U.S. Senate See Full Big Line

(D) J. Hickenlooper*

(R) Somebody

80%

20%

Governor See Full Big Line
(D) Phil Weiser

(D) Joe Neguse

(D) Jena Griswold

60%

60%

40%↓

Att. General See Full Big Line

(D) M. Dougherty

(D) Alexis King

(D) Brian Mason

40%

40%

30%

Sec. of State See Full Big Line
(D) A. Gonzalez

(D) George Stern

(R) Sheri Davis

50%↑

40%

30%

State Treasurer See Full Big Line

(D) Brianna Titone

(R) Kevin Grantham

(D) Jerry DiTullio

60%

30%

20%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Hurd*

(D) Somebody

80%

40%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert*

(D) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank*

(D) Somebody

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(R) Gabe Evans*

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(D) Joe Salazar

50%

40%

40%

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
July 16, 2011 09:55 PM UTC

Senator Michael Bennet Avoids the Question on Gay Marriage

  • 36 Comments
  • by: DavidThi808

I recently sent the following two questions to  Senator Bennet:

From: David Thielen

Sent: Thu 6/30/2011 8:59 AM

To: Timothy Zeiser

Subject: Gay Marriage question

Hi Tim;

First off, thank you again for answering on your Pols post.

Second, can you please ask the Senator for his answer on the following (and I’ll post it verbatim on Pols):

In the 60s the Southern states said that interracial marriage should be decided by each state. Does Senator Bennet think that interracial marriage should be left to each state?

And if not, how is the gay marriage question enough different from interracial marriage than one is a state’s rights issue while the other is a civil right enforced at the federal level?

thanks – dave

I received the following reply (note I do not use the term answer):

From: Michael Bennet, US Senator for Colorado

Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2011 8:18 AM

To: David Thielen

Subject: A Message from Senator Michael Bennet

Dear David:

Thank you for contacting me regarding this important issue. I appreciate hearing from you.

Let me begin by saying I understand and respect the strong feelings on both sides of the same-sex marriage debate. Marriage is a very personal covenant entered into by two individuals who deeply care for each other. I have had the joy of sharing this special relationship and the rights and privileges that come with it with my wife, Susan.

With that being said, it is important that we have a clear understanding of government’s role in marriage. Historically, marriage has been an issue controlled by the states. Over the past few decades, questions on the definition of marriage and the rights of same-sex couples have been put before voters, state legislatures, and both state and federal courts. Colorado voters in 2006 passed Amendment 43 to the Colorado Constitution, which defines marriage in the state as only a union between one man and one woman. Additionally, the state legislature passed House Bill 1260 in 2009, which allows unmarried couples to enter into a designated beneficiary agreement. These agreements grant couples limited rights, including making funeral arrangements, receiving death benefits, and inheriting property without a will.

Right now, there is a vigorous debate going on about the constitutionality of state laws and amendments that explicitly prohibit same-sex marriage. Some are comparing these laws to the issues considered in Loving v. Virginia, where the Supreme Court overturned a Virginia state law that outlawed interracial marriage. There are obvious similarities between the issues at hand, and now the courts must decide whether or not laws and state constitutional amendments can treat same-sex couples differently than heterosexual couples, and if so, how and on what basis. Our high court has also applied different standards to race-based and gender-based state and federal laws. Those distinctions, among others, may also apply here.

As I have stated previously, I believe that discrimination against any Coloradan because of sexual orientation is unacceptable. Same-sex couples should be able to enter into legally recognized relationships affording them the same rights and benefits now enjoyed by heterosexual couples, including federal tax and social security benefits and the ability to designate who can care for them at the end of life. As a voter in Colorado, if same-sex marriage were on our state’s ballot, I would vote for it.

I value the input of fellow Coloradans in considering the wide variety of important issues and legislative initiatives that come before the Senate. I hope you will continue to inform me of your thoughts and concerns.

For more information about my priorities as a U.S. Senator, I invite you to visit my website at http://bennet.senate.gov/. Again, thank you for contacting me.

Sincerely,

Michael F. Bennet

United States Senator

The reply doesn’t answer the questions but instead says leave it to the courts. The question was not how will this play out. It was not how will Senator Bennet vote. It was not should this be resolved with legislation (as opposed to the courts). It was a very simple query – what is Senator Bennet’s opinion on these two questions.

