Chuck Schumer now officially backs gay marriage. Et tut, John?

[beachmom]

http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dailypolitics/2009/03/schumer-flips-on-gay-marriage.html

At a private risotto dinner last night with gay leaders and elected officials at Gramercy Tavern last night, Sen. Chuck Schumer reversed himself on the issue of same-sex marriage, saying he not only now supports it but also backs a full reversal of the Defense of Marriage Act.

It is indeed official. Here is his statement:

"It’s time. Equality is something that has always been a hallmark of America and no group should be deprived of it. New York, which has always been at the forefront on issues of equality, is appropriately poised to take a lead on this issue."

It's hard to overstate the significance of this in the eyes of gay marriage advocates.

With the ascent of Kirsten Gillibrand to fill Hillary Clinton's vacant US Senate seat, Schumer was the last remaining statewide elected official who backed civil unions over full marriage equality.

Now, John Kerry has a much, much better record on gay issues than Chuck Schumer, most notably the DOMA vote. And that is why seeing Chuck go to the left of Kerry just really stinks. Kerry is doing all kinds of great things, but Chuck will get the headline. Sigh.

Edited for typo

[Mass]

1. How is it different from Kerry's position? I do not get it.

Kerry supports gay marriage in MA and the reversal of DOMA.

Schumer supports gay marriage in NY and the reversal of DOMA.

I am really confused here. Happy to see Schumer change, but Kerry has been there for a while. As for equality, Kerry has been for equality of rights forever. The news is that Schumer changed his mind and came to where Kerry has been for years. I really do not get it. What does he need to do to make you happy on that?

[beachmom]

3. Ah, that is not Kerry's position. He said gay marriage in MA is "settled law".

That is all. He has not stated he supports marriage equality. He has essentially said he is not in favor of changing the status quo. That actually makes Schumer's stance even more courageous since gay marriage is not legal in NY.

Please provide the quote where John Kerry says "I support marriage equality" that is not followed by ands, buts, provideds, etc. It doesn't exist.

[Mass]

5. Schumer office statement does not use the word marriage. Reread it.

If this is your litmus test, Kerry has said as much as Schumer, and has said it in front of cameras, not in a private office.

BTW, the person fighting for equal rights for couples is not Schumer, it is Kerry. Sorry, I still do not get it.

[karynnj]

7. I agree - there are any number of ways to read Schumer's reported comment

Equity does not necessarily equate to marriage equity. The other thing is that with many politicians, comments quoted out of interest group meetings are often backtracked on. We don't even know how accurate that quote is.

Even as written, Kerry's comment to Cambridge Paul - is saying the same thing, in fact he said "marriage equality". He starts the answer with "I do support marriage equality". He then spoke of even in 1996, being for equality of any state relationship. He still does mention his person believes though.

http://www.bluemassgroup.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=13677

Note, that Kerry disagreed with the interpretation that his position was just "that he would not fight against" the policy. At the end of Paul's questioning:
"Towards the end of the video I asked, "So you do support civil marriage rights for same-sex couples?" and Senator Kerry responded "Absolutely.""

[karynnj]

2. I don't see Schumer's comment as beyond where Kerry is

The direct Schumer quote speaks of equity - something Kerry said even in the 1990s. In the indirect quote, it says that he is for the repeal of DOMA and now for same sex marriage. Kerry was always against DOMA and is backing actions to get it declared unconstitutional.

On the only legislation I can think of that provides some equity, Schumer joined the Leahy amendment over a year after Kerry - at a point where it had substantial support.

