. Mr. Speaker, no proposed constitutional tion. I firmly believe that activist judges should Adoption of this amendment would for the amendment should be taken lightly. On the not be able to overturn the marriage laws of first time impose a constitutional restriction on contrary, I think such proposals require very almost every state based on bizarre legal the ability of a state to define marriage. And careful scrutiny and should not be adopted un- theories. Although I believe we must be ex- it would do so in a way that would restrict, not less we are convinced that a change in our tremely careful in amending the Constitution, protect, individual rights that now are pro- fundamental law is essential. this is a critically important issue for our coun- tected in at least some states. I think this is I do not think this resolution meets that test, try. We must place the vital institution of mar- not necessary or appropriate. and so I will vote against it. riage beyond the reach of activist courts. Some of the resolution’s supporters say it is Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Speaker, I rise in oppo- Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in needed so a state whose laws ban same-sex sition to H.J. Res. 88, the Marriage Protection strong opposition to H.J. Res. 88. marriages or civil unions will not be forced to Amendment. Passage of this resolution will Instead of spending time working on the recognize such marriages or unions estab- not protect marriage, and I am concerned it issues that really matter to the American peo- lished under another state’s laws. will create the opposite effect of what its pro- ple, we are here debating a proposed amend- They say this could happen because Article ponents seek to accomplish. ment that would write discrimination into the IV of the Constitution requires each state to Let me first state that I believe that marriage Constitution. give full faith and credit to another state’s pub- is a sacred union between one man and one We do this even after the Senate failed to lic acts, records, and judicial proceedings. But woman. I strongly support the federal Defense pass a similar amendment. my understanding is that this part of the Con- of Marriage Act (DOMA) passed by Congress So let’s be clear, regardless of what the stitution has never been construed to require and signed into law in 1996. vote is today, this amendment is going no- states to recognize the validity of all marriages Second, marriage is an issue that our where. of people from other states. Founding Fathers wisely left to the states. The This makes our time on this even more Instead, over the years various states have Tenth Amendment to the Constitution states, pointless. refused to recognize some out-of-state mar- ‘‘The powers not delegated to the United What this debate really is about is dividing riages—and the ‘‘full faith and credit’’ clause States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it our country and riling up the base for a Re- has not been used to force them to do other- to the States, are reserved to the States re- publican party increasingly concerned about wise—because marriages are not judgments spectively, or to the people.’’ their election prospects this November.

VerDate Sep 11 2014 13:17 May 03, 2017 Jkt 049102 PO 00000 Frm 00199 Fmt 0688 Sfmt 9920 E:\FDSYS\BOUNDRECORD\BR18JY06.DAT BR18JY06 ejoyner on DSK30MW082PROD with BOUND RECORD July 18, 2006 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE, Vol. 152, Pt. 11 14815 And the Republican leadership is willing to amended, it has been done so only to protect as part of our Constitution. Nothing could be trample on our Constitution in order to do so and expand individual liberty, not to deny it. more disgraceful and fundamentally un-Amer- and no issue is worth paying such a price. Americans see this amendment for what it ican. I am committed to defeat this intolerance Instead of debating discrimination and divid- is: a partisan waste of time, and that is why and work tirelessly for equal rights, justice and ing our country, why don’t we spend our time we need a new direction in Washington that respect for all Americans. Gay and lesbian working to make health care more affordable, would prioritize the needs of every-day work- Americans are citizens who must never be work to lower gas prices and achieve energy ing people. treated as second class citizens, as H.J. Res. independence, raise the minimum wage, cut Mr. Speaker, I oppose this resolution, and I 88 proposes. They must be guaranteed what the cost of college or work to ensure our hard- call on my colleagues to join me in defeating America’s founding fathers called for in the working constituents a dignified retirement? it. Declaration of Independence when they stat- Why is it that my Republican colleagues Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, I oppose ed, ‘‘all Men are created equal, that they are who talk so much about family values refuse this constitutional amendment to ban gay mar- endowed by their Creator with certain to allow our families to earn a livable wage, riage. The legislation before us today is noth- unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, refuse to fix the prescription drug program and ing more than an attempt by the Republican Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.’’ turn their backs on our children by raising the leadership to exploit a wedge issue that pan- I urge my colleagues to reject discrimination interest rate on all student loans? ders to their political base and diverts attention and hate by voting against H.J. Res. 88. We must resist this divisive use of this from their abysmal record of non-accomplish- Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong House to score a few political points. We must ment and rubberstamping the incompetence of support of H.J. Res. 88, the Marriage Protec- reject this effort. the Bush Administration. tion Amendment offered by Representative We need real leadership that will bring our As we get closer to the end of this Con- MARILYN MUSGRAVE. country towards a new direction. gress, we should be addressing the urgent The resolution reads: ‘‘Marriage in the There is a new direction that our country needs of the American people—the war in United States shall consist solely of the union must go in that will help American families and Iraq, affordable health care, a sensible energy of a man and a woman. Neither this Constitu- address the issues that impact them every sin- policy, quality education for our children, re- tion, nor the constitution of any State, shall be gle day. tirement security, and a sound and fair fiscal construed to require that marriage or the legal Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise to policy. incidents thereof be conferred upon any union voice my strong opposition to H.J. Res. 88, a Whatever one’s view is on same sex mar- other than the union of a man and a woman.’’ proposed Constitutional amendment that riage, amending the Constitution is not the This resolution is identical to the resolution would prohibit same sex marriages. This pro- place to address this issue. The laws gov- that was voted on by the House on September posed amendment is not directed at any real erning marriage fall under the domain of the 30, 2004. Although the House received a ma- jority vote on the previous resolution, H.J. problem, other than the apparent need of the states and that is where this issue should be Res. 106, it wasn’t enough for a constitutional Republican leadership to gin up political sup- addressed. Amendments to the Constitution amendment. The American people are over- port for their candidates. have historically expanded, not diminished, the whelmingly supportive of a constitutional It is sad that the Republican leadership is rights and liberties of the American people. amendment that will protect traditional mar- not as interested as they say they are in pro- We should not use the Constitution as a polit- riage between one man and one woman. In tecting the institution of marriage as they are ical tool to divide us. The American people will fact, since the vote in 2004, 16 States have in waging a campaign to divide and distract see through the motivations behind this passed State constitutional amendments to the American people from the real issues that amendment—to distract the American people protect and defend traditional marriage, includ- need to be addressed. The Nation is at war in from the failed record of the Republican lead- ing my home State of Kansas. By an over- Iraq; we face crises in Iran, North Korea and ership in the Congress. whelming margin of 70–30 percent, Kansans Lebanon; the federal deficit is soaring out of Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to work passed such an amendment in April 2005. control as more and more U.S. debt is con- to unite the American people, address the real The American people have been heard. Now trolled by countries like China; energy costs issues facing our Nation, and reject this it is time to ensure the will of the people be continue to rise and Americans wait for Con- amendment. protected by passing a constitutional amend- Ms. MCCOLLUM of Minnesota. Mr. Speak- gress to act to increase the minimum wage. ment that will define marriage as the union of The Republican response: wasting hours of er, once again this Republican led Congress is one man and one woman. With activist judges debate on an unnecessary Constitutional exercising an election year ploy with their at- overruling the will of the people time and time amendment that had already been defeated in tempt today to demonize gay and lesbian again, there is no other way than to amend the Senate. Americans. H.J. Res. 88 is an attempt to write the U.S. Constitution. Studies have consistently shown that finan- hate and discrimination into our Nation’s Con- Marriage is the foundation of our society. cial hardship is the biggest obstacle to hetero- stitution and disgracefully use this House to The well-being and welfare of children sexual marriage, yet the Republican leader- advance a cynical and cruel political agenda. should always be our focus. Children that are ship has done precious little to help address While my Republican colleagues are actively raised in a home with a married mother and the financial hardship faced by American fami- working to transform the Constitution into a father consistently do better in every measure lies. document of discrimination by passing H.J. of well-being than their peers who come from American families need job security; better Res. 88, the rest of America is concerned divorced or step-parent, single-parent, cohab- child care options; national flextime policies about very real and serious issues that this iting homes. When there is a breakdown in the that allow more young parents to work from Congress is ignoring. family or failure to form marriages becomes home and to be with their families; better pub- American families are concerned about real widespread, society is harmed by a whole lic schools; federal policies to make sure col- issues that affect their daily lives like the price host of social pathologies from increased pov- lege is affordable; housing policies that pro- of gasoline as it rises above $3 per gallon, the erty, crime, mental illness, illegal drug use to mote the construction of homes that working deteriorating situation in Iraq that is costing clinical depression, and suicide. The very best families can afford; and health care so that no the American people the lives of their loved