A
majority
of
Maryland
and
Virginia
elected
officials
contacted
by
the
Blade
over
the
last
month
have
refused
to
say
whether
they
will
back
the
proposed
Federal
Marriage
Amendment
to
the
U.S.
Constitution
that
would
define
marriage
as
the
union
of
one
man
and
one
woman.
Three
out
of
eight
House
members
from
suburban
Maryland
and
five
of
the
11
congressmen
from
Northern
Virginia
did
not
respond
to
repeated
inquiries
seeking
their
position.
Three
of
the
four
senators
from
the
two
states
did
not
respond.
The
constitutional
amendment,
which
has
96
co-sponsors
in
the
House,
has
yet
to
be
introduced
in
the
Senate.
Congressman
Chris
Van
Hollen
(D-Md.),
who
defeated
gay-friendly
Republican
incumbent
Constance
Morella
in
2002,
said
this
week
he
is
opposed
to
the
Federal
Marriage
Amendment
and
intends
“to
work
with
my
colleagues
to
actively
defeat
such
an
amendment.”
Van
Hollen
said
he
expects
the
Republicans’
House
leadership
to
push
the
amendment,
requiring
a
“significant”
response
from
opponents.
He
stopped
short
on
calling
for
other
members
of
Congress
to
join
him
in
the
fight
against
the
FMA,
saying,
“They
will
have
to
answer”
that
question,
especially
in
light
of
the
ruling
on
Tuesday
from
the
Massachusetts
Supreme
Judicial
Court
that
gay
marriages
should
be
recognized
in
that
state.
Amaya
Smith,
press
secretary
for
Rep.
Albert
R.
Wynn
(D-Md.)
said
the
congressman
opposes
the
Federal
Marriage
Amendment
and
supports
domestic
partnership
recognition
and
would
support
legislation
to
address
the
inequity
in
financial
and
tax
benefits
for
same-sex
partners.
“Mr.
Wynn
feels
that
because
there
is
no
reference
to
marriage
in
the
Constitution
that
this
is
a
social
and
personal
decision
made
by
individuals
and
should
not
be
decided
by
politicians,”
Smith
said.
Rep.
Dutch
Ruppersberger
(D-Md.)
has
also
come
out
against
the
Federal
Marriage
Amendment.
His
press
secretary,
Heather
Moeder
Molino,
said
that
gay
marriage
“is
a
states
rights
issue
and
should
not
be
handled
by
the
federal
government.”
A
spokesperson
for
Rep.
Elijah
Cummings
(D-Md.)
said
the
congressman
does
not
have
an
opinion
on
the
amendment
but
does
support
legal
and
health
benefits
for
gay
and
lesbian
couples.
Katie
Elbert,
press
secretary
for
Congressman
Steny
H.
Hoyer
(D-Md.),
who
as
Minority
Whip
is
a
member
of
the
Democrats’
House
leadership,
said
her
boss
is
against
the
proposed
amendment.
Many
members
of
the
D.C.-area
congressional
delegation
who
declined
to
announce
a
position
on
the
amendment
have
previously
scored
high
points
according
to
the
Human
Rights
Campaign’s
“Voter
Scorecard,”
which
evaluates
members
of
Congress
and
their
support
for
gay
rights
legislation.
Congressmen
Jim
Moran
(D-Va.)
and
Benjamin
L.
Cardin
(D-Md.),
who
both
have
a
100
percent
pro-gay
voting
record
according
to
HRC’s
107th
Congress
scorecard,
did
not
respond
repeated
inquiries
regarding
the
FMA.
Josh
Israel,
president
of
the
Virginia
Partisans
Gay
&
Lesbian
Democratic
Club,
said
that
Rep.
Moran
is
against
the
Federal
Marriage
Amendment.
Israel
also
said
that
Rep.
Thomas
Davis
(R-Va.)
told
him
that
he
opposes
the
amendment.
Sen.
Barbara
A.
Mikulski
(D-Md.),
who
has
a
100
percent
pro-gay
record
in
the
107th
session
of
Congress,
has
declined
to
say
where
she
stands.
Lawrence
Jacobs,
board
co-chair
of
Free
State
Justice,
Maryland’s
largest
gay
civil
rights
organization,
said
that
he
isn’t
sure
Mikulski’s
support
could
be
taken
for
granted
since
she
voted
for
DOMA
in
1996.
Her
counterpart,
Sen.
Paul
S.
Sarbanes
(D-Md.),
who
also
scored
a
100
percent
pro-gay
voting
record,
released
a
statement
to
the
Blade
that
he
is
“opposed
to
proposed
Constitutional
smendments
when
a
statutory
approach
would
adequately
serve
the
interests
being
advanced.”
