THE FIRST THING we all need to do is congratulate the litigants in California for securing that incredible decision from the California Supreme Court saying that not allowing gays to marry constitutes discrimination. The second thing we need to do is recognize that this fight is far from over.
Those who want to amend the California State Constitution to ban gay marriage will likely have their amendment on the ballot in November and at this time it looks like they have the votes to win. We need to support our brothers and sisters in California in their fight and at the same time we need to plan for the future for all of us.
The Supreme Court decision in California has again brought the issue to the forefront in D.C. There are those who are calling for a marriage bill to be introduced immediately. Others are calling for the old Spagnoletti memo to be released. This is the memo written by Mayor Anthony Williams’ attorney general in response to the question of whether legal gay marriages in other locations could be recognized in D.C. After much debate, Williams decided not to release the memo and cited lawyer client privilege in not releasing it.
I have never seen the memo and though there are many rumors about what it says, I believe that memo is now irrelevant. A memo written more than four years ago for a previous mayor shouldn’t be of concern at this time.
But the issue is still very much alive and now with California potentially allowing couples from D.C. to get married, those couples have a right to know what their status will be once they return here. The question that our mayor and City Council will have to answer is when is the right time to move forward to clarify that recognition issue and to introduce a marriage bill?
We now have 11 Council members who have said they support gay marriage. Marion Barry has yet to commit to supporting such a bill and Carol Schwartz has said she is opposed to gay marriage. Mayor Fenty has committed to signing a marriage bill if it is passed by the Council.
I believe the right time for movement on these issues is fast approaching but I caution that it is not quite here yet. We in D.C. face an obstacle that the 50 states do not. Each bill we pass is subject to approval by Congress before it becomes law. In addition, through the power Congress has over our annual budget it has the right to negate actions that the city takes. We have seen this before when Congress stopped our domestic partner legislation from being implemented for more than 10 years and when it prohibited us from moving forward on needle exchange.
MY REAL CONCERN with the timing of moving on the marriage issue in D.C. is that were we to do this prior to the election in November, then we would give the far right in Congress the perfect opportunity to make this into an issue in the presidential election and in congressional races around the country.
By forcing a vote, they can respond to the California Supreme Court ruling by using the District of Columbia as their “Trojan Horse.” It is clear that the majority of Congress would not vote for gay marriage at this time. Democratic members of Congress in swing districts will make strong statements against it because they will need to protect their seats. I may not want them elected, but the reality is that choosing between the lesser of two evils, I will still choose the Democrat who will cast the first vote to elect Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid.
I WOULD SUGGEST to the activists in D.C. and those from around the nation that would like us to act to hold their fire and wait until after the November election. Let us all focus on winning the California battle in November.
Let us work hard to elect a Democratic President and increase our majorities in both houses of Congress and even elect a Council in D.C. that will vote unanimously for gay marriage. Then on Jan. 1, 2009 the time may be right for Mayor Fenty to ask his attorney general to issue an opinion on recognizing legal gay marriages from other states and for the new Council to introduce a marriage bill with a recognition clause if need be.
The
following comments were posted by our readers and were
not edited by the Washington Blade. We ask that you
treat others with respect; any post deemed offensive will
be removed.
stephenclark on 5/23/089:28 AM:
I agree with Peter. But while asking couples to wait for the planets to align on marriage, D.C. should go ahead and give out-of-District same-sex marriages at least all the rights, benefits, and obligations of D.C. domestic partnerships. Other places with domestic partnerships and civil unions handle out-of-state marriages that way, and it would alleviate many practical burdens of the delay that strategists are wisely asking folks to endure on "marriage." There is no guarantee of success on marriage in '09, especially if we lose the California victory in November. But couples need an answers.
