House Votes on Federal Gay Marriage Bill

[maddezmom]

WASHINGTON - The Republican-led House voted Thursday to prevent federal courts from ordering states to recognize gay marriages sanctioned by other states.



The Marriage Protection Act was adopted by a 233-194 vote, buoyed by backing from the Bush administration. Last week, the Senate dealt gay marriage opponents a setback by failing to advance a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex unions.


Federal judges, unelected and given lifetime appointments, "must not be allowed to rewrite marriage policy for the states," Rep. Sue Myrick, R-N.C., said.


Democrats said the bill was an election-year distraction, calling it an unconstitutional attack on gays in America and the federal judiciary. They said it would set a precedent that Congress could use to shield any future legislation from federal judicial review.

~snip~
more: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=512&ncid=718&e=5&u=/ap/20040722/ap_on_go_co/house_gay_marriage

[bushisanidiot]

1. "Defense of Marriage Act" "Marriage Protection Act"

how many more of these things do they need?

they will be struck down as being unconstitutional.

It WILL happen..

[BlueEyedSon]

2. Isn't this unconstitutional?

Can one branch of the US gov't take action to redefine the role of another branch?

[CO Liberal]

4. That's What They Said on NPR This Morning

They said that this tactic could backfire on conservatives. If they're allowed to do this and in the future they lose control of Congress, a gun control law could be passed that no court could rul on.

All in all, very dangerous and totally unconstitutional.

[Endangered Specie]

20. The Congress has constitutional power to "ordain and establish"

inferior courts, and I believe they can alter the judiciary/judicial proceedings with relatively slack restrictions. Part of the checks and balances thing

[Frodo]

30. You say tomato, I say tomato (gee that does't come out as well when typed)

:-)

You say "checks and balances" I say "seperation of powers"

I'm pretty sure the courts will find the law unconstitutional... and they can't pass a law that keeps the courts from reviewing the law... especially if the law is held from going in to effect by a court...

This is circular!

[yellowcanine]

35. Constitution, schmunstitution - We have an election to steal. Obfuscate,

divert, deny, spin, spin, above all, spin!

[nickinSTL]

3. failed in Senate

Ok, this wasn't even brought up for discussion in the Senate.

It has to pass the Senate before being sent to the Pres to sign, right? Any chance it'd pick up the votes in the Sen. necessary to pass?

[Q3JR4]

5. For the MPA to become law,

all it needs from the senate is a majority. Unless the Democrats filibuster it.

If not, assuming that everyone votes the same way as they did for the FMA, it won't happen. That, of course, is not a given.

[Frodo]

32. Ummm "Senate"... "Kerry"..... "Edwards"

It doesn't NEED to pass (Heck, they KNOW it's unconstitutional).

It just needs to come to a VOTE and have Kerry and/or Edwards skip the vote ot (better yet) vote "No".


It's an "election thing"

[sinkingfeeling]

6. Let's all send messages to Rep. John Hostettler .....

Did you read this quote?
Rep. John Hostettler, R-Ind., the bill's author, likened the Supreme Court to the Soviet Politburo. "As few as five people in black robes can look at a particular issue and determine for the rest of us, insinuate for the rest of us that they are speaking as the majority will. They are not," Hostettler said.

Think I'll remind him that this is exactly how I felt after the '5' selected * against the will of the voting public in 2001!!

[shoelace414]

15. Don't the justices on the supreme court

have an Ego?

[Terran]

26. I don't believe this would affect the SCOTUS

They can't be restricted by Congress as to what they can and cannot hear. Just guessing, I'm not 100% sure about that.

[reprobate]

16. Hostettler, you are an idiot. Go back to school and learn civics.

At least they used to call it civics back in the brown shoe corp days when I was in school.

The job of the courts is not to reflect the will of the majority. The job of the courts is to determine constitutionality. Period.

In fact one of the jobs of the courts is to protect minorities from the will of the majority.

My question is: how can anyone rise to the level of a member of the house of representatives and still labor under such misinformation? Or is this intentional?

Oh, of course. He's a repuglican.

Genetically unable to speak truths.

[monarch]

24. Sent hostettler's opponent $100

I have made a resolution that whenever a repuke says something particularly idiotic and completely distasteful, I will try to make a contribution to his opponent. I won't be able to do it very often but if anything merits such an action, this sure does!