environment for children, our most vulnerable child has to go without the medical and dental ones and $3 billion per week, and they are members of society, should be of the utmost treatment he or she needs. deeply concerned about the skyrocketing cost importance. I will continue to fight for children Instead, today, we vote on an effort to sin- of healthcare and prescription drugs while at and families and to defend the will of the peo- gle out one group of Americans, in a pointless, the same time insurance and drug companies ple of the Fourth District of Kansas. partisan move that does nothing to address report massive profits. The American people Next month, I will celebrate my 30th anni- the major challenges facing our Nation—edu- are not threatened by men and women in lov- versary of marriage with my beautiful bride, cation, the economy, energy, homeland secu- ing and committed relationships. They are Vicki. Our marriage has been a blessing. I rity and the war in Iraq. threatened and at risk by a do-nothing Con- have gained even more respect for the institu- For over 200 years, our Constitution has de- gress that ignores the real challenges facing tion over the past 3 decades and will defend fined our Nation and protected individual America. it against attack. rights. It is a document of empowerment, not President Bush and his followers seek to I vote in favor of protecting traditional mar- limitation. While the Constitution has been permanently enshrine discrimination and hate riage between one man and one woman today

VerDate Sep 11 2014 13:17 May 03, 2017 Jkt 049102 PO 00000 Frm 00200 Fmt 0688 Sfmt 9920 E:\FDSYS\BOUNDRECORD\BR18JY06.DAT BR18JY06 ejoyner on DSK30MW082PROD with BOUND RECORD 14816 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE, Vol. 152, Pt. 11 July 18, 2006 and I encourage my colleagues to vote for used Congress’s constitutional authority to de- by a number of states. Yet, that amendment H.J. Res. 88. fine what official state documents other states remains unratified today. Proponents of this Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Speaker, the world have to recognize under the Full Faith and marriage amendment should also consider around us is engulfed in a state of peril. Our Credit Clause, to ensure that no state would that efforts to amend the Constitution to ad- soldiers in Iraq are facing increased violence, be forced to recognize a ‘‘same sex’’ marriage dress flag burning and require the federal gov- Israel is fighting a multi-state sponsored ter- license issued in another state. This Con- ernment to balance the budget have been on- rorist organization, India was ravaged by a se- gress, I am an original cosponsor of the Mar- going for years, without any success. ries of rail bombings last week, development riage Protection Act, H.R. 1100, that removes Ironically, liberal social engineers who wish in Afghanistan is being stifled by warlords, challenges to the Defense of Marriage Act to use federal government power to redefine North Korea is testing the limits of its neigh- from federal courts’ jurisdiction. If I were a marriage will be able to point to the constitu- bors with missile tests, Iran is testing the inter- member of the Texas legislature, I would do tional marriage amendment as proof that the national community’s patience and defying its all I could to oppose any attempt by rogue definition of marriage is indeed a federal mat- commitment to the Non-Proliferation Treaty, judges to impose a new definition of marriage ter! I am unwilling either to cede to federal Mexico is heavily divided over its ‘‘Florida-like’’ on the people of my state. courts the authority to redefine marriage, or to uncertain presidential election, the humani- Having studied this issue and consulted with deny a state’s ability to preserve the traditional tarian crisis in Sudan rages on. leading legal scholars, including an attorney definition of marriage. Instead, I believe it is Here in the homeland, we struggle to pick who helped defend the Boy Scouts against at- time for Congress and state legislatures to re- up the pieces after Katrina, millions of Ameri- tempts to force the organization to allow gay assert their authority by refusing to enforce ju- cans are living in poverty, the minimum wage men to serve as scoutmasters, I am convinced dicial usurpations of power. hasn’t risen in nearly 10 years, we’re short- that both the Defense of Marriage Act and the In contrast to a constitutional amendment, changing our veterans coming home from Marriage Protection Act can survive legal chal- the Marriage Protection Act requires only a Iraq, families are struggling to send their kids lenges and ensure that no state is forced by majority vote of both houses of Congress and to college, school districts face confusion over a federal court’s or another state’s actions to the President’s signature to become law. The the implementation of No Child Left Behind, recognize same sex marriage. Therefore, bill already has passed the House of Rep- seniors face difficulties paying for their pre- while I am sympathetic to those who feel only resentatives; at least 51 Senators would vote scription drugs, major cities are receiving less a constitutional amendment will sufficiently ad- for it; and the President would sign this legis- homeland security funds, and consumers are dress this issue, I respectfully disagree. I also lation given his commitment to protecting the paying over $3 a gallon at the pump. am concerned that the proposed amendment, traditional definition of marriage. Therefore, How do we respond to these challenges? by telling the individual states how their state those who believe Congress needs to take im- The Republican leadership says we should constitutions are to be interpreted, is a major mediate action to