Sen Akaka, Daniel K. - 2/14/2008
Sen Boxer, Barbara - 9/11/2007
Sen Brown, Sherrod - 5/16/2007
Sen Cantwell, Maria - 9/16/2008
Sen Cardin, Benjamin L. - 7/23/2008
Sen Casey, Robert P., Jr. - 9/11/2008
Sen Dodd, Christopher J. - 9/8/2008
Sen Feingold, Russell D. - 5/14/2007
Sen Inouye, Daniel K. - 5/15/2007
Sen Kennedy, Edward M. - 8/3/2007
Sen Kerry, John F. - 9/4/2007
Sen Lautenberg, Frank R. - 9/26/2007
Sen Menendez, Robert - 1/31/2008
Sen Murray, Patty - 9/20/2007
Sen Sanders, Bernard - 1/30/2008
Sen Schumer, Charles E. - 9/11/2008
Sen Whitehouse, Sheldon - 9/4/2007
Sen Wyden, Ron - 5/7/2008

Kerry has said that gay marriage is settled law in MA and his comments in support of the MA couple use words like "husband", "mother-in-law" and married. If that is not support of gay marriage, What is? The comments of the MA man show that he thinks Kerry - who he likely spoke to - supports gay marriage. It was also true that when the MA legislature was working on getting a referendum on the ballot to eliminate the right to gay marriage - Kerry worked behind the scenes to get a critical vote - inclined to go the other way - against it.

The problem with Kerry is just that he has not said that he personally supports gay marriage, without any qualifications. It should be noted, that Schumer is NOT being held to that standard. Nor is Obama.

I wish John Kerry would make a clear cut statement - stronger even than the one he gave to Cambridge Paul - that unambiguously supported gay marriage, but I don't know that Schumer's actual unreported comment was even as strong as Kerry's to Cambridge Paul - where he explained why he was for civil unions with full rights (and he did speak in 2004 of that meaning federal rights) - that the law in MA had gone passed that and he supported that. (Convoluted, but in summary he supports gay marriage in MA.) Nothing in the article suggests that Schumer is willing to do anything in NY or on the federal level on this issue. (Something that people would demand of Kerry.)

The fact is that Kerry in 2004 took a stronger position than Clinton or Gore had - and Obama did not go any further - even though he is a generation younger (on an issue where opinion has changed radically) and from a less conservative religious background. Obama's church (Wright) was pro-gay rights and had not spoken against gay marriage.

I do get that you hold Kerry to a higher standard because he holds himself to higher standards. Here, though, it strikes me the way it struck me when DUers were accepting Edwards' comment that he was wrong on the IWR, while not accepting what I saw as the more deeply felt Kerry comments - again surrounded by actions.

[beachmom]

4. John Kerry is in a safe Senate seat in a state where gay marriage is already legal.

He can't just say it. That is my problem.

But hey -- provide me the quote again (I know you are good with having this stuff). I don't recall him ever saying he supports marriage equality unequivocally. He only says he won't mess with MA law. NOT the same thing.

And here what is maddening: his ACTIONS are unbelievably awesome. Like the letter he wrote to Holder and legislation he is co-sponsoring to help when a gay person is married to a foreign national. Yet he can't say it -- maybe because the Catholic Church would get on his back. That is the only thing I can think of that is stopping him.

[karynnj]

6. The case of me having too complicated (and ungrammatical) a sentence

I was saying that like you I wish that he had a comment that supports marriage equality unequivocally with no caveats. The Cambridge Paul statement was as close as I've heard, but it is not a simple "I support gay marriage" - though he starts out by saying "I do support marriage equality". The Cambridge Paul comment did go beyond "I won't mess with MA law" - something he was even asked about.

Now, I could take 2 excepts from the Cambridge Paul Q&A- The response, "absolutely" to "So you do support civil marriage rights for same-sex couples?" and "I do support marriage equality". Schumer's comment is no stronger and we don't know what if anything else he said. There was possibly something because his comment that NY should lead is strange as MA,CT, NJ, RI, ME, NH, and VT are far ahead on this.

At some point, I think that, actions are more important than words. What is clear in the comments from the MA guy in the BG article is that Kerry treated him in a way that completely accepted his marriage. He may reach a point where he is comfortable saying that marriage is the union of two people, but when he does say it we will know that he believes it 100%. That is not something I would say of all politicians.

As to Schumer, NY has not had either a civil union or gay marriage bill that came close to being enacted. Schumer is the most powerful (or at least one of the most powerful) Democrats in the state. He has NEVER pushed for a Civil Unions bill, much less a gay marriage bill. Even here, nothing is said about him publicly endorsing the idea.

