Coffman Votes For Discrimination Against Gay Vet Families

Eh, you know, whatever.

Eh, you know, whatever.

As reported by the LGBT news site Washington Blade today:

A panel in the Republican-controlled U.S. House on Wednesday rejected a measure that would have enabled veterans with same-sex spouses to receive partner benefits wherever they live in the country…

Although the vote was a largely along party lines with Republicans voting “no” and Democrats voting “yes,” Rep. Jon Runyan (R-N.J.), a co-sponsor of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, was the only Republican who broke with his party to vote “yes” on the amendment.

…After the Supreme Court ruled against Defense of Marriage Act, the Obama administration began extending spousal benefits to individuals in same-sex marriages throughout the country for the most part regardless whether the state in which reside recognize their union.

But a year after the ruling, the administration deemed that because Section 103(c) of Title 38 of the U.S. Code — which governs veterans benefits — looks to the state of residence, not the state of celebration, in determining whether a couple is married, it could not afford spousal benefits to veterans in same-sex marriages if they live in a non-marriage equality state…

Also voting “no” on the amendment was Rep. Mike Coffman (R-Colo.), another co-sponsor of ENDA. He’s set to attend the upcoming annual dinner for the National Log Cabin Republicans in D.C. on September 17. [Pols emphasis]

Coffman's recent lip service to equality for gays and lesbians who serve in the military, as with so many other issues in Coffman's record, stands in contrast to past positions he's taken–like when Coffman tried to stop same-sex weddings on military bases even in states with marriage equality on the books. Presumably, when Coffman appears next week before the Log Cabin Republicans, he'll have some procedural excuse for voting against this modest measure to protect the families of gay and lesbian veterans.

But if he expects to convince anyone besides the GOP's tokenist LGBT lapdogs, it'd better be good.

0 Shares

5 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. CaninesCanines says:

    As long as Coffman is pro-fracking, the Log Cabin Republicans will greet Coffman with open arms. After all, they're after "sound business policy"–not necessarily gay rights.

    • BlueCatBlueCat says:

      I don't get the Log Cabin crowd. I get that you can have conservative economic views and be gay.  But the middle has shifted so far right, there is plenty of room in the Dem party for what would have been typical R views on the economy a few decades ago. The Dem party is now a mainly center right party, after all. You could fit the genuine liberal Dem pols in a phone booth if you could still find one.  What we don't have room for in the Dem party is the thinly disguised hateful attitude toward gays and minorities that the GOTP pretty much requires. What we don't have is a requirement that you raise your hand when asked if you accept biological science.  

      It's like me wanting to remain in a party that doesn't want kids exposed to Jews or any educated person remaining in a party that requires that you believe the earth is flat.  WTF is wrong with these people?  What level of self loathing does it take to throw in with a party that despises you quite officially as part of its platform?

  2. mamajama55mamajama55 says:

    I disagree – Mikey C gonna have some 'splainin' to do. 

    • BlueCatBlueCat says:

      Sadly I don't disagree. The Log Cabin Crowd has stuck with the GOTP through worse than this.  They  must have almost as high a tolerance for bing despised as it would take me to join a neo-Nazi group.

  3. ZappateroZappatero says:

    Pols said "lip service"….heh.

Leave a Reply

Comment from your Facebook account


You may comment with your Colorado Pols account above (click here to register), or via Facebook below.