It’s unlikely anyone would accuse Rep. Dan Meuser of being a liberal.
The first line of his official U.S. House biography describes Meuser, R-Dallas, as “a conservative business leader.”
Meuser’s views on many of the key issues of the day are, not surprisingly, in keeping with the orthodoxies of his party. But we’ve also found Meuser to be an independent thinker who hasn’t been afraid to vote — and speak — his conscience on a number of issues.
So it proved with same-sex marital rights.
Late last month, 47 Republicans voted for a House bill designed to safeguard same-sex marriage, contributing to its 267-157 victory. The vast majority of Republicans voted against the measure.
Meuser was among the 47 who bravely stood apart from their party to support it.
The Respect for Marriage Act emerged as a response to this summer’s U.S. Supreme Court decision overturning Roe v. Wade, and strong suggestions that the same reasoning used to reverse Roe and the nationwide right to abortion could be applicable to other rights granted by the court, including same-sex marriage. That became legal nationwide with the court’s 2015 ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges.
In his concurring opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas held that the court previously erred in granting other rights — such as the right to contraception, same-sex sexual relations and same-sex marriage — which were not explicitly stated in the Constitution.
The court’s ruling is at odds with trends in American society at large.
As the Associated Press pointed out, a Gallup poll conducted in May showed broad support for same-sex marriage, with 71% of U.S. adults saying they think such unions should be recognized by law, including 55% of Republicans.
And yet a majority of Republicans in the House opposed the bill, and many are likely to do so in the Senate when the upper chamber considers the measure.
Many GOP senators may oppose it, perhaps, but there also are signs that enough Republicans could support the bill for it to pass.
It is instructive to look at who supported the bill in the House, and what they had to say about it.
“My vote in support of H.R. 8404 was to affirm the current law and support the rights and freedoms of all Americans,” Meuser said in a statement provided to the Times Leader after the vote. “The passage of this legislation reflects current law, which was upheld by a Supreme Court ruling nearly 10 years ago. This vote was not difficult for me, as it does not infringe upon anyone’s personal and religious rights.”
Among the two other Pennsylvania Republicans to support the bill was House Freedom Caucus chairman Rep. Scott Perry, from York County. His vote was notable because the rest of the Freedom Caucus was staunchly opposed to the bill.
Perry told the York Daily Record that “my vote affirmed my long-held belief that Americans who enter into legal agreements deserve to live their lives without the threat that our federal government will dissolve what they’ve built.”
The other Pennsylvania Republican to vote in favor was Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick of Bucks County, a traditionally more moderate member of the party.
With respect to Fitzpatrick, the votes and statements by Perry and Meuser were notable given their traditionally conservative stances.
Likewise was the vote by Upstate New York Rep. Elise Stefanik, a rising star in the party known for her conservative views.
“I believe if you’re married in one state, that should be recognized elsewhere,” Stefanik said. “Just like I believe that you have a concealed carry permit, that should be recognized in another state as well.”
It is important to understand what The Respect for Marriage Act would and would not do.
It would repeal the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act — signed by President Bill Clinton — which for federal purposes defined marriage as the union of one man and one woman. The new act would protect any marriage under federal law as long as it was legal in the state where the marriage license was issued, meaning a couple with an out-of-state marriage license could not have marital rights denied to them based on sex, race, ethnicity, or national origin.
It would not, however, prevent states from refusing to issue same-sex marriage licenses if the Supreme Court reverses Obergefell.
Senate Majority leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., has said The Respect for Marriage Act will come to a vote in September. In order to pass, would require the support of 10 Republican senators. News reports from around the nation suggest that while this won’t be an easy hurdle to clear, it isn’t impossible, either, as at least five GOP senators have spoken out in favor so far.
Here in Pennsylvania, Sen. Bob Casey, D-Scranton, is in favor, while Sen. Pat Toomey, R-Lehigh Valley, has yet to formally declare his position.
We wish Toomey and his colleagues would listen to Meuser: No one else’s marriage, no one’s religious beliefs, are infringed upon by protecting the rights of same-sex couples to marry under the law. This is not difficult.
— Times Leader