FROM THE DESK OF REPRESENTATIVE DE BOEF

March 10, 2005

One of the issues that I feel very strongly about is the issue of marriage.  I feel that is should be defined as between one man and one woman.  I was the lead sponsor on HCR 1 which proposes an amendment to Iowa’s constitution to define it that way.  The Iowa Family Policy Center has been working actively to promote this.  They brought in Glen Stanton, author and Director of Social Research at Focus on the Family.  Focus on the Family is a non-profit, Christian-conservative organization based in Colorado Springs that seeks to preserve the traditional values and the institution of the family.  Together with the Iowa Family Policy Center, Mr. Stanton addressed the issue of marriage a the capitol and in a debate forum held at Drake University.  I was honored to be able to participate in some of these events.  Our efforts up until this point have been successful.  I am very pleased to report that the House Judiciary committee passed it out with a 13-6 vote.  We will be taking it up on the House floor this coming week.

This resolution amends the Iowa Constitution to provide that only a marriage between a man and a woman will be recognized in Iowa.  In addition, the amendment prohibits the state or any political subdivision from creating or recognizing a legal status identical or similar to that of marriage for unmarried persons (other than one man and one woman).

History of Defense of Marriage

In November 2003, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled that barring same-sex couples from civil marriage was unconstitutional.  The Senate then asked the court for an advisory opinion on the constitutionality of a proposed law that would bar same-sex couples from civil marriage but would create civil unions as a parallel institution, with all the same benefits, protections, rights and responsibilities under law.  In February, the Court answered, "segregating same-sex unions from opposite-sex unions cannot possibly be held rationally to advance or preserve" the governmental aim of encouraging "stable adult relationships for the good of the individual and of the community, especially its children."  Under this decision, the state of Massachusetts began issuing marriage licenses to same sex couples in May, 2004. 

This ruling is one of the latest developments in the larger public discussion of "marriage" and "family" that started in 1993 when the Hawaii Supreme Court ruled that laws denying same-sex couples the right to marry violated state constitutional equal protection rights.  Voters adopted a constitutional amendment in 1998, giving the Legislature the power to reserve marriage to opposite-sex couples.

In April 2000, Vermont approved landmark legislation to recognize civil unions between same-sex couples, granting them virtually all the benefits, protections and responsibilities that married couples have under Vermont law.  The Vermont legislation was a result of the state Supreme Court’s ruling in Baker v. Vermont that said same-sex couples are entitled, under the state constitution's "Common Benefits Clause," to the same benefits and protections as married opposite-sex couples.  The court ruled that the Vermont Legislature must decide how to provide these benefits and protections, either by legalizing marriage for same-sex couples or by establishing an alternative system.

The Vermont Legislature chose to preserve marriage as the "legally recognized union of one man and one woman," but at the same time create a parallel system of civil unions for same-sex couples that goes beyond existing "domestic partnership" and "reciprocal beneficiaries" laws that exist in California and Hawaii and in many localities in the U.S. today.

Congress enacted the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in 1996, which bars federal recognition of same-sex marriages and allows states to do the same.  Since 1996, thirty-nine states have enacted legislation prohibiting same-sex marriages or the recognition of same-sex marriages formed in another jurisdiction.  States have traditionally recognized marriages solemnized in other states, even those that go against the marriage laws of that particular state. Under the full faith and credit clause of the U.S. Constitution, states are generally required to recognize and honor the public laws of other states, unless those laws are contrary to the strong public policy of that state.

There are several proposals before Congress to amend the U.S. Constitution, defining marriage as between a man and a woman and ensuring that states are not required to recognize same-sex marriages from other jurisdictions.  Many states are also moving to amend their state constitutions.  Although nearly every state has a statutory Defense of Marriage Act, constitutional amendments are needed to prevent judges from invalidating these laws.  Several lawsuits are pending throughout the country seeking resolution to this issue.

Forty-two states currently have statutory Defense of Marriage Acts, including Iowa.  Three of those states have statutory language that pre-dates DOMA (enacted before 1996) defining marriage as between a man and a woman.  Seventeen states have defined marriage in their constitutions.

Many people argue that passing a Constitutional Amendment is unnecessary and mean-spirited since we already state in the Code that marriage is between on man and one woman.  However, there have been several cases, most recently in Washington State, where courts are ruling that DOMA laws are unconstitutional.  Liberal judges are pushing a social agenda on our population when all polls indicate the people of our state and our country overwhelmingly support marriage as between one man and one woman.

I believe it is time to amend the US Constitution with this language.  Due to the lengthy process that this entails however, we must amend our state constitution now. 

Question of the Week…

Do you support a state Constitutional Amendment defining marriage as a union between one man and one woman?

I would appreciate your input.  My phone number at the Capitol is 515-281-3221, or e-mail me at betty.deboef@legis.state.ia.us.  I would welcome visitors at the Capitol, too!