Repealing DOMA Will Ease the Warren Sting

On inauguration day many gay Americans will have the small comfort of knowing Tammy Baldwin is one of fifteen ceremonial co-chairs while Rick Warren delivers the invocation.

In the uproar about the Warren pick, many have called on the gay community to calm down, wait and see and trust that Obama will make regulatory decisions that benefit LGBT citizens.

Well, lucky for Obama, there are a ton of choices out there for his first pro-gay action. Now, repealing Don't Ask Don't Tell has been floated as one opportunity, but I encourage the new President to try frying a bigger fish. If you really want to show your support for civil rights repeal the Defense of Marriage Act.

Even one author of DOMA - the Libertarian Party's Presidential nominee Bob Barr - thinks it's time for DOMA to retire.

In law school I met a number of libertarians, many of whom have remained my friends. I wouldn't say that we often agree about politics, but I found myself nodding along to the recent LA Times Op-Ed written by Barr.

The former Congressman's analysis of the failures of DOMA is watertight. He explains that DOMA was originally intended to protect a State's right to refuse to recognize same-sex marriage and it has now, instead, created a kind of,

one-way federalism: It protects only those states that don't want to accept a same-sex marriage granted by another state. Moreover, the heterosexual definition of marriage for purposes of federal laws -- including, immigration, Social Security survivor rights and veteran's benefits -- has become a de facto club used to limit, if not thwart, the ability of a state to choose to recognize same-sex unions.

More importantly, DOMA is what impedes LGBT access to the bundle of federal rights - including immigration rights - that are currently reserved for straight couples. When discussing equality in the marriage fight, access to the legal title is only one piece of a larger struggle. Even if states grant marriage one-by-one, the bulk of benefits won't be available to LGBT people as long as DOMA is in effect.

States grant marriage licenses, sure, but as Barr points out, the licenses they give to gay couples are pretty substandard.

For some, this means paying a bit more money on their annual tax return. For others, DOMA's restrictions mean that families are separated permanently because American citizens cannot sponsor their same-sex, foreign born partners into the country. Don't Ask Don't Tell can't boast that kind of clout.

Barr certainly is not an outspoken advocate of gay rights, but his belief in the primacy of state government and his libertarian commitment to small government means that he has become an ally of the LGBT community.

Warren was a slap in the face, yes, but repealing DOMA would be a great lift for LGBT Americans and would undo any animosity gay voters feel toward the new President. If Barr's op-ed is any indication, the project might be easier than one would think.

Comments

[carter2004]

Excellent idea, Emma. It's a great way for Obama to finally put his money where his mouth is on the issue of same-sex marriage. That said, I think it's about as statistically likely as Obama making contact with an alien civilization. But, hey -- prove me wrong!

[eden4barack08]

"Remember what Obama said about disagreeing without being disagreeable? Obama is wearing his disagreement with Warren about gays and lesbians on his sleeve, as one of the 16 families chosen to accompany Obama/Biden on their whistle stop tour is composed of two females...Placed by Obama on equal footing with every other family on the stage.

So, Rick Warren's "Family values" includes opposition to gay families. Well, Obama just illustrated what his "family values" are by supporting all families." By PLS

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/1/8/20428/51279?detail=f

[daltexman]

big deal that Obama is having two lesbians in his whistle stop tour -- it is just for show; look at me -- i hate gays and lesbians but i will do some window-dressing to keep the queers at bay. give me equal rights then we can talk!

[itmaybetoolate]

He will never do this. It wouldn't be "inclusive" of those who support DOMA, it will damage his "80 votes in the Senate" strategy, and it would open up a can of worms that he isn't willing to open. Imagine the outcry from the repugs and the evangelical christo-fascists over this!

Those of us in the LGBT community need to understand that our numbers are too low to pressure any politician, unless we receive the full and unwavering support of our straight progressive brothers and sisters. I don't hold my breath on that one, although I would like to be proven wrong (read some of the various blogs here on huffpost on warren and decide for yourself).

You heard it here first: No DOMA repeal, no ENDA passage, no supportive statements on any ballot initiatives regarding same-sex marriage. "Don't ask, don't tell?" That one might happen.

[eden4barack08]

Sorry, I don't share your pessimism. I believe Obama is a man of his word, and will do everything in his power to keep his agenda, and believe me, he's NOT a man who accepts failure very easily.