I have sent in a follow-up email asking once again for an answer to the questions.

Tweet
Share

Comments

36 thoughts on “Senator Michael Bennet Avoids the Question on Gay Marriage”

  1. Here is a transcript of my response to your question about whether he supported gay marriage.

    “David, I’ve got an answer to #2

    http://www.gazette.com/article…

    We got this question at townhalls every now and again.”

    Your reply: “That is really good to hear

    Kudos to Senator Bennet on saying he would vote for gay marriage. And thank you for the link.”

    What exactly would you like him to do? Propose a constitutional amendment?  

    1. Yes Senator Bennet has said he will vote for gay marriage and kudos to him for that.

      He also has said it should be a question for the states and my question above was how does that differ from interracial marriage where it is a federal decision. Now you can disagree that this is a question he should answer. But I don’t think you can claim he answered it.

      1. he didn’t answer a specific question. He has made it clear that he wants to legalize, to normalize, gay marriage. If it happens in venue A before it can happen in venue B and we end up in the same place, so what.

        There is more than one way to get to a solution. We don’t need to know how many angels are on the head of a pin to use a pin.

        1. If it happens in venue A before it can happen in venue B

          I agree totally that what matters is making it legal. But venue A is Congress and Bennet has said he thinks this is a states rights issue and therefore I assume he would not vote for it in the Senate.

          I don’t think this is dancing on the head of a pin, I think this is asking if he will be one of the votes that would legalize it via venue A.

  2. you need to check with the diarist himself, before you promote the diary and before you decide to start changing the content, and ask him to change his title. If you don’t like the title, don’t promote the diary. If the author is willing to make the change, then go for it.

    It’s not your call to make and it does not fall within your “powers” to change the title or content of someone’s diary. I’m sure David is fine with it because he likes to be on the front page.

    When I was FPE, I got loads of “requests” by email from folks that wanted me to promote their stuff to the front page. I promoted what I thought was worthy and ignored all requests. The one thing I never did was start changing someone else’s diary. That’s not what an FPE does nor should be doing. Cutting down a quote to meet copyright infringement requirements is fine. Changing content or titles is not your job.

    Why this was promoted at all is beyond me, frankly. It’s nothing more than a followup tantrum and it’s embarrassing to see it on the front page.  

    1. that I’m not trying to beat you up here. I learned by trial (and mostly error) what was okay and not okay. There’s not exactly a handbook that they give you when you get promoted to FPE which makes this all confusing at first. Ask anybody that’s had this gig–it’s baptism by fire.  

      1. I changed the title because I didn’t feel it would be appropriate to promote it without a title change, since having that as the top headline makes it seem like the “official” opinion of Pols, when there was intense disagreement in the comments about whether or not the response was evasive. I’ve seen the Guvs change things when they promote so I thought it was cool.

        I’ll take it back down and change it back, but last I asked ProgressivePromoter wasn’t able to edit his diary after publishing it–is that just if there’s a poll included? I can’t remember if I could edit my published diaries or not before I was FPE, since the last time I would have tried to do so was months ago.

        David, if you want to make any changes and can’t, you know where to reach me.

        MOTR, would you want to collaborate on a handbook for the next FPEs? We’re busy people but I think with six months of lead time it ought to be possible. I kind of assumed I’d at least get a guidelines email or something, but nothing doing on that front. Assuming the powers that be prefer to let the community dictate and haven’t made one, I think it’s time someone did. If you want to send me what you’d consider guidelines in very rough form I could flesh it out and make it pretty.

        1. They can edit titles and text, and can even delete the diary (and all the comments that were made). But for some reason, soapblox doesn’t allow editing polls.

          1. That explains a lot. I really should diary more often.

            Would you want to help make a guidebook for the next crew, too? Or, ya know, for me so I stop fucking it up?

            1. over it. I consider being FPE akin to climbing Mount Everest. It’s not in my skill set.

              Nothing wrong with learning by doing. You have great coaches.

        2. You can’t edit a poll, once published. Like Ari said, some weird Soapblox glitch.

          POLS typically clean up blockquotes that are way too long or fix links. That’s about it. Or add an update to a diary already up, if the update comes later in the day.

