The Daschle duality on gay marriage

Last week, the Salt Lake Tribune had a story headlined "Donors on record pace" that contained the following passage regarding one of Senator Daschle's donors from Utah:

[Bruce] Bastian co-founded WordPerfect and rode the software firm to a vast fortune. He is the second-largest political donor in the state thus far in the 2004 election cycle, Federal Election Commission records show.

"I look for people who respect me as a human being," said Bastian, who is gay. "I hate the word gay rights, because it's much more than that. It's just equality, and if they are with me on those issues, I will give, and if not, I will do everything I can to beat them."

He has contributed $86,000 to Democratic causes and candidates, including Kerry, Rep. Jim Matheson, Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle and his favorite cause, the Human Rights Campaign, which has led efforts to block a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage.

On Monday, the state director of Concerned Women for America had a letter published in the Argus Leader that reads in part:

Sen. Tom Daschle believes "marriage is a sacred union between a man and a woman." However, his actions are curious.

Indeed. It's interesting to observe Daschle's response to a constituent who supports gay marriage:

Thank you for contacting me to express your thoughts on marriage laws. I appreciate hearing from you.

Although I believe that "marriage" should be defined as a union between a man and a woman, I respect your deeply held views, and am not opposed to an open public discussion on the issue. In fact, in light of recent developments at the state - and now, federal - level, it is clear that discussion has already begun.

As you know, the Senate recently considered a proposal to amend the Constitution to ban same-sex marriages (S.J.Res. 40, the Federal Marriage Amendment). I opposed it. In my view, states should continue to play the lead role in regulating marriage. On July 14, a motion to limit debate on the proposed constitutional amendment failed by a bipartisan vote of 48-50, and Majority Leader Frist withdrew the
legislation from further consideration by the Senate.

You may also know that I have long supported the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (S. 1705 in the 108th Congress), which is intended to ensure that employers evaluate employees based on their ability to do the job. Despite what some have suggested, it does not create "special rights," or violate religious freedom. It would simply extend existing workplace anti-discrimination laws that currently prohibit discrimination based on race, gender, national origin, and religion to also cover sexual orientation. The provisions of S. 1705 are also contained in S. 16, the Equal Rights and Equal Dignity for American Act of 2003, one of the leadership bills I introduced in January 2003.

Finally, I am a strong supporter of S. 966, the Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act. This legislation would give the federal government more effective tools to investigate and prosecute hate crimes.
Specifically, S. 966 would expand existing law to enable the Department of Justice to prosecute violent crimes committed as a result of race, color, religion or national origin. In addition, it would authorize the
Department of Justice to prosecute individuals who commit violent crimes against others because of the victim's sexual orientation, gender, or disability. S. 966 also would provide funding to help local law
enforcement officers investigate hate crimes at the local level. As you may already know, this legislation, with my support, was added as an amendment to the defense reauthorization legislation recently passed by
the Senate, which is now awaiting action by a House-Senate conference committee.

Once again, I appreciate hearing from you. Please don't hesitate to let me know if you have any additional concerns regarding these or any other issue.

With best wishes, I am

Sincerely,

Tom Daschle
United States Senate

TAD/bsh