[itmaybetoolate]

And yet he didn't have the courage to stand up for the gay and lesbian community when it counted. Instead he chose to honor a homophobic bigot.

Perhaps he is a man of his word as you say. Perhaps he supports what warren believes. Perhaps that is the lesson I should take away from this.

[DEEMA]

So, if I understand it correctly, gays are not voting for Barack on 2010 because Warren is praying at the swearing in ceremony? Wow. All I can say is good luck with whoever you vote for, as far as resolving the LGBTQ issues.

[marignymitch]

You don't understand it correctly. Obviously.

[david43a]

And you Deema?
Using whatever the "Prophet" (profit?) of the hour says to justify
your personal bias's.....is nothing new! As you should know.
you have fallen prey to willful ignorance!
That is, dear, that if 10,000,000 GLBT's tell you they did not "choose"
to be what they are and you still cling to the notion that it is a choice...
That is being willfully ignorant.
Of course you must believe this to prop up your oft stated objections to LGBT folks
even trying to compare their struggles to those of black folks....
For if you acknowledge that it is not a choice, then, in fact, there is no difference at all.
And your bias will be shown to be what it truly is...hate of the "other"...

[AbbieXHoffman]

As usual, you don't understand anything about this issue.

[Kartoffel]

Get real. There's not a snowball's chance in hell that Obama is going to expend a big chunk of political capital on this issue. He just won't. He has a history of being extremely stingy with political capital, and he's done nothing to show that gay rights is the issue that will cause him to break that habit.

[david43a]

Kartoffel, you have it right, sad as that is to me.

We can make a bet, which is first?
out of Iraq or repeal of DOMA?

[southwindow]

Well barack has publicly committed to both... oh wait, i get it!
neither

[marignymitch]

I have to agree sadly. We're only talking about gays here; it's not like they're real people or anything ;] (I once was an enthusiastic supporter of Obama--until he violated his oath of office to support FISA.) The election is over, we supported him, but we're no long useful so we're now in the rearview mirror. Thems the facts. And Obama is a politician.

[FearlessFreep]

Progressives can still demand it. And Congress can ignore BO and take the lead themselves.

[AbbieXHoffman]

That's correct. But gays don't need him. All they need is the Constitution and the SC and their own energy.

[eden4barack08]

You know, this is exactly what we were trying to tell you when you were too busy throwing a tantrum to listen. Obama had voted against DOMA anyway.
This is one of the platforms Obama ran on from the beginning of his candidacy and has been on his website since. That's why we were telling you to judge him on the policies he sets once President, rather than the character of a three minute invocation preacher he picked. I'm glad you've decided to start reasoning.

Here again, look at the promises Obama's campaign made to LGBT, then wait until he breaks these promises before shouting again, please.

http://pride.barackobama.com/page/content/lgbthome (click on Issues)

Support Full Civil Unions and Federal Rights for LGBT Couples:
Barack Obama supports full civil unions that give same-sex couples equal legal rights and privileges as married couples. Obama also believes we need to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act and enact legislation that would ensure that the 1,100+ federal legal rights and benefits currently provided on the basis of marital status are extended to same-sex couples in civil unions and other legally-recognized unions. These rights and benefits include the right to assist a loved one in times of emergency, the right to equal health insurance and other employment benefits, and property rights.

[singforpeace]

You make a good point but you are incredibly patronizing in your delivery. The response to the Warren invocation is not a bunch of whining. And to be constantly told to quiet down is not helpful. We have every right to be upset, to react, to keep issues in the forefront. Because we supported and, for me, still support PE Obama does not mean that we have to silence our outrage when he makes an egregious error as he did in this case.

[JohnFromCensornati]

The Obamabots learned well from Bushco. It's unpatriotic to criticize the prez.

[Eclectic Radical]

The response to the Warren invocation has covered a wide range. At least part of that response CAN be described as 'a bunch of whining.' There have also been angry attacks, thoughtful critiques, and careful cautions to wait and see. Some gay contributors and commenters have noted they do not believe marriage rights to be the most important goal of their movement and believe the benefit of a fight over gay marriage would be outweighed by the lack of progress on issues they feel more meaningful for them. They have been attacked for not falling in line with the rest of the movement and told to quiet down. A great deal of the commentary, from all sides both for and against, about the Warren invocation has been unpleasant and divisive in tone rather than meaningful debate. People are very angry about California's Prop 8, myself included, but Prop 8 cannot be the only issue on the liberal plate when there is so MUCH damage to undo.

