Senator Dodd on his missing the HRC/LOGO Forum:
"I regret that a scheduling conflict prevented me from participating in the HRC/Logo Presidential Forum. I was scheduled on the same day to speak to the National Education Association in New Hampshire. My 100% rating from HRC indicates my ongoing support for the community and its issues. I am proud of the work that I have done to further our mutual goals."
Chris Dodd answers questions that were asked at the Human Rights Campaign and LOGO debate concerning the GLBT community:
1. Do you understand the special needs of people in gay and lesbian couples who cannot depend on their partners’ insurance for protection because they are not a legal spouse? What would you do about this?
I believe that every American, regardless of race, age, income, or sexual orientation, is entitled to high quality health care. That is why I cosponsored the Domestic Partner Health Benefits Act. This is also why I have introduced a health care plan that provides access to proper care for all Americans. My health plan will create a health insurance marketplace called Universal HealthMart that is based on, and parallel to, the Federal Employees Health Benefits Plan (FEHBP). Individuals and businesses will contribute to Universal HealthMart based on their ability to pay. Premiums will be affordable based on leveraged negotiating power, spreading risk, reduced administrative costs, and incentives for technology and preventive care. Coverage will be portable – insurance purchased in Universal HealthMart will follow individuals, not jobs.
My plan will phase in universal, affordable coverage to all Americans over four years. No one will be forced into Universal HealthMart. If they wish, employers and individuals can maintain their existing insurance arrangements. This plan is easy to accomplish because the model and infrastructure for the plan, the Federal Employees Health Benefits (FEHBP) plan, already operates in every county in the country.
Another significant feature of my health plan is that coverage is available for all Americans regardless of employment status, health status or income level. Individuals pay for coverage within Universal HealthMart based on their ability to pay and the insurance industry will be forced to end price and coverage discrimination against people based on prior conditions.
2. Do you think public schools should teach about GLBT students and families? How can we bring this into the public school system, or should we?
I believe that schools should embrace diversity of all types and should make all families and students welcome regardless of race, ethnicity or sexual orientation. What is taught at individual schools is a local school board decision but I do believe that the federal government should ensure that just as with race and ethnicity, GLBT students should be afforded the same rights, responsibilities and protections as their peers.
3. Why should the gay community believe that Democrats will fight for us, after allowing us to be used by the Republicans as a scare tactic in 2004 and after the Clinton administration failed to follow through with campaign promises to us?
I have been a supporter of the GLBT community throughout my career, and in the White House I will be able to do even more to advance issues important to this community. My record shows consistent commitment to the advancement of GLBT issues. I am proud to have fought long and hard to pass the Family and Medical Leave Act, and I will fight again to extend this legislation to cover same-sex couples. I have supported legislation to expand the definition of hate crimes to include gender, sexual orientation, and disability. I cosponsored the Employment Non-Discrimination Act. I have supported and continue to support equal rights for domestic partnerships. I was an original co-sponsor of the Ryan White CARE Act and believe in working to restore this bill to its original purpose of promoting HIV/AIDS prevention. I will repeal Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. I have spent a great deal of time on these issues, and in the White House I would continue to fight for you.
4. If a member of your staff came to you, told you that they were transgender, that they were thinking of transitioning, how would you react to that?
I would support them in their decision.
5. Many people in the GLBT community have HIV, others suffer with cancer, and have benefited from medicinal marijuana. Do you think we should legalize medicinal marijuana?
I believe that states should be able to decide whether or not to allow the use of medicinal marijuana. From what I understand, it can be a source of significant pain relief, among other beneficial properties. I would not interfere with states whose policy it is to listen to the advice of doctors and allow the use of medical marijuana.
6. AIDS prevention outreach through Ryan White funding is currently stopped. Would you reinstate Ryan White funding for this type of outreach?
I was an original cosponsor of the first Ryan White CARE Act in 1990. I am appalled by what this administration has done to HIV/AIDS prevention and treatment programs and its cuts to Ryan White funding. I would absolutely reinstate funding for outreach to prevent HIV/AIDS.
