Great news! We have another senator standing up for equality for gay and lesbian people.
A staffer for Senator Chris Dodd has confirmed to Pam Spaulding of Pam's House Blend that the Senator now supports marriage equality for all.
This is great development -- and not entirely surprising considering the environment surrounding Senator Dodd's 2010 reelection campaign. His full statement below the fold.
Senator Dodd's poll numbers have been poor, to say the least. As Steve Singiser reported recently, Dodd's rebounding from dismal lows against Republican challengers, former GOP Congressman Rob Simmons (Dodd trailed 45-39 in a late May Q-poll) and state Senator Sam Caligiuri (Dodd led 41-31). He's been considered to possibly have a Lieberman problem, being not only vulnerable to a Republican challenger, but also to a challenge from the left. The challenger is Merrick Alpert, reported to be trailing Dodd 44-24 in the Q-poll, though that can easily change (as was seen with Ned Lamont in 2006).
One easy way to shore up the base is for Dodd to tack left on marriage equality -- something Alpert has openly espoused since the beginning of his primary effort. It's already securely the law of the land in Connecticut, and has been for several months. Resistance to it is only likely to recede as the 2010 elections near, so it seems like a relatively wise move if Senator Dodd wants to protect himself in a Democratic primary. It's certainly a move that looks like the Opposite of Lieberman.
Beyond that political cynicism, Senator Dodd's statement is very touching. Here it is:
Rights, Responsibilities and Love
June 21, 2009
Public officials aren't supposed to change their minds. But I firmly believe that it's important to keep learning. Last week, while I was in Connecticut meeting with members of the gay and lesbian community from across the state, I had the opportunity to tell them what I've learned about marriage, and about equality.
While I've long been for extending every benefit of marriage to same-sex couples, I have in the past drawn a distinction between a marriage-like status ("civil unions") and full marriage rights.
The reason was simple: I was raised to believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. And as many other Americans have realized as they've struggled to reconcile the principle of fairness with the lessons they learned early in life, that's not an easy thing to overcome.
But the fact that I was raised a certain way just isn't a good enough reason to stand in the way of fairness anymore.
The Connecticut Supreme Court, of course, has ruled that such a distinction holds no merit under the law. And the Court is right.
I believe that effective leaders must be able and willing to grow and change over their service. I certainly have during mine - and so has the world. Thirty-five years ago, who could have imagined that we'd have an African-American President of the United States?
My young daughters are growing up in a different reality than I did. Our family knows many same-sex couples - our neighbors in Connecticut, members of my staff, parents of their schoolmates. Some are now married because the Connecticut Supreme Court and our state legislature have made same-sex marriage legal in our state.
But to my daughters, these couples are married simply because they love each other and want to build a life together. That's what we've taught them. The things that make those families different from their own pale in comparison to the commitments that bind those couples together.
And, really, that's what marriage should be. It's about rights and responsibilities and, most of all, love.
I believe that, when my daughters grow up, barriers to marriage equality for same-sex couples will seem as archaic, and as unfair, as the laws we once had against inter-racial marriage.
And I want them to know that, even if he was a little late, their dad came down on the right side of history.
I have always been proud of my long record fighting for the civil rights of the LGBT community. I've co-sponsored legislation to strengthen hate crime laws and end discrimination in the workplace. I've spoken out against "don't ask, don't tell" and always supported equal rights for domestic partnerships.
But I am also proud to now count myself among the many elected officials, advocates, and ordinary citizens who support full marriage equality for same-sex couples.
I understand that even those who oppose discrimination might continue to find it hard to re-think the definition of marriage they grew up with. I know it was for me.
But many of the things we must do to make our union more perfect - whether it's fighting for decades to reform our health care system or struggling with a difficult moral question - are hard. They take time. And they require that, when you come to realize that something is right, you be unafraid to stand up and say it.
That's the only way our history will progress along that long arc towards justice.
Pam Spaulding has asked the important follow-up question: what effect does this shift have on what Senator Dodd will do with regard to repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act, "Don't Ask/Don't Tell", the Uniting American Families Act, and support for the Employment Non-Discrimination Act? It would be great to have another strong voice for equality regarding ALL of those legislation pieces.
I'd also like to see what Senator Lieberman has to say in response.
Regardless -- even if it's a little late to the game -- thanks, Senator Dodd!
Update: From Love Makes a Family, Senator Joe Lieberman's statement on marriage equality and the Defense of Marriage Act and other gay rights concerns:
Senator Joseph Lieberman’s Statement on Marriage Equality and DOMA
June, 2009
"Senator Lieberman voted for DOMA in 1996, which was signed into law by former President Clinton; and he continues to support the principles set forth in that law today. DOMA makes clear that marriage under federal law is a status that should be attainable only by one man and one woman and that any State’s decision to define marriage otherwise, such as his own State of Connecticut which he respects, should not affect the definition of marriage under either federal law or the laws of other States.
Apart from the issue of marriage itself, Senator Lieberman believes that basic American ideals of fairness and equality demand that we take concrete steps to end discrimination against gay men and lesbians. That is why he is also a long-time leading cosponsor of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, sponsored by Senator Edward Kennedy (D-MA), which would outlaw workplace discrimination based on sexual orientation. He has also introduced legislation on May 20, 2009, extending job-related benefits such as health insurance, retirement benefits, and life insurance to domestic partners of federal employees and has separately supported ending taxation of health insurance benefits for domestic partners and treating them the same as health benefits for legal spouses, which are not taxed to the employee. And, he supports the repeal of the "don’t ask, don’t tell" policy in the military."
...as well as a listing of the current standing of some others in Connecticut's Congressional Delegation, from the front page of their site:
Sen. Chris Dodd:
Supports marriage equality; supports repeal of Sec. 3 of DOMA and portability of federal benefits. Read Sen. Dodd's supportive op-ed here.
Sen. Joe Lieberman:
Does NOT support marriage equality; does NOT support repeal of DOMA (read Sen. Lieberman’s statement here)
Rep. John Larson:
Would not give a position (Repeated requests made).
Rep. Joe Courtney:
Supports marriage equality AND full repeal of DOMA
Rep. Rosa DeLauro:
"Comfortable with Connecticut’s marriage law"; supports repeal of Sec. 3 of DOMA
Rep. Jim Himes:
Supports marriage equality AND full repeal of DOMA
Rep. Chris Murphy:
Supports marriage equality AND full repeal of DOMA
Sounds like this would be an opportunity call or email your representation, if you're in Connecticut, and either thank them or pull them into this century. Ladies and gentlemen, start your telephones!