protect marriage this year spend our time making sure that two adults usurpation of the states’ power. The division of should focus on passing the Marriage Protec- who love each other cannot form a marriage. power between the federal government and tion Act. Is this why our founding fathers created the the states is one of the virtues of the Amer- Because of the dangers to liberty and tradi- greatest democracy in the world—to keep ican political system. Altering that balance en- tional values posed by the unexpected con- people apart? Our country and our world de- dangers self-government and individual liberty. sequences of amending the Constitution to serve better than this. To say that the threat However, if federal judges wrongly interfere strip power from the states and the people of same sex marriage is so great that it re- and attempt to compel a state to recognize the and further empower Washington, I cannot in quires the alteration of our Constitution to in- marriage licenses of another state, that would good conscience support the marriage amend- clude discriminatory language is a slap in the be the proper time for me to consider new leg- ment to the United States Constitution. In- face to those that have fought for equality and islative or constitutional approaches. stead, I plan to continue working to enact the civil rights. Conservatives in particular should be leery Marriage Protection Act and protect each We already debated gay marriage nearly of anything that increases federal power, since state’s right not to be forced to recognize a two years ago with the Defense of Marriage centralized government power is traditionally same-sex marriage. Act. States that don’t want to honor other the enemy of conservative values. I agree with Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise to ex- states civil unions don’t have to. the assessment of former Congressman Bob press my strong opposition to House Joint I believe that states should have the right to Barr, who authored the Defense of Marriage Resolution 88, which would amend our Con- grant same-sex marriages or offer couples the Act: stitution to deny basic rights to gays and les- same legal rights as those of other couples. I ‘‘The very fact that the FMA [Federal Mar- bians. I would like to express my disappoint- share this position with Vice President DICK riage Amendment] was introduced said that ment in the Republican leadership for once conservatives believed it was okay to amend CHENEY. This flagrant attempt to include dis- again bringing this divisive and discriminatory the Constitution to take power from the crimination into our Constitution is nothing but states and give it to Washington. That is amendment before Congress. election year politics and the American people hardly a basic principle of conservatism as Our Constitution has guided our Nation for deserve better. we used to know it. It is entirely likely the over 200 years. During that time, it has been Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, while I oppose fed- left will boomerang that assertion into a fu- amended to guarantee religious liberty, equal eral efforts to redefine marriage as something ture proposed amendment that would weak- protection, and the right to vote. Not once has other than a union between one man and one en gun rights or mandate income redistribu- it been amended to take away rights from a woman, I do not believe a constitutional tion.’’ specific group of people. Yet that is what this amendment is either a necessary or proper Passing a constitutional amendment is a legislation would do. way to defend marriage. long, drawn-out process. The fact that the Of course, this constitutional amendment While marriage is licensed and otherwise marriage amendment already failed to gather will not be adopted; it failed to garner even a regulated by the states, government did not the necessary two-thirds support in the Senate simple majority only weeks ago in the Senate. create the institution of marriage. In fact, the means that, even if two-thirds of House mem- We are wasting our time on this because Re- institution of marriage most likely pre-dates the bers support the amendment, it will not be publican pollsters have concluded that tar- institution of government! Government regula- sent to states for ratification this year. Even if geting gays and lesbians is a winning election tion of marriage is based on state recognition the amendment gathers the necessary two- strategy. of the practices and customs formulated by thirds support in both houses of Congress, it Mr. Speaker, our fellow citizens deserve private individuals interacting in civil society. still must go through the time-consuming proc- better. Same-sex couples are trying to raise Many people associate their wedding day with ess of state ratification. This process requires families, pay the bills, get health care for their completing the rituals and other requirements three-quarters of the state legislatures to ap- partners, and put their kids through college. of their faith, thus being joined in the eyes of prove the amendment before it can become Instead of working to help them, we are debat- their church and their creator, not with receiv- effective. Those who believe that immediate ing whether to permanently deny them over ing their marriage license, thus being joined in action to protect the traditional definition of 1,000 rights and benefits given to married het- the eyes of the state. marriage is necessary should consider that the erosexual couples. We should be striving for If I were in Congress in 1996, I would have Equal Rights Amendment easily passed both fairness and equality, not singling them out for voted for the Defense of Marriage Act, which houses of Congress and was quickly ratified discrimination.

