Grasping at Straws

According to Senator John Cornyn (R-TX), the real reason we cannot afford, literally, to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act, which the Department of Justice has labeled unconstitutional, is because it simply costs too much.

“Repealing the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) would actually result in an expansion of federal benefits and spending at a time when we know that federal spending is way out of control and our entitlement programs are unsustainable,” he told the Senate Judiciary Committee Thursday.

“Repealing the Defense of Marriage Act would actually increase the cost of Social Security that is already insolvent,” he added. “No one has paid into the Social Security system expecting benefits to be paid to same sex partners.”

According to a 2004 analysis by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), repealing DOMA could actually save the federal government $100 to $200 million per year, which may be one reason why Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich declared this past Saturday that he would eliminate the CBO if he were president.

The Senate Judiciary Committee passed the repeal of DOMA 10-8 along party lines. Because both parties are the same. Or something.

Print Friendly
This entry was posted in LGBT and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.
  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1215240366 Audrey Carangelo

    nice to know equal rights just cost too damn much…

  • D_C_Wilson

    “Newt Gingrich declared this past Saturday that he would eliminate the CBO if he were president.”

    Par for the course for Newt. Congress used to have an agency called the Office of Technology Assessment (OTA). It’s job was to evaluate evaluate scientific reports and provide Congress with unbiased analysis. Of course, it had an annoying habit of telling Congress things like a certain pesticide was linked to cancer when that was indeed what the data indicated. Republicans hated hearing things like that because it made it harder for them to justify not having any regulations on the pesticide.

    After the 1996 election when the republicans took control of Congress and Newt became speaker, one of their first acts was to abolish the OTA. That ended all that pesky unbiased scientific analysis.

  • muselet

    I just watched the video at the link. Now I feel slightly ill.

    If John Cornyn and Charles Grassley were capable of human emotion, they’d be hanging their heads in shame after their performances. Ditto all the other Rs on the committee.

    On the other hand, the Ds—Patrick Leahy and Diane Feinstein in particular—deserve kudos.

    –alopecia

    EDITED to add the obvious missing word.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Rick-Janes/607039439 Rick Janes

    It’s doubtful Blingrich — in the dealt-a-straight-flush chance he was elected — could eliminate the CBO. That would be in the purview of Congress, not the Executive branch. Perhaps the ‘great conservative thinker’ Newtie should take some time to read up on the powers of the presidency granted by the Constitution, as ‘quaint’ as that document might be to the GOP these days.