A Letter to My Congressman

I received the following letter from my Congressman, Rob Simmons:

October 25, 2006

Dear Bill:

Knowing your opposition to efforts to ban gay marriage, I wanted to update you on my views on the subject.

Since coming to Congress, I have consistently opposed measures that would prohibit gay marriage. Most recently, I voted against H.J. Res. 88, the so-called “Marriage Protection Amendment,” which would have amended the U.S. Constitution to specifically define marriage as the union of a man and a woman. I am proud that my opposition to this short-sighted measure helped prevent it from gaining the necessary two-thirds vote for passage, failing by a vote of 236 to 187.

I oppose bans on gay marriage because I believe state legislatures should be free to make their own choices in defining legal arrangements for gay couples, without interference from the federal government. In fact, had such interference been in place, it could have prevented Connecticut from becoming only the second state to allow homosexual couples to enter into civil unions, allowing them to receive virtually all of the benefits of marriage. In short, banning gay marriages would weaken our families rather than strengthen them.

Rest assured, as your Congressman I will continue to oppose this and any other constitutional amendment that discriminates against American citizens.

Thanks for taking the time to read this update. Should you have any questions or concerns about this or any other issue, please do not hesitate to contact my office. Also please feel free to visit my website at Rob Simmons.

All the best,

Rob Simmons
Member of Congress
Second District, Connecticut

My reply...

Dear Congressman:

I just received an email from you. In that email, you stated,

“I oppose bans on gay marriage because I believe state legislatures should be free to make their own choices in defining legal arrangements for gay couples, without interference from the federal government. In fact, had such interference been in place, it could have prevented Connecticut from becoming only the second state to allow homosexual couples to enter into civil unions, allowing them to receive virtually all of the benefits of marriage. In short, banning gay marriages would weaken our families rather than strengthen them.”

Living in Connecticut, me and my partner of 31 years can now legally enter into a “civil union”, but we have chosen not to. Why? Because they are second class. You can argue that we have made the choice not to enter into a civil union when it was offered to us, but the fact of the matter is, “civil unions” are not the same as marriage, and we refuse to label ourselves as second class by entering into the inherently second class arrangement of civil unions. If they were equal to marriage, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WOULD HONOR THEM!

Yet, I hear NOTHING at the federal level, from you or anyone else, that will give gay couples the ability to have access to their partners’ social security survivor benefits, tax benefits, retirement savings, home protection (laws protect married seniors from being forced to sell their homes to pay high nursing-home bills), nursing homes (married couples have a legal right to live together in nursing homes), pensions (after the death of a worker, most pension plans pay survivor benefits only to a legal spouse of the participant - so surviving same-sex partners get no pension support for their surviving partners. Any pension dies with the worker), family leave to care for a sick partner, inheritance rights (when a married person’s spouse dies, the survivor can automatically inherit a substantial share from the deceased spouse’s estate regardless of whether a will exists)....

The list goes on and on. In fact, there are 1049 rights and privileges at the federal level afforded to marriage that a state civil union or a state marriage (Massachusetts only) will not allow us to have because of the national Defense of Marriage Act.

So, your email really fell on deaf ears because I would really like to know what action YOU are taking to get the disgusting Defense of Marriage Act off the books so that my partner and I, along with millions of other gay people, can finally have a chance at true equality?

That is what you SHOULD BE ABOUT.

From you...

“In fact, had such interference been in place, it could have prevented Connecticut from becoming only the second state to allow homosexual couples to enter into civil unions, allowing them to receive virtually all of the benefits of marriage.”

That’s a lie. Civil unions do nothing of the sort. They are not portable from state to state as marriage is, and, because of the Defense of Marriage Act, even real marriages afforded to gay couples by the State of Massachusetts are not honored at the federal level because of that act. You should know this. When former Congressman Gerry Studds died weeks ago, his spouse was completely shut out from receiving the Congressman’s pension (as a married couple would have access too), even though they were legally married in the State of Massachusetts.

Get your facts straight, and write to me again when you are really serious about leveling the playing field for gay couples against discrimination.

Sincerely,

Bill Cannon