The bill, called the Federal Marriage Amendment, is quite short:

Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman. Neither this Constitution, nor 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.

Last week, the Supreme Court held that Section 3 of DOMA, which defined marriage as between a man and a woman for the purposes of receiving federal benefits, is unconstitutional.

Though there's no chance that Huelskamp's legislation will become law, 28 Republicans have signed on as co-sponsors to it, mostly unsurprising conservatives like Paul Broun, Ga., Trent Franks, Ariz., Louie Gohmert, Texas, Ralph Hall, Texas, Jim Jordan, Ohio, and Steve Stockman, Texas.

The Huffington Post reports:

Continue Reading...

From Politico:

The Congressional Budget Office, which judges the budgetary impact of all legislation, says “Depending on the number of additional births under H.R. 1797, such Medicaid costs could range from about $75 million over the next 10 years to more than $400 million over that period.”

CBO officially estimates that the bill increases federal deficits by $75 million between 2014 and 2018, and $225 million between 2014 and 2023.

Continue Reading...

"Once you move marriage beyond the scope of a man and a woman, you really don't end up with a good place to put a limit," Gohmert, R-Texas, said, adding: "I think polygamy is wrong, bigamy is wrong, and it's a crime in many places -- but how will that be justifiable now that the court has removed this? There's some [who] believe polygamy is a way to go."

h/t the Huffington Post.

Continue Reading...

Speaking on the conservative radio show The Steve Deace Show, Huelskamp, a Republican from Kansas, accused the Court of trying to “rewrite the Constitution” and “ramming their views down the throats of Americans.”

“If you read these decisions together," he continued, referring to both the Prop 8 and DOMA decisions (with majority opinions written by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Anthony Kennedy, respectively), "[it's] twisted logic, tortured the Constitution, I can’t even stand to read the decisions because I don’t even think they’d pass law school with decisions like that.”

Huelskamp is currently pushing the Federal Marriage Amendment, a constitutional amendment that would restore the effects of DOMA by defining marriage as between a man and a woman. In a 5-4 decision on Wednesday, the Supreme Court ruled that the section of DOMA that did the same is unconstitutional under the Equal Protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Continue Reading...

“The Voting Rights Act is vital to America’s commitment to never again permit racial prejudices in the electoral process,” Sensenbrenner, of Wisconsin, said in a statement. He continued: “This is going to take time, and will require members from both sides of the aisle to put partisan politics aside and ensure Americans’ most sacred right is protected.”

“I am disappointed by the Court’s ruling,” Sensenbrenner said, “but my colleagues and I will work in a bipartisan fashion to update Section 4 to ensure Section 5 can be properly implemented to protect voting rights, especially for minorities.”

According to The Hill, Republican Reps. Steve Chabot of Ohio and Sean Duffy of Wisconsin also said they're in favor of congressional action on the law.

Continue Reading...

From Politico, Huelskamp said that he will file the amendment sometime this week:

“My response to this will be later this week to file a federal marriage amendment,” he said at a Conversation with Conservatives lunch on Wednesday morning.

When asked if leadership is likely to support efforts to restore DOMA, Huelskamp said he was encouraged by the statement Speaker John Boehner released after the ruling.

“I give tremendous credit to the Speaker of the House,” Huelskamp said.

Boehner had put out a statement earlier on Wednesday, saying: "While I am obviously disappointed in the ruling, it is always critical that we protect our system of checks and balances. A robust national debate over marriage will continue in the public square, and it is my hope that states will define marriage as the union between one man and one woman.”

Continue Reading...

Bachmann, R-Minn., had put out a statement in response to the ruling, saying that "Marriage was created by the hand of God. No man, not even a Supreme Court, can undo what a holy God has instituted."

Watch, via Mediaite:

Continue Reading...

Speaking on the Family Research Council’s "Washington Watch" radio show on Monday, Fleming told host Tony Perkins that "Humans can be very innovative sometimes and I can actually see where two people of the same sex, even who are not themselves homosexual in any way, could find a way to get married just for the purpose of sharing those benefits and only for practical reasons."

"It would be similar to marrying someone from a foreign country. Is it done for convenience? Did someone pay somebody to be married? I mean, you can see how the whole institution of marriage could be demeaned," he continued.

Here's the audio, via Right Wing Watch:

Continue Reading...

He continued that "there is a natural law that parents should be involved in education," but this "reminds me so much of the summer that I was an exchange student in the Soviet Union back in the Seventies and I was shocked when they were saying 'no, the children don't belong to parents, they belong to the state.' And if any parent said anything in front of their children negative about the wonderful Soviet Union, then we will take their children away and give them to somebody more deserving."

Here's the audio, via Right Wing Watch:

Continue Reading...

"You know, maybe part of the problem is we need to go back into the schools at a very early age, maybe at the grade school level, and have a class for the young girls and have a class for the young boys and say, you know, this is what’s important," Gingrey said. "This is what a father does that is maybe a little different, maybe a little bit better than the talents that a mom has in a certain area. And the same thing for the young girls, that, you know, this is what a mom does, and this is what is important from the standpoint of that union which we call marriage."

