Credit Where Credit Is Due-- Some House Republican Closet Cases Don't Sign On As Cosponsors To A Homophobic Bill

The closeted gay congressman from North Carolina who always carries water for extremist hate groups

Yesterday AmericaBlog posted a list of the 95 biggest homophobes on the US House basing it on which bigots were willing to sign on as co-sponsors to Missouri's gay obsessed Vicky Hartzler's resolution demanding President Obama defend DOMA in court.

This list pretty much comprises the biggest homophobes in the U.S. House of Representatives. They're all Republicans. The list is also an indication that the newly elected teabaggers are not just focused on fiscal issues. A number of the cosponsors are freshmen (for example, Sean Duffy (WI), Kristi Noem (SD), Tim Scott (GA) and many more.) So, yeah, the teabaggers are hard-core right-wingers on social issues, too... They hate the gays and nothing will stop them. It's pure bigotry. For some of them, rhetorical and legislative gay-bashing is a passion, even an obsession.

Joe Sudbay, the writer, explains that they all have LGBT constituents, of course, but he doesn't point out that at least two of them are notorious closet cases themselves, Trent Franks (R-AZ) and Patrick McHenry (R-NC). That's not to say that none of the others are; it's just that Franks and McHenry have been blatant and publicly exposed. I don't know what hotties Howard Coble (R-NC), Michael Grimm (R-NY), and Adam Kinzinger (R-IL) do behind closed doors. On the other hand, several notorious GOP closet cases have not signed on as cosponsors, including Adam Schock (IL) and David Dreier (R-CA).

I might add at this point that Blue America has a page dedicated to replacing homophobes in Congress and we'll be actively working to make sure at least a couple of the worst offenders have robust challenges. I notice that the #1 homophobe on the AmericaBlog list, at least alphabetically, is central Florida's healthcare hypocrite and clueless bigot Sandy Adams. I asked her Democratic opponent in the 2012 congressional race for his stand on marriage equality. As usual, he didn't hesitate:

The tragedy of discrimination knows no boundaries. That is why it is deplorable that in the United States, there still remain individuals whose prejudice runs so deep, that they would seek to legislate their sexual preference into laws that selfishly favor their own gender identification or sexual preference, by denying basic social and civil rights to other citizens who share different ways of life. The fact that DOMA was signed into law by a Democratic president is equally detestable, as DOMA rails against democracy in every sense of the word. In the case of Rep. Sandy Adams (R-FL), who I am running against in Florida District 24, and her Republican brethren-- I can only say that the depravity of their continued support for DOMA is intellectually bankrupt and spiritually deafening.

We added Ruiz to the page today.

Meanwhile, Jerry Nadler (D-NY) has just re-introduced the Respect for Marriage Act, which would repeal DOMA once and for all. I got this letter from him yesterday:

The long march toward equality and civil rights for gay and lesbian Americans took a major detour in 1996, when the regressive and overtly discriminatory Defense for Marriage Act (DOMA) was signed into law and the forces of intolerance temporarily triumphed over rationality and compassion. But, while progress comes much more slowly than we want, our society’s feelings about gays and lesbians-- and their rights-- have thankfully changed dramatically in 15 years.

For one, President Bill Clinton, who signed DOMA into law, and former Congressman Bob Barr (R-GA), who authored that terrible legislation, have changed their minds and renounced DOMA and endorsed my legislation-- the Respect for Marriage Act-- to repeal it.

Today, we find ourselves at a crossroads, in which the majority Americans support the rights of gays and lesbians to marry, and in which President Barack Obama has boldly announced that DOMA is unconstitutional and that the Department of Justice will not defend it in court. Meanwhile, the House Republican Leadership appears more out of touch and remote from the needs and values of Americans than ever, pledging now to use the public’s resources to continue to defend DOMA in court.