7. What potential hurdles do you see to passing ENDA? How will you overcome them?
As a supporter of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act I would fight hard to ensure its passage. I believe I can overcome the current deadlock in Congress by relying on my long experience of reaching across the aisle to bring people together on tough issues. I passed the first child care legislation since World War II and the Family and Medical Leave Act with help from across the aisle. Reaching out, building upon existing relationships to get the job done, is something I have proven time and time again I am successful at. It is time to work with others to make them understand that a society that discriminates against a population of people based on nothing other than their inherent characteristics is not a truly free or vibrant democracy. ENDA is not about granting new rights to people. It is simply about affording every American the same rights in employment.
8. The CDC estimate that nearly 50% of black, gay, and bisexual men in urban surroundings may already be infected with HIV. What can we do to fix this?
There are a number of things we need to do to reduce the rate of HIV/AIDS in our urban communities. Reinstating funding for the Ryan White CARE Act will be an important piece of turning back the tide on this disease. In addition, my universal healthcare plan which focuses on prevention as well as coverage, will ensure that people in our urban communities, regardless of socioeconomic status, have access to the information they need to prevent the spread of HIV/AIDS, and the treatments we have developed to treat it.
9. Under our current immigration laws, one spouse can sponsor another to become a U.S. citizen, but same-sex couples are not covered by this law. What would you do to help bi-national gay and lesbian couples whose families are being torn apart by this system?
I cosponsored the Permanent Partners Immigration Act, which provides same-sex partners of U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents the same immigration benefits that legal spouses of U.S. citizens enjoy. As President, I will work to encourage cooperation in Congress in order to pass this important piece of legislation.
10. Do you think homosexuality is a choice or is biological?
I believe that it is biological.
11. Would you repeal Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell?
Yes. I believe that “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” prevents people like Marine Staff Sgt. Eric Alva, the first American wounded in the war in Iraq, from being recognized as they should for their heroic acts in defense of our country. Gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender Americans ought to be able to serve in the armed forces without being required to hide part of their identities from their fellow soldiers. We need every skilled person we can get in the armed forces. Excluding people based on their sexual orientation is ludicrous and would run counter to our national security goals.
12. Do you support gay marriage?
I strongly believe that all Americans should have equal rights regardless of their sexual orientation, and as a United States Senator, I have been working to make that a reality for over 30 years. This is not something I have come to because I am running for President -- I have been fighting for civil rights and equal protections my entire career.
I wish every American, when considering these issues, would think about this as a personal matter affecting their own family not an esoteric issue affecting “others”. I have two young daughters, 2 and 5 years old, I would want them to have access to all the benefits their mother and I have had. They should be able to have the jobs of their choice, build homes, and take care of the people they love. I want these things for my children regardless of their sexual orientation. Every American ought to want that.
But marriage is a states issue, and that is one of the reasons I opposed the constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. I would also support amending the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) to ensure parity for civil unions at the federal level. I am proud that my home state, Connecticut, was the first state in the union to enact a civil unions law without a court order.
13. Would you put someone in a position of power who is known to be anti-gay?
No. I would not put someone in a position of power who would discriminate, or be outwardly hostile, against another based on race, ethnicity, age, gender or sexual orientation.
Comments
Senator: Thank you for your reponses. I wish you had chosen to explain why you were not a participant in such a historic event.
Your responses are carefully crafted and consistent with those of all the other candidates, except for Kucinach and Gravel. I noted one difference. You state, reasonably, that you "believe" that homosexuality is biologically innate, which, in fact, is scientifically accurate. However, at another point you use the phrase "sexual preference." I respectully suggest you notice a contradition that is not lost on the GLBT community. If homosexuality is "biological" it has not been selected as a preference. The only "preference" that is relevant to the GLBE Americans is the preference to be who one actually IS, groeing up and living in a hostile atmosphere of lifelong discrimination.
I appreciate your taking the time to post these responses. However, I remain disappointed that you did not participate in the event directly.
If you chose not to participate, I would rather hear that addressed directly and honestly. It's a matter of respect.