Continue Reading...

Rohrabacher first argued that some researchers are “very skeptical of some of the research that has been going on" that links human action to climate change. He then objected to OFA's use of the term "climate denier."

“The only other use of that term is a ‘Holocaust denier,’” Rohrabacher said, according to Politico. “Do you use that term ‘denier’ for those people who disagree with you on climate science, and do you think that term is appropriate in engaging in a civil discourse over a scientific issue?”

“I much prefer a civil discourse, and that’s what I hope we’re engaging in," Moniz replied.

From Politico:

Continue Reading...

Speaking on Laura Ingraham's radio show, Politico reports, Bachmann was responding to Rove's criticism after she announced she would not run for reelection in 2014, which he said was a good thing. “Michele Bachmann was the chairman of the congressional Tea Party caucus and in that position did nothing,” Rove said.

“The base of our party is not where Karl Rove is, to be honest with you,” Bachmann said Tuesday. “I think that perhaps he wants to be the conscience of the Republican Party.”

“It is bizarre,” Bachmann added. “On one hand, the Tea Party was doing too much. And now they’re saying they’re not doing enough.”

Continue Reading...

“I have no intention of putting a bill on the floor that will violate the principles of our majority and divide our conference,” Boehner said, according to GOP aides, the Washington Post reports. “One of our principles is border security. I have no intention of putting a bill on the floor that the people in this room do not believe secures our borders. It’s not gonna happen.”

From the Post:

Continue Reading...

“I would consider that a betrayal of the Republican members of the House, and a betrayal of the Republicans throughout the country," Rohrabacher told WorldNetDaily radio. "Just as legalizing the status of illegals and suffering consequences of fifty million new people heading in our direction is a betrayal of the interests of the American people."

He continued: "And if Spekaker Boehner moves forward and permits this to come to a vote, even though the majority of Republicans in the House - and that's if they do [call a vote] - oppose whatever it is that's coming to a vote, he should be removed as Speaker."

Here's the audio, via Right Wing Watch.

Continue Reading...

Speaking on Rick Wiles' radio show, Duncan responded to questions about whether the House will "pursue Barack Obama's phony identification papers." Wiles asked: "If we know they are lying about all these other things, why not go back and say 'well, maybe the first scandal was a lie too?'"

Duncan replied: "There you go, I'm all with you, so let's go back and revisit some of these things because Americans have questions about not only the IRS scandal but also about the President's validity."

Here's the audio, via Right Wing Watch:

Continue Reading...

Politico reports:

A spokesman for Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) confirmed Friday to POLITICO that she’ll be managing the debate, and that the bill is being changed to include the new exception.

Continue Reading...

"NARAL, Planned Parenthood and the taxpayer-funded abortion lobby is attacking me for one reason -- I'm 100 percent unapologetically pro-life and I won't back down," Franks wrote to supporters in an email, the Arizona Republic reports. "Will you contribute $25, $50, $100, or even $500 right now to help me fight back?"

“Now they will spend whatever it takes to destroy me, remove me from Congress, and stop me from protecting any more unborn children," he continued.

Franks was referring to comments he made during a House Judiciary Committee debate on his bill to ban abortions after 20 weeks. Democrats were pushing an amendment to create an exception for rape or incest, which ultimately failed. “Before, when my friends on the left side of the aisle here tried to make rape and incest the subject — because, you know, the incidence of rape resulting in pregnancy are very low,” Franks said, the Washington Post reported.

Continue Reading...

Franks made the comments in a House Judiciary Committee hearing on Wednesday, during the debate on his bill to ban abortion after 20 weeks at the national level. Franks was voicing his objections to an amendment that would create an exception for rape or incest. “Before, when my friends on the left side of the aisle here tried to make rape and incest the subject — because, you know, the incidence of rape resulting in pregnancy are very low,” he said.

The Huffington Post reports:

Continue Reading...

[embedtweet id="345204589974417408"]

[embedtweet id="345214305026838528"]

ABC News explains:

King, a long-time immigration hardliner, last week sponsored an effort to cut funding for President Obama's deferred action program, which grants deportation reprieves to DREAMers.

In response, United We Dream, an undocumented youth activist group, organized a protest at the Iowa congressman's office this morning. Two dozen or so demonstrators showed up at King's office to voice their displeasure with him, organizers said. They arrived wearing caps and gowns (photo here) to reinforce their message that they want to pursue higher education and careers in the U.S.

Continue Reading...

“Before, when my friends on the left side of the aisle here tried to make rape and incest the subject — because, you know, the incidence of rape resulting in pregnancy are very low,” Franks said, according to the Washington Post. He continued: “But when you make that exception, there’s usually a requirement to report the rape within 48 hours. And in this case that’s impossible because this is in the sixth month of gestation. And that’s what completely negates and vitiates the purpose for such an amendment.”

Continue Reading...