Gays Punted from Immigration Reform

Now see, the guy on the left you can call anything you want. Mary. Miss
Scarlett. But the guys on the right? I'm disappointed, but I don't think
they're homophobes. Image from DailyKos.

I'm not sure where I come down on this one. What it boils down to is, leading Democrats fought for Senator Patrick Leahy's amendment that would allow legally married gay couples to petition for their spouses to get legal status, if they are foreign born. Republicans balked, and will kill the immigration reform bill if it doesn't include discrimination. Ain't that sweet? And the Democrats--as they are wont to do have pulled the amendment. This includes some pretty staunch liberals, including Charles Schumer and Al Franken (a personal fave).

Some gay activists--as they are wont to do--are going full-bore against those Democrats, and presumably the President. So, one of my favorite bloggers--John Aravosis of AmericaBlog.com--has the Senators emblazoned with "HOMOPHOBE" in red letters. Yikes. Me, I'm not quite so reactionary. And I don't believe Leahy and especially Franken in particular are homophobes. I think they're pragmatists, and they really want this legislation to pass. The Republicans are holding it hostage, because they insist upon enshrining their bigotry into law. To me, it is the Republicans who are the villains in this, the question is whether the hostage negotiators did a bad job.

And I get it, I do. It sucks, but I do. The Supreme Court's decision in June could render the question moot, if we get federal recognition for legally married couples. If that happens, I've gotta think it would be at most some changes to verbiage. This situation is ultimately a reminder that gays are still not completely equal in this country. We're still treated as though we're criminals or some alien "other." I mean, can you imagine if this fight was over married interfaith couples? Married mixed race couples? But even I will concede that though we've made amazing progress in civil rights, we have a ways to go. And we have a whole generation that might need to shuffle off before we get there. Unfortunately, I'm right behind them!

[Excerpt]

Immigration Reform Amendment For Gay Couples Withdrawn

Sens. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) had to make what the New York senator called an "excruciating" decision on Tuesday to come out against including LGBT couple provisions in their immigration reform bill, citing the need to keep the fragile balance in the "gang of eight."
Sounding disappointed, Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) withdrew the amendment after debate during a markup on the bill. . .

Read more at: Huffington Post

Senate Headed for Showdown with White House

Photo from source, RawStory.com

My tightly crossed fingers may be cramping, hoping that Congress shows some cojones, but they got a little relief with the news that the Senate may actually start playing hardball with the White House. It's pretty cut-and-dry, this case.

Regardless why the White House doesn't want to comply, or what specifically the subpoenas are for, you simply must appear when called.

You can refuse to comply once there, and you might get away with it. But to not show up at all? To have the Senate address an empty chair? If the Senate lets them get away with this, they have lost what little credibility they may have left.

If let to die, this issue will come up again with future administrations, and then there will be precedent. Congressional subpoenas, and the concept of Contempt of Congress will be meaningless. So do it, Senators! Do it!

[excerpt]

White House, Senate headed for subpoena showdown

The Bush Administration and a Senate committee have entered an apparent standoff as the White House failed to meet a 2:30 p.m. deadline from the Senate Judiciary Committee, which seeks compliance with subpoenas related to President Bush's warrantless wiretapping program. The committee's chairman threatened criminal charges if the administration continues to withhold requested documents.

"We should not have to legislate in the dark when the administration hides behind a fictitious veil of secrecy," Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy said at a Capitol Hill press conference Monday afternoon.

The Vermont Senator said he'll begin contempt proceedings in the Judiciary Committee if the Bush administration does not comply with the subpoenas by the end of the current congressional recess. A majority of Judiciary Committee members would have to endorse the decision to begin criminal proceedings before the full Senate could consider pursuing prosecution. . .

Read more at: RawStory.com