VerDate Sep 11 2014 13:17 May 03, 2017 Jkt 049102 PO 00000 Frm 00201 Fmt 0688 Sfmt 9920 E:\FDSYS\BOUNDRECORD\BR18JY06.DAT BR18JY06 ejoyner on DSK30MW082PROD with BOUND RECORD July 18, 2006 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE, Vol. 152, Pt. 11 14817 Americans are sick and tired of political Miller, Gary Regula Stearns Waxman Wexler Wu gamesmanship. They want a Congress that Moran (KS) Rehberg Sullivan Weiner Woolsey Wynn Murphy Reichert Tancredo ANSWERED ‘‘PRESENT’’—1 will address the real challenges our Nation Musgrave Renzi Tanner faces: health care, energy security, education, Myrick Reynolds Taylor (MS) Lipinski Neugebauer Rogers (AL) Taylor (NC) economic opportunity. The Republican leader- NOT VOTING—9 ship has once again let down the American Ney Rogers (KY) Terry Norwood Rogers (MI) Thomas Brown (OH) Hinojosa McKinney people, and I urge my colleagues to reject this Nunes Rohrabacher Thompson (MS) Davis (IL) Johnson, Sam Northup effort to distract and divide. Nussle Ross Thornberry Evans Kind Strickland The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursu- Ortiz Royce Tiahrt 1400 ant to House Resolution 918, the joint Osborne Ryan (WI) Tiberi b resolution is considered read and the Otter Ryun (KS) Turner So (two-thirds of those voting having Oxley Saxton Upton not responded in the affirmative) the previous question is ordered. Pearce Schmidt Walden (OR) The question is on the engrossment Pence Scott (GA) Walsh joint resolution was not passed. and third reading of the joint resolu- Peterson (MN) Sensenbrenner Wamp The result of the vote was announced tion. Peterson (PA) Sessions Weldon (FL) as above recorded. Petri Shadegg Weldon (PA) A motion to reconsider was laid on The joint resolution was ordered to Pickering Shaw Weller be engrossed and read a third time, and Pitts Sherwood Westmoreland the table. was read the third time. Platts Shimkus Whitfield Stated against: The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Poe Shuster Wicker Mr. HINOJOSA. Mr. Speaker, during rollcall Pombo Simpson Wilson (NM) question is on the passage of the joint Porter Skelton vote No. 378 on July 18th I was unavoidably Wilson (SC) detained. Had I been present, I would have resolution. Price (GA) Smith (NJ) Wolf The question was taken. Putnam Smith (TX) Young (AK) voted ‘‘nay.’’ The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the Radanovich Sodrel Young (FL) Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, re- Rahall Souder garding the Federal marriage amend- opinion of the Chair, two-thirds of Ramstad Spratt those present have voted in the affirm- ment, I was detained coming in from ative. NAYS—187 the airport, missed the vote by 4 min- Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, on that Abercrombie Green, Al Murtha utes, and would have voted ‘‘nay’’ on I demand the yeas and nays. Ackerman Green, Gene Nadler the Federal marriage amendment, roll- The yeas and nays were ordered. Allen Grijalva Napolitano call 378. Andrews Gutierrez Neal (MA) Mr. STRICKLAND. Mr. Speaker, on The vote was taken by electronic de- Baca Harman Oberstar vice, and there were—yeas 236, nays Baird Hastings (FL) Obey rollcall 378, which I missed as a result 187, answered ‘‘present’’ 1, not voting 9, Baldwin Higgins Olver of my being detained at the airport, I Bass Hinchey as follows: Owens indicate for the RECORD that I would Bean Hobson Pallone have voted ‘‘nay’’ had I been here for [Roll No. 378] Becerra Holt Pascrell Berkley Honda Pastor that vote. YEAS—236 Berman Hooley Paul f Aderholt Cubin Herger Biggert Hostettler Payne Akin Cuellar Herseth Bishop (NY) Hoyer Pelosi PERSONAL EXPLANATION Alexander Culberson Hoekstra Blumenauer Inslee Pomeroy Bachus Davis (AL) Holden Boehlert Israel Price (NC) Mr. HINOJOSA. Mr. Speaker, I was