[rox63]

8. All I can say is "It's a Catholic thing"

He has come as close to supporting same-sex marriage as his religion will allow. Going any further will bring down the wrath of the Church on his head, something I'm sure he wants to avoid, both personally and politically. He's done the same thing on the issue of abortion rights. It would be a pretty major thing to be so at odd with the religion he has been part of all his life.

I don't agree with that reasoning, but that's one of the many reasons I'm an ex-Catholic.

[Mass]

9. I've never seen Kerry say it was a catholic thing. If it was, he would have to say homosexuality is

wrong, not just gay marriage. Do you assume he thinks homosexuality is wrong, because this is something that would really bother me a lot more than using the word marriage.

There is a huge difference between abortion, that most people would prefer to avoid, even if we want the right to have one if necessary, and gay marriage, something that is done by 2 consenting adults. I have heard Kerry a speak about it a lot, and each time, he was referring to cultural references of the word marriage, not to his religious faith.

I think it is a lot more the pragmatism. He knows that people will be a lot more inclined to give people rights if the word "marriage" is not used. But I may be wrong.

[rox63]

10. He has skated on the edge of offending the Church powers-that-be

By saying that he is personally opposed to issue x (abortion, same-sex marriage, etc), but can not impose his own faith on those who don't share it. But he does support equal legal protections for same-sex couples, and he opposes any sort of discrimination against gay people, which is as close as I think he will ever come to "officially" supporting gay marriage.

[Mass]

11. Are you saying Kennedy is more courageous?

[karynnj]

14. I don't know if it is courageous, so much as your observation that

in the past, he saw the likelihood of succeeding to get the full rights while calling it marriage significantly higher than if you called it marriage. That does not explain his need to continue to point out that he personally sees marriage as between a man and a woman. I do wonder if the comments to Cambridge Paul might not be a bridge to eventually quietly doing that. The comments in the BG article from Coco and his own words in the letter to Holder seem to suggest that Kerry does see their gay marriage as a marriage.

As you and others have said, Kerry from the time this issue started - back in the 1990s, has been absolutely consistent on "equal rights".

He and Kennedy were not in the same position. When he first articulated the position of civil unions with the full rights of marriage he was planning a run for President and in 2004 that was likely the most progressive position he could take without it killing his general election chances. Given that he very likely thought that this position was the most likely to help gay couples, it was not throwing them under the bus. He likely did not completely give up the possibility of being President until it was clear that Obama would win - an effort he worked his heart out for. Supporting the MA people in challenging DOMA in court and writing the Holder letter are actions that are consistent even with his 2004 stands.

It also might be that Senator Kerry and his wife are practicing Catholics and they might fear the church making an example of him. In 2004, one article spoke of Kerry's staff calling Catholic churches that he quietly attended while campaigning to make sure he would not be embarrassed or refused communion. In 2007, in a New Yorker article the CO bishop who was so awful to Kerry in 2004, spoke of not having the same problem with Guiliani, who was also pro-choice. His argument was bizarre. He said that no one would think that Guiliani's positions could be a valid Catholic positions - but he felt that was a danger with Kerry, who used Catholic social justice language to argue for things like health care etc. It is almost because on many issues Kerry does reflect his religious values that they hit him harder.

[TayTay]

12. I think his position is clear

All rights and responsibilities of marriage including federal Social Security benefits to surviving partners.
Repeal of DOMA.

He doesn't want to call that marriage. The voters last fall in MA seemed fine with that.

I think the issue is settled here. We have bigger fish to fry than just this one social issue. I think that the Senator should move on to helping the poor and middle class and leave this issue to people who really have had a problem with it in that past.

I don't actually care about this as a voter. It is settled law in this state and Sen. Kerry has come out in favor of it in all but the narrow use of the word marriage. Beyond that, I don't care.

[beachmom]

13. Well, it matters in terms of advancing the cause.

When more and more people stand up and say they are for gay marriage, then it becomes more acceptable. Even more so when an elected official as prominent as Sen. Kerry.

But never mind. Pardon me my wanting to help a minority who have higher rates of poverty, by the way, than their heterosexual counterparts:

http://www.mydesert.com/article/20090321/NEWS01/903210318/-1/newsfront

One in five children living in a same-sex household is poor compared to one in 10 for children in opposite-sex married families.

