John Yarmuth, U.S. Representative from Kentucky's 3rd District

Not a single member of Kentucky’s Congressional Delegation has co-sponsored U.S. House Resolution 3567, the Respect for Marriage Act. It was quickly placed in Committee, where it has remained buried since October 19, 2009 despite having 111 co-sponsors.

The Commonwealth’s U.S. House Delegation currently includes Ed Whitfield (R), Brett Guthrie (R), John Yarmuth (D), Geoff Davis (R), Hal Rogers (R), and Ben Chandler (D).

Resolutions, like the one passed by the Kentucky Senate stating that “no discrimination in the Commonwealth is acceptable,” however do not carry the force of law unless passed by both chambers and signed by the chief of state (the president or governor respectively).

Irony does not begin to describe the fact that the Kentucky Democratic controlled House of Representatives passed a resolution imposing Christian values on the Commonwealth (previous story), while the Republican controlled Senate says no discrimination is acceptable.  (previous story)

U.S. House Resolution 3567 was sponsored by the Honorable Representative from the State of New York, Jerrold Nadler:

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the “Respect for Marriage Act of 2009″.

SEC. 2. REPEAL OF SECTION ADDED TO TITLE 28, UNITED STATES CODE, BY SECTION 2 OF THE DEFENSE OF MARRIAGE ACT.
Section 1738C of title 28, United States Code, is repealed, and the table of sections at the beginning of chapter 115 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by striking the item relating to that section.

SEC. 3. MARRIAGE RECOGNITION.
Section 7 of title 1, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:

‘Sec. 7. Marriage
‘(a) For the purposes of any Federal law in which marital status is a factor, an individual shall be considered married if that individual’s marriage is valid in the State where the marriage was entered into or, in the case of a marriage entered into outside any State, if the marriage is valid in the place where entered into and the marriage could have been entered into in a State.

‘(b) In this section, the term `State’ means a State, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or any other territory or possession of the United States.’.

Curtis Morrison, a former candidate for Jefferson County Judge Executive stated: “Should we change the name of the [Louisville] Fairness Campaign newsletter to the Congressman John Yarmuth Re-election Propaganda Piece? I appreciate what he’s done, but he’s had over a year to join over 100 U.S. Representatives in the co-sponsoring the Respect for Marriage Act and he has failed to do so. Those that settle on our behalf, are our enemies.”

Morrison Continued: “My post was not about who the best candidate was, but the rather frustration with the [Louisville] Fairness Campaign’s lack of focus on it’s noble mission, and respect for federal law regulating their 501(c)(3) corporate status. The ends, do not justify the means. Not only are we giving Yarmuth a pass for not supporting the Respect for Marriage Act, but the [Louisville] Fairness Campaign, and the Kentucky Statewide Fairness Coalition, refused to even ask him. That’s called internalized homophobia.”

Halyn Roth, the Southern Kentucky Regional Director for Kentucky Equality Federation, which sponsors Marriage Equality Kentucky, has a Facebook page titled “I bet we can find 15,000 Kentuckians who support Gay Marriage.” Currently, the group has gathered more than 7,000 members without any media attention or publicity.

PASSING THE LAW COULD HAVE OVER 1.5 MILLION IN LEGAL FEES FIGHTING MASSACHUSETTS

The coat of arms is encircled by the Latin text "Sigillum Reipublicæ Massachusettensis" (literally, The Seal of the Republic of Massachusetts). The Massachusetts Constitution nevertheless designates the name of the government as Commonwealth, not Republic.

By passing U.S. House Resolution 3567, the United States Government could save nearly $1,685,000.00 (estimate) in legal fees defending itself from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts who says the U.S. Defense of Marriage Act overreached and infringes on the sovereignty of the states.

The Obama administration has decided to fight Massachusetts however, in a decision that will ultimately reach the U.S. Supreme Court.  (previous story)

On July 08, 2009 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts sued the United States Government for infringing on the sovereignty of the Commonwealth with the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) because marriage is “an exclusive prerogative of the states.”