But today is a historic day: I have re-introduced the Respect for Marriage Act to repeal DOMA and remove the federal government from the business of discriminating against legally married gay and lesbian Americans. This legislation is the product of years of work and consensus among our nation’s foremost LGBT advocates and leaders, along with elected officials who care about the rights of all Americans, and I am extremely proud to do my part.

Now, as we continue the struggle for equality, the question at hand is not IF Congress will repeal DOMA but WHEN.  I can imagine the day when my future grandchildren will ask, “so what was the big deal about gay marriage anyway?” But, until we get there, we must continue to fight. Please say “I DO Support the Respect for Marriage Act,” sign the petition, and stay informed about my efforts toward marriage equality for all Americans. Thank you for all that you do to make equality a reality.

Representatives Of Big Gay Districts in CA, TX And FL Won't Sign On As Sponsors Of The Respect For Marriage Act

No respect for marriage from Mary Whittaker Bono Baxley & Cornelius Alexander McGillicuddy IV

Early this morning, Ken did an excellent job of explaining the importance of the Respect For Marriage Act, the bigger picture. He also republished Earl Blumenauer's moving Huffington Post piece on why he's changed his position on DOMA, something everyone should read, a yes vote in 1996 that the veteran lawmaker now calls "the worst vote of my political career." Today Blumenauer is one of the 91 co-sponsors of the Respect For Marriage Act.

My congressmember, Diane Watson is on that list too, and so is Ken's (Charlie Rangel). I live in the 33rd CD in Los Angeles, in a district without any ostensibly gay neighborhoods-- no West Hollywood, no Silverlake, no Echo Park, no Venice. In fact, it's a solidly middle class district with lots and lots and lots of churches. The district is only about 20% white, with far more blacks and far more Hispanics than Caucasians and it includes Koreatown. Watson won with 88% last year, the first time she's had an opponent since 2002 (when she garnered a mere 83%). I can't imagine where the 12% who voted for McCain came from; maybe elderly people who couldn't get the peg in the right hole on the ballot. This year, though, Watson has a slick prosecutor running against her, Felton Newell. He doesn't sound like he's going to be the kind of committed, fighting progressive that she is. He's already attacked her for wanting to liberalize U.S. policy towards Cuba and he sounds more like a Republican than like a Democrat. We haven't heard his position on this yet; it's probably something he'll have whispered than in writing.

Here's the full list of the original 91 co-sponsors of the bill, all Democrats:

Jerry Nadler (D-NY) Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Jared Polis (D-CO), John Conyers (D-MI), Eliot Engel (D-NY), Mary Jo Kilroy (D-OH), Jackie Speier (D-CA), Shelley Berkley (D-NV), Alcee Hastings (D-FL), Carolyn Maloney (D-NY), Mike Quigley (D-IL), Steve Israel (D-NY), Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), Raúl Grijalva (D-AZ), Neil Abercrombie (D-HI), Diana Degette (D-CO), Pete Stark (D-CA), Robert Wexler (D-FL), Peter Welch (D-VT), Linda Sánchez (D-CA), Lynn Woolsey (D-CA), Mike Capuano (D-MA), Anthony Weiner (D-NY), José Serrano (D-NY), John Olver (D-MA), Earl Blumenauer (D-OR), Ed Markey (D-MA), Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC), Paul Hodes (D-NH), Gary Ackerman (D-NY), Nydia Velázquez (D-NY), Bob Andrews (D-NJ), Chaka Fattah (D-PA), George Miller (D-CA), Barbara Lee (D-CA), Maurice Hinchey (D-NY), Mike Honda (D-CA), Jim McDermott (D-WA), Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL), Diane Watson (D-CA), Nita Lowey (D-NY), Yvette Clarke (D-NY), Keith Ellison (D-MN), Robert Brady (D-PA), Luis Gutierrez (D-IL), Donna Edwards (D-MD), Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), Frank Pallone (D-NJ), Rush Holt (D-NJ), John Larson (D-CT), Edolphus Towns (D-NY), John Lewis (D-GA), Bobby Scott (D-VA), Xavier Becerra (D-CA), Jim Moran (D-VA), Bob Filner (D-CA), Henry Waxman (D-CA), Lucille Roybal-Allard (D-CA), Chris Murphy (D-CT), Ed Pastor (D-AZ), Lois Capps (D-CA), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), Bill Delahunt (D-MA), James McGovern (D-MA), Brad Sherman (D-CA), Joe Sestak (D-PA), Howard Berman (D-CA), Carol Shea-Porter (D-NH), Jesse Jackson, Jr (D-IL), Steve Rothman (D-NJ), Patrick Kennedy (D-RI), Susan Davis (D-CA), Chellie Pingree (D-ME), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Paul Tonko (D-NY), Nikki Tsongas (D-MA), Hank Johnson (D-GA), Doris Matsui (D-CA), Jane Harman (D-CA), Grace Napolitano (D-CA), John Tierney (D-MA), Jim Himes (D-CT), Joe Courtney (D-CT), Mike Doyle (D-PA), Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), Sam Farr (D-CA), Gregory Meeks (D-NY), Charlie Rangel (D-NY), Dan Maffei (D-NY), Rosa DeLauro (D-CT), Kathy Castor (D-FL), Betty McCollum (D-MN), and David Wu (D-OR).