Nationally, 24 percent of lesbians and bisexual women are poor compared to 19 percent of heterosexual women.

15 percent of gay and bisexual men nationally are poor compared to 13 percent of heterosexual men.

Researchers theorized gays and lesbians could be more vulnerable to poverty because of employment discrimination, lack of insurance, less family support and no access to marriage and the more than 1,100 rights and benefits it affords.

[TayTay]

16. Maybe those efforts would be better spent on people who actually oppose this

and oppose gay rights in general.

The difference for Sen. Kerry on this is hairline thin. He is not the person who is against repealing Don't Ask, Don't Tell. He is not the one who wants to keep DOMA around. He is not someone who wants to repeal Equal Marriage Rights in Massachusetts or elsewhere.

I just think this is splitting hairs. What about the Senators and Reps from your State? What is their position on Equal Marriage rights, Gay Rights and so forth? Wouldn't it be time better spent to actually pressure people who are actually opposing progress rather than spending time on those who are for all those things?

Answer me this: What single policy, in MA or nationwide, would be affected should Sen. Kerry say he will accept the word marriage for what he already supports? What will this do, in whole or in part, that isn't already a part of his agenda as a US Senator? What changes for a single person, either here in MA or nationally?

I am for Equal Marriage. But I have no clue why anyone wants to beat up on a life-long champion for Gay Rights for a quibble.

[beachmom]

18. I will get Middle East peace before Tom Price will be persuaded to do anything sane:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ZqeEckI7zg

He is the Mouse Guy. I repeat I am represented in Congress by The Mouse Guy.

The Mouse Guy, who is a doctor, voted against S-CHIP. You think the guy who is against kids having health insurance is going to back civil unions, let alone gay marriage? Even when I called his office about something non-partisan I was quickly dismissed.

[ProSense]

15. That's all it takes?

For as long as Kerry has been fighting for equal rights, all it takes is Schumer to come to a similar position to negate Kerry's efforts?

KERRY ENDORSED BY HUMAN RIGHTS CAMPAIGN FOR HIS LEADERSHIP ON GLBT RIGHTS
BOSTON – The Human Rights Campaign (HRC) has announced it is endorsing John Kerry for re-election to the U.S. Senate.

"I am honored to have the endorsement of the Human Rights Campaign, one of the savviest, most respected and most influential political, civil rights and human rights organizations in our country," said Kerry. "When you’re in a fight to change our country, you can always count on HRC to be there with you in the trenches, and there’s no better ally in the fight to advance the cause of freedom and equality for all Americans. I have been proud to work with the Human Rights Campaign for close to 25 years now in the U.S. Senate. We’ve fought together to combat AIDS, including our fight this year in the Foreign Relations Committee to lift the HIV Travel Ban, to pass the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act, to end discrimination in the workplace through ENDA, and to work toward the day when same-sex couples are granted the same rights other Americans take for granted. We’ve spent a lot of our energy these last years stopping bad things from happening with a Republican in the White House. We’ve been proud to fight those fights, but I can’t begin to tell you how much I look forward to serving in a bigger, stronger Democratic majority in Congress under a Democratic president so we can wage and win the progress we’ve been waiting for and which the community deserves."

“Senator Kerry has been an outspoken leader for GLBT equality in the United States Senate. Most recently, Senator Kerry’s leadership was crucial to the advancement of legislation to lift the discriminatory HIV travel ban. We are pleased to endorse Senator Kerry for re-election and look forward to working with him on achieving equality for our community,” said Joe Solmonese, President of the Human Rights Campaign.

Kerry has a long record of fighting for equal rights for all gay, lesbian, bi-sexual and transgendered (GLBT) Americans.

Twenty-four years ago, one of Kerry’s first acts as Senator was to introduce a bill prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. He supports passage of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, and has adopted a nondiscrimination policy for his Congressional offices based on sexual orientation and gender identity.

He is an original co-sponsor of the Hate Crimes Prevention bill, which would extend federal jurisdiction over serious, violent hate crimes. It would also finally include crimes motivated by sexual orientation and sexual identity to be considered hate crimes.

