CHIPPEWA VALLEY (WQOW) - The two congressmen representing the Chippewa Valley were split along party lines on Tuesday, on a vote on the 'Respect for Marriage Act.'
The bill passed the house 267 to 157, with 47 republicans voting yes. If signed into law, the bill would prohibit any state from preventing marriage based on sex, race, ethnicity or nation of origin.
Democrat Ron Kind of Wisconsin’s 3rd district voted 'yes' on the bill, while republican Tom Tiffany, representing the state’s 7th district, voted 'no.'
Here's the official statement on the bill from Kind:
“When the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, it put the right to privacy on shaky ground and called into question past rulings affecting marriage equality and access to contraception. That’s why this week, I voted to protect these essential freedoms and advance both the Respect for Marriage Act and the Right to Contraception Act. Every Wisconsinite should be able to make personal decisions about their bodies, lives, and futures without interference from politicians.”
News 18 reached out to Tiffany for his comments on his decision to vote "no." In response, we received this official statement:
“Instead of addressing the record-breaking inflation, skyrocketing gas prices, rising crime, and the worsening border crisis that the Biden administration created, House Democrats are attempting to distract the American people. This legislation is nothing more than a cheap attempt to fearmonger Americans into believing that every Supreme Court decision is under threat. We all know that’s not true. The holding in the Dobbs decision clearly distinguishes Roe and Casey, from Loving and Obergefell, despite the attempts made by some to draw a conclusory connection from the opinions of the Justices. As Justice Alito noted, “Nothing in this opinion should be understood to cast doubt on precedents that do not concern abortion.” It’s time to end the distractions and reverse course from the failed economic policies of President Biden and Pelosi’s House Democrats.”
In direct contradiction to Tiffany's point about Alito's assurance that the overturning of Roe v. Wade would not cast doubt on other precedents, Kind pointed to the words from conservative Justice Clarence Thomas’ opinion in the courts decision to overturn Roe v. Wade. Thomas stated the court should "reconsider all of this court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence and Obergefell.”
Those three cases Thomas cited set precedents concerning access to contraceptives, consensual sex between people of the same sex and gay marriage, respectively. Without updated laws for these issues, if the Supreme Court were to reverse course on any of these cases like they did on Roe v. Wade, it would be up to each individual state if these would still be legal.
After receiving Tiffany's official statement, News 18 reached out to the congressman's office again, to get some clarity on his stance on the central issue the 'Respect for Marriage Act' addresses. Three straightforward questions were posed:
- Based on this official statement, are your constituents to infer that your vote has nothing to do with your stance on gay marriage? What is your stance?
- If you view this bill as a political distraction, why didn’t you abstain from voting?
- If your focus was and is on other issues, wouldn’t it have taken the exact same amount of time to vote ‘yes’ as it did to vote ‘no?’ Why did you vote ‘no?’
As of the posting of this article, we have not received a response.
