Republican lawmakers preparing themselves for a likely vote on a marriage equality bill in the Senate are expressing their reluctance, with some even disparaging the measure as unnecessary and a “stupid waste of time” — and doing so in front of their LGBTQ colleagues.
Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wisconsin), who is up for reelection this year and is the subject of a myriad controversies, suggested he will likely vote in favor of the bill when it comes up for a vote, but made no bones about his reluctance to do so.
The Respect for Marriage Act was crafted after conservative justices on the Supreme Court ended abortion rights last month that had been recognized since the 1973 decision on Roe v. Wade. They did so by arguing that the precedent discussed in the case — a penumbric constitutional right to privacy — was not explicitly written into the Constitution.
That notion could upend any number of other Supreme Court rulings of the past 60 years — including the right to contraception and birth control, the right to have consensual adult relationships without state interference, and indeed, the right of same-sex couples to marry, which was recognized in the 2015 decision on Obergefell v. Hodges.
Johnson dismissed such concerns when commenting on the Respect for Marriage Act this week.
“Unlike Roe v. Wade, I do not see any scenario in which the Supreme Court would overturn Obergefell,” he claimed. “The Respect for Marriage Act is another example of Democrats creating a state of fear over an issue in order to further divide Americans for their political benefit.”
However, in his concurring opinion, the far right Justice Clarence Thomas stated that cases like Obergefell should be reexamined, countering Johnson’s claims that the issue of same-sex marriage is settled.
Johnson wasn’t the only Republican lawmaker grumbling about the bill, as Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Florida) was also caught mocking the idea of a vote to codify marriage equality. While entering an elevator on Wednesday, Rubio whined that, to him, the bill was a “stupid waste of time.”
Rubio’s comments were heard by Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisconsin), who is not only the lead sponsor of the Respect for Marriage Act, but also the first open LGBTQ individual to be elected to the Senate. On Thursday, Baldwin recounted on CNN how she confronted Rubio while on the elevator with him.
“You probably would have loved to be on the elevator to see the exchange after,” she said.
Baldwin also tried to explain to her Republican colleague why the bill wasn’t a “waste of time.”
“I said that, ‘The recent Supreme Court decision eroded a constitutional right to privacy. There’s a whole bunch of cases that have been decided based on a constitutional right to privacy that are in jeopardy,’ which he disagrees with,” Baldwin said, adding that she told him “we’ll be talking some more.”
Baldwin did not elaborate on what Rubio said to her in response.
Like Johnson, Rubio is also up for reelection in this year’s midterm elections.
The Respect for Marriage Act would repeal the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), a homophobic law passed in the mid-1990s that stated the federal government would not recognize state-sanctioned same-sex marriages. It also allows states that define marriage as strictly between one man and one woman to not recognize same-sex marriages legalized in other states. In addition to repealing DOMA, the Respect for Marriage Act would also require states with bigoted laws on marriage to recognize same-sex marriages from other states.
We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.
As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.
Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.
As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.
At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.
Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.
You can help by giving today during our fundraiser. We have 5 days to add 340 new monthly donors. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.