Four Republicans with outsized gay populations in their districts-- 3 of whom try to play up to that community-- Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL), Mary Bono Mack (R-CA) and Mark Kirk (R-IL)-- are all refusing to sign on as co-sponsors. (The 4th is John Culberson a dedicated homophobe and represents the Montrose area of Houston.) Kirk, who's running for the U.S. Senate and is deathly afraid of teabaggers and extremists in his own party, has already shown what a complete coward he is by announcing that if he's elected to the Senate, he'll oppose the climate and energy bill he voted for in the House. Yeah, all anyone needs to do is scratch an eighth of an inch of hypocrisy off any mainstream Republican and you're left with... Joe Wilson or Virginia Foxx.

When I tweeted at 8AM that Ros-Lehtinen refuses to cosponsor the bill, she responded quickly but rather weakly: "Pleased to see folks on Hill pushing for 3 year Ryan White Act extention: HIV program that saves lives. Expires Sept 30. Needs to move fast." Bono-Mack, on the other hand, is just hiding under her bed.

Republican closet cases, of course, are getting nowhere near this. David Dreier (R-CA)-- whose closet door has been off its hinges for at least half a dozen years-- isn't only not a co-sponsor; he probably could be safely assumed to be a "no" vote. Adrian Smith (R-NE) and Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) hope people will let them off the hook because their gay "flings" were in their wild youths. Patrick McHenry, who's conveniently announced an engagement (to a woman) has been wild much more recently. None of them are co-sponsors and none can be considered even "maybes." There's also a closeted Blue Dog who isn't a sponsor but since he hasn't ever voted against any gay civil rights legislation, I won't out him... until he does.

Not expected to be a co-sponsor any time soon:

With 91 cosponsors, the Respect for Marriage Act (is that a great name or what?) is introduced to repeal and replace DOMA

UPDATE: THE LATEST ON DADT (see below)

"Today, in supporting this act, I am an arch conservative. Why is that? Because when you think about it, what have the conservatives said for all time about government's role? That government's role is to stay out of people's personal lives.

"This will allow people privacy and the right to make decisions that are most important to them. But most of all, it is about respect for what they decide to do with their own lives as long as they're not hurting anyone else. So what, I would ask, is a more intimate, more important, more critical decision, a more sacred decision than who we love -- and how we express that love?"

-- IL Rep. Mike Quigley, speaking yesterday at the introduction of the Respect for Marriage Act (at right is NY Rep. Jerrold Nadler, a prime mover of RMA)

"Whether this takes a year, six months, three years, what we're accomplishing here today is getting the ball rolling."

