[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 102 (Friday, July 28, 2006)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1575]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          H.J. RES. 88, THE ``MARRIAGE PROTECTION AMENDMENT''

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. DENNIS MOORE

                               of kansas

                    in the house of representatives

                         Friday, July 28, 2006

  Mr. MOORE of Kansas. Mr. Speaker, on July 18, 2006, I voted against 
passage of H.J. Res. 88, a constitutional amendment to bar same-sex 
marriages.
  The text of H.J. Res. 88, the Marriage Protection Amendment, reads as 
follows: ``Marriage in the United States shall consist solely of the 
union of a man and a woman. Neither this Constitution or the 
constitution of any state, shall be construed to require that marriage 
or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon any union other than 
the union of a man and a woman.''
  Marriage and family law have traditionally been regulated by state, 
rather than federal, laws. Current federal law, as well as some state 
laws, already prohibits federal recognition of same-sex marriage. 
Further, in 1996, President Clinton signed the Defense of Marriage Act, 
DOMA, which prohibits federal recognition of same-sex marriages and 
allows individual states to refuse to recognize such marriages 
performed in other states.
  Some believe the Marriage Protection Amendment is necessary to 
strengthen the institution of marriage. While the amendment's 
supporters claim that it simply would remove the issue of same sex 
marriage from the courts, the text of the amendment also would remove 
decision making authority from Congress and state legislatures, where 
marriage and family law have traditionally been regulated.
  My personal belief is that marriage is a union between a man and a 
woman, but that the regulation of marriage should be left to the 
states.
  In 2004, Vice President Dick Cheney spoke on the subject of a 
constitutional marriage amendment during a campaign appearance in 
Davenport, Iowa, when he said: The question that comes up with the 
issue of marriage is what kind of official sanction or approval is 
going to be granted by government? Historically, that's been a 
relationship that has been handled by the states. The states have made 
that fundamental decision of what constitutes a marriage. He also went 
on to say that with respect to the question of relationships, my 
general view is freedom means freedom for everyone.
  I agree with Vice President Cheney's remarks, and voted against the 
Marriage Protection Amendment on the House floor. This amendment would 
break sharply from our nation's commitment to, and constitutional 
tradition of, protecting individual rights. The truth is--and the 
proponents of this Amendment know it--there was not any chance for this 
to become a Constitutional Amendment. Just last month the Senate 
refused to pass it! The House Amendment was simply another effort by 
certain people to advance their political agenda. I support equal 
rights for all Americans. I am committed to a nation in which all 
Americans can share equally in the protections of the law.

                          ____________________