Fiorina voted in favor of Proposition 8 in 2008. When she announced her bid for Boxer’s seat last November, Fiorina reiterated her stance against gay marriage saying she “believes in the sanctity of a marriage between a man and a woman.” Fiorina has been relatively quiet on the issue since.

The measure, attached to an essential military-spending bill, broadens the definition of federal hate crimes to include those committed because of a victim’s gender or gender identity, sexual orientation or disability. It gives them the same federal safeguards already afforded to people who are victims of violent crimes because of their race, color, religion or national origin.

Supporters of the legislation argued that it would deter those tempted to attack people out of bigotry, and that extra protections for those victimized because of their sexuality were needed because such crimes have been on the rise.

Opponents argued to no avail that the new measure was unnecessary in view of existing laws and might interfere with local law enforcement agencies. Senator Jim DeMint, Republican of South Carolina, said he agreed that hate crimes were terrible. “That’s why they are already illegal,” he said, asserting that the new law was a dangerous, even “Orwellian” step toward “thought crime.”

Judy Shepard, mother of Matthew Shepard for whom the bill is named responded to the news…

“Dennis and I are extremely proud of the Senate for once again passing this historic measure of protection for victims of these brutal crimes,” said Judy Shepard, president of the Matthew Shepard Foundation Board. “Knowing that the president will sign it, unlike his predecessor, has made all the hard work this year to pass it worthwhile. Hate crimes continue to affect far too many Americans who are simply trying to live their lives honestly, and they need to know that their government will protect them from violence, and provide appropriate justice for victims and their families.”

Senator Fiengold was the only Democrat who voted against the bill, most likely because he disagreed with some aspect of the military spending and not because of hate crimes. The Nays in the roll call are the usual suspects and appear below:

“Edward M. Kennedy, the husband, father, grandfather, brother and uncle we loved so deeply, died late Tuesday night at home in Hyannis Port (Massachusetts),” the Kennedy family said in a statement.

One of the most influential and longest-serving senators in U.S. history — a liberal standard-bearer who was also known as a consummate congressional dealmaker — Kennedy had been battling brain cancer, which was diagnosed in May 2008.

“We’ve lost the irreplaceable center of our family and joyous light in our lives, but the inspiration of his faith, optimism, and perseverance will live on in our hearts forever,” the family statement added.

From CNN…

In the clip below, Teddy Kennedy gives a moving eulogy for his brother Robert. If there is a hearafter, I hope he is now at peace, and is rejoined with those he had lost. RIP Teddy…

This will be first time Congress has evaluated the policy since it was enacted in 1993 under President Clinton. There are also efforts to overturn the DADT in the House under the leadership of Rep. Patrick Murphy (D-PA), an Iraq war veteran.

Sen. McCaskill says she was not against letting people carry concealed weapons. But she is against requiring one state to accept another state’s laws that might differ from its own. She says it would be a foot in the door that could allow Vermont’s laws on gay marriage to be enforced in Missouri, which has a constitutional provision against gay marriage.

McCaskill says many of the supporters of the proposal are advocates for states’ rights, but they want to override states’ rights on carrying concealed weapons.

McCaskill audio available here:

Senator McCaskill has since attempted to clarify her position via email.
(via Pam’s House Blend)

“In talking about my recent vote against the gun provision offered in the Senate, I wasn’t clear when I stated that my vote against that provision was because it came down to a states’ rights. I was expressing my frustration in that some who argue that states shouldn’t respect the laws, certificates, or permits from other states when it’s convenient, like with gay marriage, but then argue that they should when it’s convenient on another issue, like gun rights. They can’t have it both ways,” McCaskill said.

While it is true that Republicans are demonstrating hypocrisy with regards to state’s rights on this issue, based on McCaskill’s original statement, it really sounds like she thinks DOMA is a “good” idea.

PROMO, The Missouri LGBT advocacy group has responded to McCaskill’s comments today:

In a statement defending her opposition to this bill, she [McCaskill] stated: “This is a foot in the door that would require, for example, the laws in Vermont on gay marriage to be enforced in Missouri.”

This is a problem. A state’s rights argument is valid in this situation, however it is inconceivable that an ally can support Hate Crimes legislation- which recognizes the LGBT community is a target of increased abuse, intolerance and aggressive force- but uses a touchstone issue for the community as a shield rather than stand alone on an anti-gun sentiment.

In a time when we have seen incredible strides on a state by state basis, we have turned a corner and will not tolerate being used as a shield. Please reach out to Sen. McCaskill’s office and let her know while she is an ally, you won’t tolerate being used as a shield. The numbers listed are below for local and DC offices.

Gay Republicans have also expressed particular outrage over McCaskill’s comments, an outrage likely fueled more by the fact that McCaskill is a Democrat and their strong support of the concealed weapons law, than anything about gay marriage.

Matt Canter, a Gillibrand spokesperson, told the Blade on Wednesday that the senator determined there weren’t 60 votes available for a vote of cloture on the amendment.

“She was working for about a week to assess support among her colleagues for the measure,” he said. “It does not appear that we’re going to have the 60 votes needed to overcome a filibuster. So she’s not going to pursue the moratorium amendment at this time.”

Canter said Gillibrand is working with senators “to continue to highlight the issue and move forward on the issue.”

Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) is slated to introduce a bill for full repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” in the Senate. In the House, Rep. Patrick Murphy (D-Pa.) took over as lead sponsor of repeal legislation earlier this month.

Canter said Gillibrand will continue to back Kennedy and Murphy’s efforts to build support for repeal legislation.

While unfortunate, the withdrawal is not completely surprising. The proposed amendment was last minute, and comes at a time when the Senate has been focused on healthcare reform, the DoD authorization bill, and mermaids. Seriously, it had better not been the last one.

The 58-40 vote reflected an all-out lobbying campaign by the administration, which had to overcome resistance from lawmakers confronted with the potential losses of defense-related jobs if the F-22 program was terminated.

“The president really needed to win this vote,” Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin, D-Mich., said. Levin said it was important not only on the merits of the planes but “in terms of changing the way we do business in Washington.”

While the termination of the F-22 program increases the likelihood Obama will sign the hate crimes bill when it reaches his desk, it is unclear if the “unwelcome” amendments added just yesterday, including a provision for the death penalty, will pose further problems.

The ACLU also has issues with the Senate version of the bill, preferring the House version.

…Obama has told Congress he will veto the defense bill if it includes more money for an F-22 fighter program he is trying to terminate. The House in April passed a similar hate crimes bill, but did it as independent legislation not tied to a larger bill.

Five Republicans voted for it, zero Democrats voted against it.  Full roll call of vote courtesy of Tips-Q:

For the record, the bill does not curb free speech; it only applies to people who commit physical acts of violence against other people. This is just more fear-mongering.

It appears the hate crimes bill will be voted on in the Senate later today, but is encountering resistance from the usual suspects, the measure being called “highly explosive!”

“This legislation works to ensure that our society recognizes the dignity and sacredness of human life,” said Brownback. “Creating human-animal hybrids, which permanently alter the genetic makeup of an organism, will challenge the very definition of what it means to be human and is a violation of human dignity and a grave injustice.”

This important piece of legislation is co-sponsored by nearly 20 other like-minded individuals who refuse to blur the lines between man and beast, and should be the Senate’s top priority. Prohibiting mad scientists from creating man-beasts is so much more important than health care or any of those other trifles the Senate is currently debating.

Give me a break. Granted there is some legitimate research going on in Britain, but it is not as the bible-thumping conservatives would present it.