          Touch base with the Guvs about collaborating on some guidelines for FPE since it’s their site, not mine. There aren’t many rules so I doubt it will reach handbook status. More like a one page memo, if that.  

          1. granted, I have no ColPol FPE experience but thru blog admin I like the idea of locking out a poll publisher from the ability to alter/edit poll questions, the header, and/or results after the poll has been published.

            Just imagine the havoc possible if a troll were allowed to poll, collect responses,  and then turn that poll 180 to fit their needs … why that just too juicy not to give it a bite.  

            Seems some Soapblox ‘glitch’ programmer is a might prescient.    

          1. I mucked things up. I felt your original title shouldn’t be on the front page because Bennet posts here (or, his staff does) and I wouldn’t want to make things awkward for Pols by making it seem like the “official opinion” of the community was that he was being an evasive jerk, when there was very vigorous debate in the comments about whether or not he was avoiding your questions. I may be hypersensitive in not wanting to put that title up, but I felt like the diary warranted the greater degree of discussion the front page brings, but I wasn’t comfortable with the original title being perceived as Pols’ opinion of Bennet’s response.

            So I changed it to “Responds” instead of “Avoids the Questions” to make it neutral and promoted it. I was confused by a discussion with ProgressivePromoter as to whether or not users can edit diaries, so I didn’t think to ask you if you would mind changing the title.

            MOTR corrected me above and I reverted the title and un-promoted it.

            I guess if this is the biggest mess I make as FPE I’m doing OK, but still, how embarrassing! I think I’ve turned the color of my favorite hat. 🙁

      2. I thought the email from Bennet was interesting enough to be on the front page. It’s nothing he hasn’t said before but it’s well laid out here and I don’t know that I personally have seen in writing that he would vote for gay marriage.

    2. First off PC thank you for the promote (which apparently was subsequently unpromoted). Second, I don’t think there is a need to ask before promoting – I never did when I was a FPE.

      On the re-write, that I do think you should ask. Or just add an “Update by PC” at the top.

  4. I can tell you Senator Bennet feels strongly about the rights of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people. Senator Bennet’s former Chief of Staff, Guy Cecil (who is now the Executive Director of the  US Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee), was openly gay while working for him, and many of his office and campaign staff were openly gay. I attended numerous campaign functions sponsored by HRC and other gay-rights groups, and heard him emphatically support equal rights issues many, many times. Senator Bennet is rock solid on civil rights for all Americans.

    That said, I agree that his “states rights” argument is vague and seems to deflect forcing him to say how strongly he feels on the issue. His response (above) said marriage laws are “historically” made at the state level. I don’t believe that is a requirement written into the constitution, although I could be wrong (I am not an attorney or constitutional scholar, although other people here probably are). Whether his position is technically correct or not, I agree most Coloradans would like to see the gay marriage issue to be decided at the federal level — one way or another.

    My gut tells me his response, which sounds more like a history lesson than a position paper, is political calculation — no more, no less. I’ve said countless times on Pols that Colorado is a Barney purple state, and anyone who appears too progressive — or too tea party — will never win here. They would also never retain their seat. Senator Bennet may be looking for some job security by not appearing too “left”. If that is not the case, then my next questions would be, “Do you think marriage equality should be a federal issue or a state issue, regardless of what has happened historically? If so, why?”

    I am confident Senator Bennet would vote for full marriage equality if a piece of legislation were in front of him to do so.

  5. … because the Supreme Court strikes down purported civil rights laws that aren’t about commercial activity (employment, contracting, etc.). So if what you (David) want is Bennet to sponsor legislation on gay marriage: that’s a really bad idea, and I say this as a strong gay marriage supporter; we don’t want the Supreme Court’s first gay marriage case to be the striking down of a gay mariage statute.

    A federal constitutional amendment declaring a right to gay marriage couldn’t get struck down by the Court, of course — but despite the immense social progress of the past few years on marriage equality, there’s so zero chance of 2/3 of the House & Senate voting for gay marriage…

    1. And if Bennet’s answer had come back saying that (and preferably that he hopes the court will follow the precedent of Loving vs Virginia) – that would absolutely be an answer to the question.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Gabe Evans
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

122 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!