If your schedule did not permit you to attend, it would have been better if that had been announced: "Chris Dodd regrets that a scheduling conflict prevents him from participating this evening." Maybe I missed it, but I don't even recall your name being mentioned.
You couldn't have cancelled the other thing?
I stand with you as a proud gay American and applaud your lifelong efforts to fight for the GLBT community. Your 100% HRC rating speaks for itself! Bravo Senator Dodd!
Personal pride is a good thing in itself, but its relevance here is unclear. Gay Americans should expect supportive congressional representatives to show up at a ground-breaking forum of enormous importance to millions of GLBT citizens. Senator Dodd has not explained his absence, which is disappointing and remains an issue. He has, however, answered questions posed at the forum. It's noteweorthy that Sen. Biden neither explained his absence nor offered any commentary on his website. That's completely unacceptable.
I really wish that those who support federal civil unions would address the specifics of how it would be implemented. Especially since this implementation is likely to leave those of us in states with amendments banning them in the lurch. I refer you to Mr. Dodd's remarks above regarding marriage being an issue for the states. The fact no one seems to be talking about is that the federal government has no more power over civil unions than they do marriage. There is therefore no reason we should believe federal recognition of civil unions will be extended equally to citizens of every state.
You're really only talking about the citizens of a handful of states benefitting from this - those states which already have civil unions at the state level. It isn't very many - only Vermont, Connecticut and New Jersey, with New Hampshire to follow shortly. No one seems to have said whether the domestic partnerships of Maine, Washington, Oregon or California will be extended federal recognition.
And no one is talking at all about states like Michigan, whose ban on ANY form of recognition for same-sex couples has threatened the health care of same-sex partners of employees working for state-funded entities. I hardly think the state is going to turn 180 degrees and repeal its ban on civil unions just because Congress extends federal recognition to them.
Don't waste your breath telling me to just move to another state. I shouldn't have to, if we're all truly equal as U.S. citizens. I shouldn't be expected to abandon my career when I'm nearing retirement age, nor to abandon two sets of elderly parents for whom moving isn't an option, just so I can have second-class status in some other state.
I really liked all your positions until I came to the civil marriage question. So at best you support a "separate but equal" institution and at worst you support a "separate but unequal" institution. Either way, why don't you support civil marriage for same-sex couples?
If one of your daughters were gay, would you really want one of them afforded the right of civil marriage and the other relegated to a second class status under civil unions?
As a practical matter, I understand the previous post. But it's important to understand why Dodd is so often ignored. One of the biggest factors has been the media's relentless coverage of the 2008 presidential election as a "horse race" right from the start (the day after the 2006 elections). This benefits our corporate media, not our nation. Clinton and Obama have been thrust upon us like Paris Hilton and Nicole Ritchie. The media should have helped us examine all the candidates, their positions and qualifications; ignoring the polls and horse race till we are ready to make an informed decision (on the eve of the election). This is a democracy? Give me a break. It's a constitutional plutocracy.
I hope your daughters do grow up to be gay, Senator. Then when they are denied their equality they won't have far to look to know who to blame.
You stink, Dodd. You're not a crook, like your old man, but still as low budget.
That said, I'll vote for you and encourage my friends(my family already will hold their noses and do it)to do the same. I just encouraged a friend at lunch today. You remain, hands down, the most qualified candidate for the job.
I have read and heard candidates speak that there are over 1100 rights denied to GLBT same sex union/marriage... can anyone direct me to a list of these individual rights?
Where do you stand on the RFID chip?
Just saw Dodd on CNN Wednesday 29, I thought he looked great and performed even better. Came to the website and can't believe I didn't know more about this senator. Shows my ignorance. But maybe more needs to be seen. I have been looking for Gov. Richardson to look better than he has. I will be watching Chris Dodd much closer until Fla. Primary. Even if our votes don't count. I hate the parties hard line against "life long democrats" in Florida. We all know the Republicans run this state and are doing this to disenfranchise independents and win undecided.
