Friday, June 25, 2004
A the Republicans Imploding?
I leave DC for one weekend and all hell breaks loose. First Cheney tells Patrick Lehey
"F.U." then the House decides that rather than move forward with a vote on FMA they'll do a test vote on it by banning gay marriage in the District of Columbia. Andrew Sullivan, as expected has written a decent piece on this issue. His thesis is that if the far right keeps saying the people should have their say, it's hypocritical to ban gay marriage by a vote of Congress since we residents of DC have NO VOTING REPRESENTATION IN CONGRESS.
Sullivan's post:
So this is where the revolution of 1994 has led...cussing and imposing congresses imperial will on a federal district that is little more than a colony. Seems to me this is an indication that they don't have the votes for FMA in the House, which is pretty suprising. They could instead focus on curbing spending, fixing social security and our intellengce services....nah....
"F.U." then the House decides that rather than move forward with a vote on FMA they'll do a test vote on it by banning gay marriage in the District of Columbia. Andrew Sullivan, as expected has written a decent piece on this issue. His thesis is that if the far right keeps saying the people should have their say, it's hypocritical to ban gay marriage by a vote of Congress since we residents of DC have NO VOTING REPRESENTATION IN CONGRESS.
Sullivan's post:
This has been the rallying cry for many social conservatives, outraged that courts might uphold minority rights on the issue of marriage. So what are they proposing this summer in the House? Because they apparently lack the votes to pass a Constitutional Amendment banning marriage rights (or any other legal protections) for gay couples, they are considering other options. According to
Amy Fagan, in the Washington Times yesterday, such options "include ... a measure that would define marriage in the District of Columbia as being between a man and a woman." How about the voters in the District of Columbia? The City Council has a majority that would support equal marriage rights for homosexuals. Voters probably agree. So why should Congressmen from other states dictate social policy for D.C.? As Bill Clinton might put it, because they can. Just please don't tell me that the campaign to prevent gay couples from marrying has anything to do with genuine concern for democracy. In D.C., it's the opposite. Why not let the people vote in DC on marriage rights? Because residents of the capital city are subjects not citizens.
So this is where the revolution of 1994 has led...cussing and imposing congresses imperial will on a federal district that is little more than a colony. Seems to me this is an indication that they don't have the votes for FMA in the House, which is pretty suprising. They could instead focus on curbing spending, fixing social security and our intellengce services....nah....