un- Baker Davis (KY) Hulshof Bono Jackson (IL) Pryce (OH) avoidably detained in meetings downtown with Barrett (SC) Davis (TN) Hunter Boswell Jackson-Lee Rangel Barrow Davis, Jo Ann Hyde Brady (PA) (TX) Reyes my constituents. Had I been present, I would Bartlett (MD) Davis, Tom Inglis (SC) Brown, Corrine Johnson (CT) Ros-Lehtinen have voted ‘‘nay’’ on rollcall 378 because I Barton (TX) Deal (GA) Issa Butterfield Johnson, E. B. Rothman Beauprez Dent Istook Capps Jones (OH) continue to believe the issue of what con- Roybal-Allard Berry Doolittle Jefferson Capuano Kanjorski stitutes a marriage should be left to the states Ruppersberger Bilbray Drake Jenkins Cardin Kaptur Rush to determine. I also believe that we should not Bilirakis Duncan Jindal Cardoza Kennedy (RI) Ryan (OH) set a precedent by amending the constitution Bishop (GA) Edwards Johnson (IL) Carnahan Kildee Sabo Bishop (UT) Ehlers Jones (NC) Carson Kilpatrick (MI) in a way that narrows the rights of individuals. Salazar Blackburn Emerson Keller Case Kirk Sa´ nchez, Linda f Blunt English (PA) Kelly Castle Knollenberg T. Boehner Etheridge Kennedy (MN) Clay Kolbe Sanchez, Loretta GENERAL LEAVE Bonilla Everett King (IA) Cleaver Kucinich Bonner Feeney King (NY) Clyburn Langevin Sanders Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I ask Schakowsky Boozman Ferguson Kingston Conyers Lantos unanimous consent that all Members Boren Flake Kline Costa Larsen (WA) Schiff Boucher Forbes Kuhl (NY) Crowley Larson (CT) Schwartz (PA) may have 5 legislative days in which to Boustany Ford LaHood Cummings Leach Schwarz (MI) revise and extend their remarks and in- Boyd Fortenberry Latham Davis (CA) Lee Scott (VA) clude extraneous material on H.J. Res. Bradley (NH) Fossella LaTourette Davis (FL) Levin Serrano Brady (TX) Foxx Lewis (CA) DeFazio Lewis (GA) Shays 88. Brown (SC) Franks (AZ) Lewis (KY) DeGette Lofgren, Zoe Sherman The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there Brown-Waite, Gallegly Linder Delahunt Lowey Simmons objection to the request of the gen- Ginny Garrett (NJ) LoBiondo DeLauro Lynch Slaughter tleman from Georgia? Burgess Gibbons Lucas Diaz-Balart, L. Maloney Smith (WA) Burton (IN) Gillmor Lungren, Daniel Diaz-Balart, M. Markey Snyder There was no objection. Solis Buyer Gingrey E. Dicks Matsui f Calvert Gohmert Mack Dingell McCarthy Stark Camp (MI) Goode Manzullo Doggett McCollum (MN) Stupak ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE SPEAKER Campbell (CA) Goodlatte Marchant Doyle McDermott Sweeney Cannon Gordon Marshall Dreier McGovern Tauscher PRO TEMPORE Cantor Granger Matheson Emanuel McNulty Thompson (CA) The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursu- Capito Graves McCaul (TX) Engel Meehan Tierney Carter Green (WI) McCotter Eshoo Meek (FL) Towns ant to clause 8 of rule XX, the Chair Chabot Gutknecht McCrery Farr Meeks (NY) Udall (CO) will postpone further proceedings Chandler Hall McHenry Fattah Michaud Udall (NM) today on motions to suspend the rules Chocola Harris McHugh Filner Millender- Van Hollen Coble Hart McIntyre Fitzpatrick (PA) McDonald Vela´ zquez on which a recorded vote or the yeas Cole (OK) Hastert McKeon Foley Miller (NC) Visclosky and nays are ordered, or on which the Conaway Hastings (WA) McMorris Frank (MA) Miller, George Wasserman vote is objected to under clause 6 of Cooper Hayes Melancon Frelinghuysen Mollohan Schultz rule XX. Costello Hayworth Mica Gerlach Moore (KS) Waters Cramer Hefley Miller (FL) Gilchrest Moore (WI) Watson Record votes on postponed questions Crenshaw Hensarling Miller (MI) Gonzalez Moran (VA) Watt will be taken later today.

VerDate Sep 11 2014 13:17 May 03, 2017 Jkt 049102 PO 00000 Frm 00202 Fmt 0688 Sfmt 0634 E:\FDSYS\BOUNDRECORD\BR18JY06.DAT BR18JY06 ejoyner on DSK30MW082PROD with BOUND RECORD