I'm glad to read what you are doing with regard to FMLA, medical coverage, partner immigration and HIV/AIDS outreach...but I disagree with your stand on marriage. Up to each state? C'mon, that is ridiculous. STOP TALKING LIKE A REPUBLICAN!
Are you going to say that Social Security should be up to each state? How about illegal immigration? How about Child Pornography? Better yet if one state came out with a law that denied the rights of say, Muslims, to be married, do you think it would turn into a National debate? You bet it would. And if you are talking about spousal rights (e.g. benefits) or employment anti-discrimination laws at a Federal level, then how the hell can you still relegate the decision of marriage/civil union discrimination back to the states? You make no sense whatsoever!
Exactly which side of the fence are you going to stay on?
You, Sir, are just waffling all over yourself here with your absurd "position" (or should I say, lack of one. Grow a backbone...and then you'll get my vote!
"Marriage" has always been a hetero word, which additionally has a religious connotations. As a gay man I would not want to enter into a marriage with another man and I find the thought of it distasteful. However the right to have my partnership recognized legally is important to me.
It is my conviction that the Government should be completely out of the "marriage" business altogether, because this is a type of binding the government to religion which is strictly unconstitutional. Instead, the Federal government should be in charge of appointing all unions (regardless of gender) and granting a Civil Union to ANY couple of legal age who wishes to enter one, but regardless of gender. (To some degree, this could be likened to being vaguely similar the current "marriage license" process.)
Once a Civil Union is granted, if that couple (regardless of gender) wants a "marriage" within their own church or religion or National Park, whatever...then, fine. But the legally binding union would be the documented was granted to the couple when their civil union was signed, stamped and sealed by the Government.
Stop sanctioning religious control of Government. It is NOT democracy.
I agree with the Senator that Marriage is a religious institution. We have what is often referred to as "Separation of Church and State." I would not want that tinkered with. Civil Unions provide the same benefits as marriage only they don't force a compromise on the separation of church and state. Everyone is entitled to love who they wish as an American, but Senator Dodd is right on with his endorsement of Civil Unions and not Gay Marriage!
Interesting argument bringing up "Separation of Church and State."
One could argue that the government should not recognize or license any marriage because it is up to "the church" to do that.
And perhaps only recognize registered domestic partnerships which can be allowed between two or more consenting adults of any gender arrangement.
That way the State and the Church are completley separate.
As a side note, some religions are ok with "gay marriage."
The State shouldn't pick one religion over another to agree with.
I think the State should lean for expanding freedoms not limiting them.
So, to do that, it would recognize equally all forms of adult "marriages" or "domestic partnerships" or whatever you want to call the arrangment between adults.
It's sad that this page is not previewed/included in the main portion of the issues page, like all of the other "issues," but, rather, is merely as a small link on the side of the page.
So close, yet so far, Senator.
Many years ago a number of states disaproved of slavery and some did. Slavery came to an end when the federal government abolished it. Today we have second class citizens who do not have the right to marry, except for one state. Sen Dodd's idea to continue this injustice by continuing the second class status of a portion of our citizens by denying them of equal righte under federal law is not only unamerican but immoral. I will be voting for one who can see beyond this issue in an honest fashion. The buck stops with 50 senators, not 50 govenors.
I have been sick about the elections.
It seems that the main focus is the war. I understand that obviously that is something that needs to be talked about. I live in minnesota, and our bridge just collapsed because our government has been federally funding a war for six years and not giving a damn about taking care of the roads and bridges. I feel the loss of life everywhere I look, people show up from out of state and treat the colapse site like a tourist attraction.
Until I had the job I have now, I didnt have health insurace for close to five years. I take medication everyday for a cronic illness. My state at one time would supply me with low cost health insurance, by when Gov. Pawlenty was elected that was the first to go. I am 25 and have so much debt for the cost of my medications I am facing bankruptcy. I have read all of these posts, and what I want MORE than anything is a president that will just allow me to live my life freely. I'm gay, and I dont care if I ever get married. I just want health care. and I want to know that if I am paying taxes that they are going to take care of the roads and bridges. I understand why getting married is so important to some people. But if the republicans or religious rights are so crazy about it then let them keep it. I'm asking for a President that will actually make progress in office. I want results.