-- CO Rep. (and RMA sponsor) Jared Polis, at yesterday's press conference

by Ken

I know I keep making the point, but maybe I haven't made it enough: If the institution of marriage is in need of defending, there's nobody it needs defending from more than the people who pushed through the infamous Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), a piece of raw sludge and loathing which had no purpose other than to satisfy the boiling inner loathing of all those hate-mongers who seek relief from their own poisoned existences by trying to enforce their misery on others.

How many more "Christian pillars" of their tight-assed slave communities have to be revealed as closet sex maniacs (if not outright sociopaths)? How many more fire-and-brimstone clergymen revealed as wife- and child-beaters, and little-boy-molesters for good measure? The American Crap Christian institution of marriage is basically a warehouse-factory for the preservation and development of raging sociopaths (usually male) and their immediate-family victims (usually female). (Male offspring of course start out as victims, but that's how the system shapes them into into full-fledged wife- and child-beating sociopaths.)

If these people had a shred of sanity or honesty, they would acknowledge that allowing same-sex couples to marry if they wish has absolutely nothing to do with the survival of marriage either as conventionally understood or as they understand it -- as a breeding ground for hatred, social maladjustment, and domestic violence. The more rigorously right-wing and fundamentalist the "defenders of marriage," the more horrific the stories of the women and children who escape from their clutches, or in vastly greater number are swallowed up by it.

The screeching tyrants of Crap Christianity go bonkers anytime anyone suggests as much as tinkering with DOMA, one of their proudest accomplishments, and at the same time a lingering source of shame for the sane people who let themselves be cowed into enacting and signing the thing (about some of whom more in a moment). This is why I find myself in need of a heckuva lot of hats for tipping to the people responsible for this news yesterday:

Nadler, Baldwin and Polis Introduce the Respect for Marriage Act to Repeal the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA)

WASHINGTON, Sept. 15 - Today, Congressman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), Chair of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, Congresswoman Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) and Congressman Jared Polis (D-CO), along with Congressman John Conyers (D-MI), Congressman John Lewis (D-GA), Congresswoman Nydia Velazquez (D-NY) and Congresswoman Barbara Lee (D-CA), with a total of 91 original co-sponsors to date, introduced the Respect for Marriage Act in the House of Representatives. This legislation would repeal the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), a 1996 law which discriminates against lawfully married same-sex couples.

The 13-year-old DOMA singles out legally married same-sex couples for discriminatory treatment under federal law, selectively denying them critical federal responsibilities and rights, including programs like social security that are intended to ensure the stability and security of American families.

The Respect for Marriage Act, the consensus of months of planning and organizing among the nation’s leading LGBT and civil rights stakeholders and legislators, would ensure that valid marriages are respected under federal law, providing couples with much-needed certainty that their lawful marriages will be honored under federal law and that they will have the same access to federal responsibilities and rights as all other married couples. . . .

The Advocate's crackerjack Washington correspondent, Kerry Eleveld, has a thorough post on advocate.com on the announcement and the reaction to it, including the conspicuous absence among the bill's supporters of Massachusetts Rep. Barney Frank (who's not on board for various technical and practical reasons) as well as varying views on the content of the bill and its prospects. Not surprisingly, this is fine, likely indispensable reporting (what are the chances any infotainment-news reporter will bother to talk to the people Kerry did?). If you care about the nuts and bolts not to mention the ins and outs of the battle to come, read it.

Just now, however, I'm not -- for once -- in a nuts-and-bolts mood. I just want to take a brief look at the bigger picture.

First off, I have to say that "Respect for Marriage Act" is a brilliant name for a bill that, unlike the monstrous DOMA, really does show respect for marriage. The name might even put the loony opponents on the defensive. As a colleague pointed out, who could oppose something called the Respect for Marriage Act?