Kerry also introduced the HIV Nondiscrimination in Travel and Immigration Act that would repeal the outdated, misguided provision in the Immigration and Nationality Act, which bars HIV positive individuals from entering the United States, including HIV positive family members, doctors and experts, as well as refugees seeking asylum. This long standing ban against those with HIV only serves to stigmatize the disease and discriminate against those infected.

In 1990, Kerry cosponsored the first Ryan White Comprehensive AIDS Resources Emergency Act (CARE)—which represents the largest discretionary federal investment in treating individuals with HIV and AIDS. Kerry also sponsored the Vaccines for the New Millennium Act, aimed at boosting contributions to the International AIDS Vaccine Initiative, a non-profit group working to promote development of an HIV vaccine in 2000. Kerry also introduced the U.S. Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, TB, and Malaria Act, which would increase the federal funding of international HIV/AIDS efforts from approximately $1.7 billion in 2003 to $1.9 billion in 2004. This effort led to the Act’s unanimous passage in May 2003. AIDS activists have characterized Kerry as one of Congress’s top leaders on HIV/AIDS policy.

During the Clinton Administration, Kerry opposed the White House’s “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell Policy.” He was one of a few senators to testify before the Senate Armed Services Committee and call on the President to rescind the ban on gay and lesbian service members.

Kerry has repeatedly said that same-sex couples should be granted rights, including access to pensions, health insurance, family medical leave, bereavement leave, hospital visitation, survivor benefits, and other basic legal protections, that all families and children need. He has supported legislation to provide domestic partners of federal employees the benefits available to spouses of federal employees including the Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligations Act. He was one of 14 Senators -- and the only one up for reelection in 1996 -- to oppose the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).

Here in Massachusetts, just last spring, Kerry worked with Governor Deval Patrick and progressive legislators to help defeat a narrow and discriminatory constitutional amendment that would have banned same sex marriage in Massachusetts.

The HRC is America’s largest civil rights organization working to achieve gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender equality. Altogether, HRC endorsed 14 Senators or candidates for Senate it says will continue advancing the issues the campaign cares about. In 2006, the HRC and its 700,000 members were involved in 200 House and Senate races. Their candidates won 94% of those races.

Schumer was opposed to this as of the 109th Congress

Uniting American Families Act (S. 1278) (Co-Sponsorship) Senators were asked to co-sponsor legislation (formerly called the PermanentPartners Immigration Act) that would amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to provide same-sex partners of U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents the same immigration benefits legal spouses of U.S. residents enjoy. As of Sept. 9, 006,
measure had 14 co-sponsors: Democrats 1 ; Republicans 1; Independents 1.

PDF

I'm glad Schumer came around to supporting civil marriage, but that Kerry has been out there for years doing more than talking.

[beachmom]

17. You guys just don't get it.

This is the SAME OLD problem that Kerry has suffered in the past: he does good things and no one even knows about it. He would be recognized more if he knew how to talk about the issue. But he refuses to talk about it in clear language so that people can understand. Therefore, the very bad reputation he suffered for his 2004 presidential campaign where he had to come out AGAINST the law of the land in Mass. is his lasting legacy people will remember. They will not hear about his work to help the Brazilian. They will not hear about all the great stuff you are posting and links you are providing.

[Mass]

19. And you think using the word marriage will change that?

I am sometimes irritated with Kerry's caution, but this seems very overblown for me. I agree with TayTay that I would prefer see him come strongly for poor people in MA than spend one more minute right now whether to use the word marriage. BTW, the article you quoted was originally named "Schumer flips on gay marriage", which tells you what the reporter really thought of his move.

[karynnj]

20. Do you think anyone who said clearly they were for gay marriage

could have won the general election in 2004? The fact is that Obama, whose church is ok with gay marriage - though Illinois isn't, did NOT say anything significantly different in 2008 - Kerry was actually MORE specific on what "full federal rights" were and that he would ask for legislation. With Obama, some people just assumed that he really was for it, but couldn't say it. Obama also has the advantage of being able as President to continue to change and have people see the results of any change.