While you were missed your HRC rating goes a long way. I understand the need for the states to regulate marriage BUT the reality is that the federal government has a great deal to do with regulating marriage. For example polygamy is against the federal laws. There are tax laws and pension laws etc. that are federal law issues. If the states have the right to decide whether or not two men can marry then why shouldn't they have the right to decide which races can marry? I recognize that this note will not change your mind but I feel it's important to say.
I also recognize that for all the candidates getting elected/re-elected is a top priority. Unfortunately I believe that when the GLBT community becomes more of a liability than an asset most politicians will drop us like a hot potatoe.
Up to the states? So if my beloved and I decide to get civ-un'd in one state where it's allowed, what do we do if one of us gets transferred to a state where it ISN'T allowed? And how - EXACTLY - do you propose that the federal government enforce the equity of civil unions and marriage? Will insurance companies (currently regulated by states) be required to provide coverage in all states? Or only in those where civil unions are legal? How about inheritance laws? Hospital visitation? Medical decisions? Adoptions? and on and on and on.
That sounds an awful lot like "Neener, Neener, Neener - I can't hear you!!"
Thank you so much for your informed and intelligent responses to these questions. It's nice to see open and accepting people in positions of power, and I completely support your campaign for president. I fully believe in gay marriage and equal rights, and I hate descrimination. I agree with you that marriage is a state issue, however I would really like to see every state legalize gay marriage. Although I can't say I agree with every word you've said, you are doing a great thing. Keep up the great work.
I am proud to let you know that after much consideration, and reflection, I will be declaring myself as a Delegate for Dodd, from the Ohio 17th, to the 2008 DNC. As a Robert Kennedy Democrat, I find that you stir the passion, emotion and idealism of what this Nation is all about. Thank You.
Tristan, thank you so much for your support of Senator Dodd. As a resident of Clermont County, I have been so worried that members of the Ohio caucus would not give the Senator their support. As a Robert Kennedy Democrat myself, I too have been overwhelmed by the feelings invoked by Senator Dodd's passion and commitment to steer this Nation in the right direction.
As a long time HRC member, I have been impressed by Senator Dodd's work for the GLBT community. He is so deserving of the 100% ranking the HRC has given him. I only hope that you can convince other members of the Ohio caucus to support Senator Dodd.
Thank you again, Tristan!
I am doing a report for school on Chris Dodd and I am very interested in the Democratic view as i live in South Carolina and we are a republican state.
Like many of the people who have already posted, I am quite impressed with your well thought out answers and place a high value on your HRC rating. Thank you for your support of the GLBT Community thus far. I hope you continue to be an ally and that in the future you see the importance of equal marriage rights for all!
After seeing a video of you that was recently posted on cnn.com, and reading this page and the others...I hope you continue fighting to stay in the race. You are an awesome candidate, and I think you could actually beat whomever the Republicans pick.
On an semi-unrelated topic: Can we have a national primary day? I'm tired of Iowans standing in corners of a room being pretty much the deciding factor in most primaries. I seem to get the raw end of the deal here in Virginia...
The more I read and hear of Senator Dodd- the more I like. After suffering through an overdose of Clinton, Obama, and Edwards, Senator Dodd is a HUGE breath of fresh air. I wish the media would stop referring to him as a second-tier candidate. His common sense approach to major issues makes him very electable, and his political history makes him much more qualified than the afore-mentioned big three. I echo Mr. White's sentiments or yesterday; Don't quit now! I also agree with the idea of a national primary day. As an Arkansan, I'm very familiar with that raw end feeling.
I understand the reason you did not make the event, I also would have gone to the Education one rather than this one. Our children are our future and they play a part in this as well. I appreciate your statement about health care and equality, to put out there that all you want is for your children to have everything you have is amazing, many people would censor certain things in a statement like that just to stay popular. Once again you are a strong candidate and wish you the best.