Sen. Murkowski Votes To Defend Institution Of Marriage
Washington, D.C. - U.S. Sen. Lisa Murkowski joined with the vast majority of her Republican colleagues in voting to advance a constitutional amendment that would define marriage as between one man and one woman.
Murkowski voted to begin Senate consideration of the defense of marriage amendment (Senate Joint Resolution 40) because she said the amendment was important to protect the will of the Alaska population, which by nearly a 70 percent margin approved a constitutional amendment in 1998 that defined marriage in Alaska as between one man and one woman.
"I support the traditional definition of marriage and I joined Alaskans in 1998 in defining marriage as between one man and one woman. I want to make sure that this decision by Alaskans remains the law of our state. For that reason I support the federal amendment. Without this amendment there is concern that by court decision, the U.S. Constitution's full faith and credit clause could override Alaska's Constitution on marriage," said Senator Murkowski in supporting the amendment.
The amendment, which needed a 60-vote margin to clear a potential Democratic filibuster and then a two-thirds margin to be adopted and submitted to the states for ratification, would have bolstered the federal Defense of Marriage Act, passed in 1996 on an 85-14 vote in the Senate.
The amendment was proposed after the Massachusetts Supreme Court this spring allowed same-sex marriages in that state. The Senate also took up the amendment because of legal challenges to the definition of marriage as between a man and a woman in states, such as Nebraska, which have adopted the same definition of marriage as adopted in Alaska. Four states, Alaska, Hawaii, Nebraska and Nevada have passed constitutional amendments defining marriage, while 38 other states have passed statutes defining/limiting marriage in some manner.
The amendment failed to advance in the Senate on a 48-50 vote.
"Marriage is an important institution in our society and it should be protected. Secondly as a state's rights advocate, I don't believe any state should be able to determine the policies of another or be subjected to another state's laws that contradict their public policy," said Senator Murkowski.