Not, for one, former President Bill Clinton, who signed DOMA into law in 1986. He sent a statement that was read at yesterday's announcement by New York Rep. Jerry Nadler, one of the prime movers of RMA:

“Throughout my life I have opposed discrimination of any kind. When the Defense of Marriage Act was passed, gay couples could not marry anywhere in the United States or the world for that matter. Thirteen years later, the fabric of our country has changed, and so should this policy.”

Of course we know who'll oppose RMA. In fact, they're already on the job. I don't know what the bill's prospects are, but I think 91 cosponsors is a pretty darned good start, and I want to offer a hat tip to each.

At least one of the 91 is a story in his own right. Oregon Democratic Rep. Earl Blumenauer told that story yesterday in a HuffPost piece, "Proudly Changing My Position on DOMA," which began:

On July 12, 1996 I cast the worst vote of my political career. Having served in public office since 1973, that says something. While I've made other mistakes, this was different: it was a deliberate vote that I knew to be poor public policy and was against my values. I've been a strong champion of civil rights and protections based on sexual orientation since I chaired the first legislative hearing on anti-discrimination legislation in 1973. Even worse, this vote was cast after careful consideration.

Having given it much thought, I was convinced that by voting for this one federal statute against the recognition of same-sex marriage, it would somehow take the steam out of the Newt Gingrich-Tom Delay Congress, which was using the homophobic right-wing agenda to mobilize their base at the expense of millions of gay, lesbian, transgendered, and bisexual Americans. My hope was to simply move on and get to more pressing business at hand, including smaller steps for equality based on sexual orientation, like legislation against employment discrimination.

Since I was an outspoken supporter of anti-discrimination, I assumed that my calculations would be understood by my friends in the community and that we would lay this obnoxious political vendetta to rest. Wrong on all counts.

It should have been obvious to me that we would not be able to quell this assault based on sexual orientation. Far from stopping it, this vote fed the bigotry. Once Congress had put its imprimatur on DOMA, it was a logical step for the homophobes and political cynics to intensify their efforts and make permanent a ban on gay marriage in both the U.S. and state constitutions -- spawning many state initiatives and intensifying the assault.

Barney Frank may have been correct "that there is zero chance of this bill becoming law in the near future," but Colorado Rep. Jared Polis, a leading RMA sponsor, was just as right when he said at yesterday's press conference, "Whether this takes a year, six months, three years, what we're accomplishing here today is getting the ball rolling."


UPDATE: WHAT ABOUT "DON'T ASK, DON'T TELL"?

Meanwhile, Kevin Naff reports for the Washington Blade that Pennsylvania Rep. Patrick Murphy has 166 cosponsors for his previously announced DADT repeal bill:

Murphy expects House hearings on DADT repeal
in early 2010

Rep. Patrick Murphy (D-Pa.) said he expects the House to hold hearings on a bill to repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" in winter or spring of 2010.

Murphy, speaking to the Blade at a Wednesday event sponsored by the Raben Group, a D.C.-based public affairs firm, also said he has 166 co-sponsors lined up for the measure and commitments from another 10 lawmakers to vote for the bill but not sponsor it.

Murphy took over as lead sponsor of the repeal effort in the House after Rep. Ellen Tauscher (D-Calif.) resigned her seat to take the job of undersecretary for Arms Control & International Security at the State Department.

Meanwhile, on the Senate side, prospects for ending the military's gay ban appeared to take a hit following the death of Sen. Edward Kennedy, who was expected to introduce a repeal bill in that chamber.

But earlier this summer, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) announced plans for a fall Senate hearing on the policy.

Gillibrand issued a press release in July thanking Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), the chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee, for agreeing to the hearings. Levin has said he supports repeal.

Murphy said he is confident that other senators will step up to champion repeal in that body.

"It looks like we have the votes in the Senate," Murphy said, adding that Levin's support is critical to passage.

The winter-spring timetable for House hearings is consistent with public comments by gay Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) this summer that he expects Congress to repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" in 2010.

#