[oafishcad]

Obama didn't vote against DOMA. He wasn't in the Senate when it passed. Could you provide a link to show he's spoken against DOMA? And civil unions are not equality any more than sitting at the back of the bus is equality. The word equal has a meaning. That's all gays want. Equality.

[NCYvonne]

If all you wanted was equality, you wouldn't have launched a month-long temper tantrum about an invocation that will have NO impact on gay equality.

If all you wanted was equailty, you would have saved your political capital to focus on issues like DOMA and DADT instead of subjecting everyone Obama selects to the "how much do they love gays" litmus test.

[eden4barack08]

I may have confused it with the Federal Marriage Amendment of 2006. He voted against that, and believes DOMA should be repealed. So what if he wasn't in the Senate then? This is still what he believes.
I'm providing you a link to his website, which was how he spoke to many in two years of campaigning. Isn't that enough?

Oppose a Constitutional Ban on Same-Sex Marriage: Barack Obama voted against the Federal Marriage Amendment in 2006 which would have defined marriage as between a man and a woman and prevented judicial extension of marriage-like rights to same-sex or other unmarried couples. "We are better than this. And we certainly owe the American people more than this. I know that this amendment will fail, and when it does, I hope we can start discussing issues and offering proposals that will actually improve the lives of most Americans." (Barack Obama on the Senate floor regarding the Federal Marriage Amendment, June 5, 2006)

[eden4barack08]

"He has separated himself from the rest of the Democratic candidates at this early point in the campaign by seeming far less tortured when discussing our community," Mr. Van Capelle said. "I"m happy that Senator Obama has called for the repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act, something that Senator Clinton is in favor of. The best I can decipher from candidate Edwards is that he is on both sides of the issue."

http://citizenchris.typepad.com/citizenchris/2007/06/obama_and_doma.html

"For the record, I opposed [the Defense of Marriage Act] in 1996. It should be repealed and I will vote for its repeal on the Senate floor. I will also oppose any proposal to amend the U.S. Constitution to ban gays and lesbians from marrying. This is an effort to demonize people for political advantage, and should be resisted. ¦

When Members of Congress passed DOMA, they were not interested in strengthening family values or protecting civil liberties. They were only interested in perpetuating division and affirming a wedge issue. ¦ Despite my own feelings about an abhorrent law, the realities of modern politics persist. While the repeal of DOMA is essential, the unfortunate truth is that it is unlikely with Mr. Bush in the White House and Republicans in control of both chambers of Congress." -Obama

http://citizenchris.typepad.com/citizenchris/2007/06/obama_and_doma.html

[M1]

Eden4Baracko8,

Your comment..." tantrum" is all I heard from you and is unacceptable. Sign your real name to it or continue to be a coward.

[david43a]

M1, exactly....
and if Eden4Baracko8 has trouble understanding this attitude I suggest she open the dictionary and read the definition of "patronizing"

[eden4barack08]

Well that's always a problem in an honest debate. If one is just going to jump on ONE word and ignore a hundred, plus dismiss the overall content, we'll never have dialogue, much less make any progress.

And what's this about signing your real name? What difference does that make on an anonymous blog even if I tell you my name? Why would I want to know yours? Sorry, you make no sense there.

[FearlessFreep]

One man's tantrum is another man's free speech.

[FogCityJohn]

Um, maybe you missed this, but DOMA was passed back in the mid-1990s, long before Barack Obama was in the Senate. He certainly couldn't have voted against it, as you claim, since he wasn't a member of Congress.

[BeFairNow]

What is it with all this 'it's pretty clear that Obama doesn't care about (insert complex issue here)? The man hasn't even been sworn in yet! Let's not get ahead of ourselves. For some of us, the melting ice caps is the number 1priority, for others gay marriage and for some the economy, etc. All of these are extremely important issues and just in case you think he's trifling by not making declarative announcements on a long list of issues every five minutes, you try it and see how you manage. Granted none of us ran for president but do it just to get an idea of what it's like, and don't forget to take probing questions from the press and then explain what you said again and again as every word and pause is purposefully taken out of context by people trying to trip you up. He's also trying to relocate his life to Washington. Moving house is one of the most stressful things you can do, even with tons of help. Add to that the pressure of walking a tightrope for a few months as President-Elect BEFORE becoming the most powerful (and stressed out individual) in the free world. Give the grumbling a rest already!