[nickinSTL]

7. vote by member?

Any list available of who voted for/against?

[UVAlaw]

8. Haven't seen one

Yet. I imagine it was mostly a partyy line vote. Probably won't pass the Senate as I imagine a filibuster would be likely. Would more than likely be held unconstitutional if it did pass both houses. Serious equal protection/due process questions.

[Q3JR4]

9. I can tell you my "representatives"

voted for it, so I don't really need to know otherwise.

I would, however, like to get a look at the list of Dems. who voted with the majority on this issue.

[realFedUp]

11. List "not available yet" of H.R.3313

But 48 cosponsors are listed....nice little legislation to slip
through today while others are looking at 9/11 book.

COSPONSORS(48), ALPHABETICAL : (Sort: by date)
Rep Akin, W. Todd - 10/16/2003 Rep Barrett, J. Gresham - 10/20/2003
Rep Bartlett, Roscoe G. - 10/16/2003 Rep Bishop, Rob - 2/26/2004
Rep Collins, Mac - 5/19/2004 Rep Cunningham, Randy (Duke) - 5/19/2004
Rep Davis, Jo Ann - 3/11/2004 Rep Davis, Tom - 7/13/2004
Rep DeMint, Jim - 5/11/2004 Rep Duncan, John J., Jr. - 3/30/2004
Rep Forbes, J. Randy - 10/16/2003 Rep Garrett, Scott - 10/16/2003
Rep Goode, Virgil H., Jr. - 10/16/2003 Rep Gutknecht, Gil - 10/16/2003
Rep Hall, Ralph M. - 5/11/2004 Rep Hastings, Doc - 7/14/2004
Rep Hensarling, Jeb - 1/21/2004 Rep Herger, Wally - 5/11/2004
Rep Hunter, Duncan - 5/11/2004 Rep Jenkins, William L. - 6/23/2004
Rep Johnson, Sam - 10/20/2003 Rep Jones, Walter B., Jr. - 10/16/2003
Rep King, Steve - 7/14/2004 Rep Kingston, Jack - 5/11/2004
Rep Lewis, Ron - 7/9/2004 Rep Manzullo, Donald A. - 7/13/2004
Rep McCotter, Thaddeus G. - 6/23/2004 Rep Miller, Jeff - 11/18/2003
Rep Neugebauer, Randy - 10/20/2003 Rep Northup, Anne - 1/28/2004
Rep Norwood, Charlie - 10/20/2003 Rep Otter, C. L. (Butch) - 6/24/2004
Rep Paul, Ron - 10/16/2003 Rep Pence, Mike - 10/16/2003
Rep Petri, Thomas E. - 6/15/2004 Rep Pombo, Richard W. - 5/11/2004
Rep Rahall, Nick J., II - 6/15/2004 Rep Rogers, Mike D. - 7/13/2004
Rep Ryun, Jim - 5/19/2004 Rep Sessions, Pete - 7/9/2004
Rep Simpson, Michael K. - 6/24/2004 Rep Smith, Nick - 10/16/2003
Rep Stearns, Cliff - 3/30/2004 Rep Terry, Lee - 10/30/2003
Rep Tiahrt, Todd - 10/21/2003 Rep Wamp, Zach - 11/17/2003
Rep Weldon, Dave - 10/16/2003 Rep Wilson, Joe - 10/21/2003

[Dickie Flatt]

13. Link to votes HERE

Check here.

[nickinSTL]

10. vote

I've checked the Thomas list of votes, but it doesn't seem to be up yet.

I'm hoping my Rep voted against it. He was against FMA, so hopefully this as well.

[Laughing Mirror]

12. Rep. Hostettler drenched in irony;

Rep. John Hostettler, R-Ind., the bill's author, likened the Supreme Court to the Soviet Politburo. "As few as five people in black robes can look at a particular issue and determine for the rest of us, insinuate for the rest of us that they are speaking as the majority will. They are not," Hostettler said.

[yellowcanine]

34. Hey Hostettler - how about your buddy George "Effin 5-4" Bush? Didn't

hear you squawking then about 5 justices not speaking for the majority. Well? Cat got your tongue?

[liveoaktx]

14. Geez, this Rep thinks the SCOTUS is like Soviet Politburo

Rep. John Hostettler, R-Ind., the bill's author, likened the Supreme Court to the Soviet Politburo. "As few as five people in black robes can look at a particular issue and determine for the rest of us, insinuate for the rest of us that they are speaking as the majority will. They are not," Hostettler said.
****
Uh, it's part of our DEMOCRACY, 3 prongs.

