Holding a floor vote on a House-passed bill to codify same-sex marriage rights nationally would probably seem like a no-brainer for Senate Democrats. But as their party grapples with stalled progress on much of its legislative agenda while staring down the prospect of steep losses in this fall’s midterm elections, some Democratic leaders are hesitating, signaling that the political calculus might not be that simple.
Senate Democratic leaders, charged with building a robust election-year strategy as they try to expand their bare-bones majority in the chamber, do not seem to be in a rush to consider the Respect for Marriage Act. The bill cleared the House on Tuesday in a bipartisan 267 to 157 vote, with 47 Republican lawmakers joining all Democrats in support.
HOUSE PASSES BILL CODIFYING SAME-SEX MARRIAGE WITH SIGNIFICANT GOP SUPPORT
In the House, the Respect for Marriage Act drew support from unexpected corners of the GOP, including members of party leadership like Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY), the third-ranking House Republican, and Rep. Tom Emmer (R-MN), the head of the House GOP’s campaign arm. Some hard-right conservatives, including Rep. Scott Perry (R-PA), the chairman of the House Freedom Caucus, also backed the bill.
So Senate Democrats’ apparent reluctance to push for a floor vote on the bill comes as a surprise since passing it and sending it to President Joe Biden for his signature would mark the culmination of long-standing Democratic efforts to reverse federal statutes defining marriage as between one man and one woman. If enacted, the Respect for Marriage Act would repeal the Defense of Marriage Act, the 1996 law that defined marriage for federal purposes as the union of one man and one woman, and would require states to recognize same-sex marriages performed elsewhere. DOMA was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court’s landmark 2015 decision in Obergefell v. Hodges, which declared that the fundamental right to marry is guaranteed to same-sex couples by the due process clause and the equal protection clause of the Constitution’s Fourteenth Amendment. Nevertheless, it was never formally taken off the books.
The Democratic Party’s base has been pushing for legislation to repeal DOMA and codify same-sex marriage rights in light of Justice Clarence Thomas’s lonely view that the Supreme Court ought to “reconsider” its position on the issue and overturn Obergefell. Yet Senate Democratic leadership has been pointedly noncommittal on the prospect of holding a floor vote on the Respect for Marriage Act. While some rank-and-file Democratic senators, such as Sen. Brian Schatz (D-HI), have demanded that the Senate take immediate action on the bill, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) refused to say whether he would schedule a vote at a press briefing on Tuesday.
Although Schumer seemed more open to a floor vote on Wednesday, saying in a floor speech that he “want[s] to bring this bill to the floor” if there’s enough GOP support to “ensure it would pass,” Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL), Schumer’s deputy, said that the Senate might not have the calendar space to consider the bill, telling reporters on Tuesday that his caucus has “more priorities than we have time.”
Along with Democrats’ political calculations, the timing also seems right for them to make a push to pass the bill. The wide-ranging Republican support that it received in the House suggests that it might not run into the same long odds that much of the Democrats’ agenda has faced in the evenly divided Senate, in which a functionally 60-vote hurdle needed to pass most legislation means the vast majority of bills require bipartisan backing.
Comments from Republican senators have shown that there is a real chance the Respect for Marriage Act can draw enough GOP support to clear the Senate’s filibuster-proof threshold. Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) was an original co-sponsor of the legislation in the Senate, and she was joined on Tuesday by Sen. Rob Portman (R-OH), who publicly reversed his opposition to same-sex marriage in 2013 when his son came out as gay. Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), a prominent Senate GOP centrist, also indicated her support, telling reporters on Tuesday that she “made clear” her support for same-sex marriage “years ago.”
Additionally, Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC), who led efforts to pass a state constitutional amendment that banned same-sex marriages and civil unions as speaker of the North Carolina House of Representatives, said on Wednesday that he “probably will” vote for the Respect for Marriage Act if it comes up for a floor vote. When asked by reporters whether he supported same-sex marriage on Wednesday, Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-AL) replied, “Yeah, if that’s what you want to do. Fine.” And Sens. Pat Toomey (R-PA), Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV), Mike Rounds (R-SD), and Mitt Romney (R-UT) are among a wider array of GOP senators seen as potential supporters of the bill.
Senate Republican leadership doesn’t even have an official position yet — Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) said he wouldn’t take a public stance on the bill or decide whether he would whip GOP senators to oppose it until Schumer schedules a floor vote. His deputy, Senate Minority Whip John Thune (R-SD), later admitted that he “expect[s]” the bill to receive “pretty good bipartisan support” if it comes up for a vote. Sen. Joni Ernst (R-IA), the vice chairwoman of the Senate Republican Conference, went so far as to indicate an openness to backing the legislation, telling reporters on Wednesday that she has “a good number of very close friends that are same-sex married.”
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
As the White House indicated in a statement of administration policy released on Tuesday, Biden is certain to sign the bill if it clears the Senate. So as Democrats fashion dire predictions of same-sex marriage’s demise while grasping for political wins, it seems logical that they would be eager to pivot their legislative agenda toward passing the Respect for Marriage Act. But, so far, that eagerness has yet to materialize, at least from Democratic leaders.