[oafishcad]

Obama did make a declarative sentence to gays when he chose Warren a month after prop 8 passed. I'm sure gays are just as concerned about polar ice caps and the economy as everyone else, but Obama did , and there really is no question that he did, insult gays. Let's see if he acts any differently than that other gay champion Bill Clinton did. The guy who signed DOMA and endorsed Dont ask dont tell. So far he's following Clinton's playbook pretty closely.

[JohnFromCensornati]

The Democrats will not repeal DOMA or DADT. Get a grip. And, good gawd, Bob Barr is not our ally!

[AnotherTry]

My thoughts exactly. GLTs need to brace themselves for a whopper of a backlash being ushered in, I believe intentionally, by the Obama administration.

[oafishcad]

I agree. Obama is going to use the gay community as his sacrificial lamb of outreach, just as Clinton did. On the other hand, I wish him the best on all the other issues that he faces.

[Dave01]

Agreed John. Obama and the rest of the Democrats are spineless when it comes to LGBT issues. They honestly don't give two sh**s about what is important to our families. The LGBT community makes up more of the voting population than Jews yet they keep their noses firmly in the bum cracks of the Jews and give them whatever it is they desire.

[Eclectic Radical]

Let's be frank if we're going to get nasty: most /liberals/ are spineless on liberal issues. While I am not sure that Dennis Kucinich or Mike Gravel would make a good president, they did run. They were both in favor of gay marriage, they were both opposed to the war in Iraq, they both advocated closing Guantanamo Bay, and they both explicitly opposed torture. They both advocated green energy and public health care policy. Liberals lined up to vote for the two most conservative candidates for the nomination: Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

What really galls the majority of the people posting the most virulent attacks on President-elect Obama right now, in my opinion, are that most of them supported either him or Senator Clinton over liberal candidates for the Democratic nomination and are seeing the fruits of that decision. They express their feelings of betrayal at the President-elect's decision to include Rick Warren in his invocation, when in reality they betrayed their own principles when they supported Senator Obama in the primary.

President-elect Obama is what we have. Should we voice our opinions and engage in debate where we disagree with him? Yes. Certainly.

But those who voted for him in the primaries were not betrayed by President-elect Obama, they betrayed the principles they are angered at him for not sharing.

[iwantpie]

Thank God, I was a little worry there for a second.

[JohnFromCensornati]

"I was a little worry there for a second."

People that can't construct an actual sentence are usually the ones that get a little "worry" about gay people destroying marriage, the world, etc. I'm not surprised.

[CindyV]

I wouldn't hold my breath, if I were you. Obama's made it pretty clear with his silence on the issue that he doesn't care about LGBT folks. Instead of telling us (via surrogates) to "get over it," it would be nice if we could hear something like an acknowledgement that the Warren choice hurt the LGBT community. I don't need Obama to uninvite Warren. i'd just like him to acknowledge his choice was kinda thoughtless and he's sorry. But I guess that's too much to ask for. I should know that being President means never having to say you're sorry.

[Dave01]

It's not even just the Warren pick, it's the Lahood - who is totally anti-choice anti-gay rights etc., It's the promoting of Tim Kaine to chair the DNC who seeks to expand "faith outreach" (meaning anti-Democratic Party platform.) As far as I'm concerned, the Democratic Party can KI$$ my behind. They will be getting no more money from me, I will no longer volunteer for them, I will no longer promote them. I have officially changed party affiliation to Independent.

[iwantpie]

"I have officially changed party affiliation to Independent."

Thank you and good luck with this Independent candidate. I heard Nader is looking for more votes like 2000 election, you see how that turn out for us as a country. Furthermore, stop complaining and just live your life, the aging process will not be that fast.

[MamaBird62]

Dave,
Like you, I would like to see full civil rights for everyone, regardless of sexual orientation. It should and must be the law of the land, on that we agree. What you see happening is the everyday politics that are reality in our country. Obama is an extremely careful politician, he does nothing by accident. Warren is being paid back for some political favor, he wasn't chosen because Obama agrees with him on issues (you could see clearly in the Saddleback forum that they disagree on many things). Warren will give a 3-5 minute bland, non-controversial invocation, then he'll head back to Orange County, to his diminishing congregation and scarred reputation.