[sinkingfeeling]

17. My email to Hostettler.....probably shouldn't have sent it from work!

Dear Representative Hostettler,

I was fascinated by your comments regarding the Supreme Court, "As few as five people in black robes can look at a particular issue and determine for the rest of us, insinuate for the rest of us that they are speaking as the majority will. They are not."

Those, sir, were my exact thoughts when in January 2001, five members of that court discounted the will of the voting public and installed a fictitious, Right Wing extremist acting president. I intend to soundly defeat him and all fascist, GOP members of Congress, who so hate the US Constitution and the idea of personal liberty.

[mitchtv]

18. I see Miss David Drier voted for it

someone please out that closet queen

[David__77]

21. No kidding!

I'm so glad that the pro-outing side is winning out in the debate these days. I recall arguing for it here and being blasted by a large majority of the posters. I think people are beginning to realize that it's entirely legitimate to out such people like Dreier.

[David Zephyr]

22. Yes, Davie "Dottie" Drier, Arnold's Favorite Girlie-Man Lawmaker Voted Aye

It's high time that Dottie Drier be returned to Kansas where Dottie belongs:

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2004/roll410.xml

[mitchtv]

29. thanks for the backup,

I expected a lot of "oh ones'sexuality doesn't/shouldn't figure into it" It sure as fuck does.Log Cabin repubs should just hide their greedy faces. while I'm at it.

[reprobate]

19. And my email to this fool

"As few as five people in black robes can look at a particular issue and determine for the rest of us, insinuate for the rest of us that they are speaking as the majority will. They are not," Hostettler said.

Sir:

May I respectfully suggest that you take a leave of absence from the congress and enroll in a high school civics class?

Let me remind you that it is not the job of the USSC to determine the will of the majority. That is left to the ballot box. As you well know, the job of the court is to determine the constitutionality of a law. Period.

In fact, one of the jobs of our courts is to protect the minority from the will of the majority. I suggest you google "slavery" for just one example.

It seems more than just disingenuous that you utter such disinformation. Funny, but I can remember a time when someone speaking from the pit of congress would turn heaven and hell to speak the truth. Times change, I guess. For a Republican to utter this kind of untruth must be intentional.

Respectfully,

[MallRat]

23. 27 Democrats voted YES to emasculate our Federal Courts.

I hope your Rep. is not on this list:

Alexander
Berry
Boucher
Boyd
Carson (OK)
Chandler
Costello
Cramer
Davis (TN)
Edwards
Gordon
Herseth
Holden
John
Lucas (KY)
Marshall
Matheson
McIntyre
Peterson (MN)
Rahall
Ross
Sandlin
Skelton
Stenholm
Tanner
Taylor (MS)
Turner (TX)


3 Democrats did not vote:
Carson (IN)
Kucinich
Lowey

17 Republicans voted against the measure, but that's little consolation.

-MR

[dusty64]

25. I said it on another

thread and I must say it again, COCKROACHES!

[Justitia]

27. Whoa nelly! Herseth??? WTF???

I've been an ardent supporter of Herseth via Emily's List!
What the hell is she doing????

And Stenholm too????

I demand some answers from these women - like yesterday!

[liveoaktx]

31. Stenholm almost never votes a good Dem ticket

I live in his district so I'm not surprised. The only good thing is that he sent out an email before his vote to tell us that's what he was planning to do. On the other hand, the man who is in our new district, Chet Edwards, voted for this as well, presumably to pander to the Republicans in the gerrymandered district who would not be able to look past the terms *gay marriage* to see the court issue.

[Justitia]

28. Hastert has no time to address 9-11 recommendations

but has time for this?!?!?!

I AM OUTRAGED!

I watched that gasbag say on TV today that the House will not have any time to address ANY of the 9-11 recommendations this session, but they have all the fucking time they need to rape the federal courts and gay bash????!!!!

What the hell is going on in the House of Non-Representatives?

Who is NO ONE asking this question but me?
Am I going insane?

[Frodo]

33. Soooo?

When we get attacked again in October...

We'll have a tape of him saynig there's no time to address the terrorism report that says we're going to be attacked again soon?