I also think "very bad reputation" is complete overkill. The Bay State Stonewall Democrats gave him a strong recommendation in the primary. Even at the fringe - where Blue Mass was, many were angry and some supported O'Reilly, but the vast majority when pushed agreed that he had on all other GLBT issues been not just ok, but a hero. As an antidote to my BM created worries, I made 50 plus primary calls and not one person mentioned his position on gay rights and a very large percent of people volunteered that they would vote for him. This was in MA - where the fact that he represented MA was far more important than elsewhere.

There is a lot of truth in what you say. Kerry had more visibility in 2004 and there is some real tendancy to hold him to his 2004 positions - while allowing everyone else to change. In all I read, there is NOTHING that is clearer in Schumer's comments. Here, Schumer simply seemed to say he would lead in repealing DOMA. This is not beyond Kerry's 2004 or even 1996 position. It will be interesting to see when and if he files legislation and if he then actually causes it to be brought to the floor of the Senate. Until that happens, he has just words - and words that contradict his past actions.

Looking at the GLBT forum here and some articles linked to threads there, on the main forum and here, it seems to me that there is more trust and even affection for Kerry than for Schumer and the articles on Kerry's actions in the gay press were positive. Kerry is given more credit than the Clintons. I suspect this reflects the list of things they know Kerry has done over the decades. In fact, the only major politician I see more hope about is Obama - but that is in a "we'll see" vein.

[karynnj]

21. Searching Thomas, the only bill found

searching for Defense of Marriage Act, is one that has to be unconstitutional by Dan Burton (who was an idiot in the Indiana state legislature when I was at IU in the 1970s and is still one in the House now) The surprise is Mr Libertarian Ron Paul is a co-sponsor!

"H.R.1269
Title: To amend title 28, United States Code, to limit Federal court jurisdiction over questions under the Defense of Marriage Act.
Sponsor: Rep Burton, Dan (introduced 3/3/2009) Cosponsors (15)
Latest Major Action: 3/16/2009 Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on Courts and Competition Policy.
Jump to: Summary, Major Actions, All Actions, Titles, Cosponsors, Committees, Related Bill Details, Amendments
SUMMARY AS OF:
3/3/2009--Introduced.

Marriage Protection Act of 2009 - Amends the federal judicial code to deny federal courts jurisdiction to hear or decide any question pertaining to the interpretation of, or the validity under the Constitution, of the provision of the Defense of Marriage Act declaring that no state shall be required to give effect to any marriage between persons of the same sex under the laws of any other state.
MAJOR ACTIONS:

***NONE***

ALL ACTIONS:

3/3/2009:
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.

3/16/2009:
Referred to the Subcommittee on Courts and Competition Policy.

TITLE(S): (italics indicate a title for a portion of a bill)

* SHORT TITLE(S) AS INTRODUCED:
Marriage Protection Act of 2009

* OFFICIAL TITLE AS INTRODUCED:
To amend title 28, United States Code, to limit Federal court jurisdiction over questions under the Defense of Marriage Act.

COSPONSORS(15), ALPHABETICAL : (Sort: by date)


Rep Akin, W. Todd - 3/3/2009
Rep Alexander, Rodney - 3/3/2009
Rep Bartlett, Roscoe G. - 3/3/2009
Rep Barton, Joe - 3/11/2009
Rep Boozman, John - 3/3/2009
Rep Carter, John R. - 3/3/2009
Rep Graves, Sam - 3/3/2009
Rep Hall, Ralph M. - 3/3/2009
Rep Jones, Walter B., Jr. - 3/11/2009
Rep Lamborn, Doug - 3/3/2009
Rep Linder, John - 3/3/2009
Rep Manzullo, Donald A. - 3/3/2009
Rep Paul, Ron - 3/3/2009
Rep Pitts, Joseph R. - 3/11/2009
Rep Poe, Ted - 3/3/2009

COMMITTEE(S):

Committee/Subcommittee: Activity:
House Judiciary Referral, In Committee
Subcommittee on Courts and Competition Policy Referral

RELATED BILL DETAILS:

***NONE***

AMENDMENT(S):

***NONE***