As for Tim Kaine, he's one of my least favorite Democrats too, and I'm not thrilled to see him head up the DNC, but again it's political payback. Without Virginia and NC going blue, we'd see a less friendly national political environment to progressives, and Kaine was very important in making that happen.
Obama hasn't even become President yet. We don't know what he'll do, so give the guy a chance. Based on his past comments and actions as a legislator, I expect good things.

[Catothemuchyounger]

Uh, how, exactly, can Obama "repeal" DOMA??? Last I checked, Presidents do not have the power to "repeal" Acts of Congress.

[oafishcad]

You're right. He can't. He would need congress to do it, and they would never do it without pressure from the President. I don't think, as he has clearly indicated, that gay issues are at the top of his priorities. He's not going to "waste" his juice on that when there are more pressing national issues. And there are.

[AbbieXHoffman]

If DOMA gets repealed the path to winning a case in the SC is clear and free (for the most part). Get 'er done.

Speaking up, as you have done about the Warren issue, is important for a host of reasons and bargaining is one of them! Thankfully, you didn't listen to those people that tried to silence you--keep up the noise. When you have truth and justice on your side it's ALWAYS worth it to make noise.

[daltexman]

Obama has screwed the LGBT community -- I have read countless apologists and rationalizations for his snubbing of gays ("the inaugural is his day"; "he is brilliant in getting the dialogue going", "it is an olive branch to conservatives", blah, blah, blah); Obama figures that gays will not be angry if he throws a bone at some point, any bone. I for one believe in actions, not words. This president-to-be has let me down. And yes, I have a right to complain and be bitter. Obama needs to do something on a grand scale or I propose that all gays and gay-friendly folks just stay home in four years. Since we are not seen as an important part of society, withdrawing our financial support and volunteering and vote won't make much of a difference to Democrats, right?

[NCYvonne]

Correct. Withdrawing your support and vote won't make a difference to Democrats so go ahead. The sooner the better. You voted overwhelmingly for Kerry and he lost. You didn't vote for Obama and he won.

And think of how much better you will get on if you get the republicans in charge!

[iwantpie]

"You voted overwhelmingly for Kerry and he lost. You didn't vote for Obama and he won.

Agreed and thank you for stating the obvious.

[FogCityJohn]

"You didn't vote for Obama and he won."

Yep, the GLBT community certainly didn't vote for Obama. I mean, he only got 70% of the GLBT vote. By your logic, Latinos didn't vote for him (68%), young voters didn't either (64%), and neither did women.

Look, you can be opposed to equal rights for gay people, but at least try getting your facts straight.

[thebigbike]

Two words to assess the probability of this or even the repeal of DODT.... "AS IF..." though I would love to lose a bet for $100 that that it won't happen, and I'll give you 10-1 odds

[Raven]

Sure, repealing DOMA would be great. And yes, definitely a bigger fish than Don't Ask Don't Tell.

But will it ease the Warren sting? Not in my mind. Obama had many chances to correct that wrong - and he decided instead to completely ignore the pain he was causing the GLBT community. DiFi all pissed because she's seeing the Hague in her future? Well, he's got a quick apology ready.

GLBT community in an uproar over his insulting choice of Warren? Nothing but silence.

So I'm not counting any unhatched chickens this time around.

It's pretty clear what Obama's priorities are. And what they aren't.

Spending political capital for the LGBT community? Sorry, I'm still not seeing that he really cares that much.

Seems he's got plenty of other big fish to fry - and some of his biggest supporters are among on the menu, not the agenda.

[fdavidm]

DOMA must go. New York now recognizes same sex marriages that were legally performed out of New York. Same sex marriages however may not be performed in New York. But this means nothing as far as the payment of NY State and CIty taxes for a gay married couple, since New York tax law requires that one's tax filing for state and city tax be the same as one's Federal tax filing. Since the Federal government does not accept same-sex marriage, gays must file as single on their Federal return and since NY State and City returns must match the Federal, married gays must in essence always file as "Single" and this will not change even if same-sex marriage is actually legalized in NY. How's that for equality?

[iwantpie]

"this will not change even if same-sex marriage is actually legalized in NY."

Good. I live here in NY and I agree with the NY State and City tax law. Plus, I don't see anything wrong with DOMA or DADT.

[Dave01]

Of course you don't. You see absolutely NOTHING wrong with gay and lesbian FAMILIES subsidizing YOURS with OUR tax dollars.

[SarahSarah]

1% - 10% (depending on what percent of the population you think is gay) of our war heroes throughout history have been gay. That is what is wrong with DADT and it should fill every American with great shame.