>>> THE NATION'S FIRST OPENLY
GAY U.S. SENATOR, TAMMY BALDWIN
OF WISCONSIN, WORKS TO GET TEN
REPUBLICAN SENATORS TO VOTE IN
FAVOR OF THE RESPECT FOR
MARRIAGE ACT, A BILL TO
ESTABLISH THE RIGHT TO SAME-SEX
AND INTERRACIAL MARRIAGE IN
FEDERAL LAW.
SUCCESS PILOT THE MAJORITY OF
THE PUBLIC SUPPORTING SAME-SEX
MARRIAGE, INCLUDING REPUBLICANS,
THE PUSH FOR PASSAGE OF THE BILL
ENSHRINING THAT RIGHT COULD BE
AN UPHILL CLIMB.
SENATOR TAMMY BALDWIN IS JOINING
US NOW, AND THANK YOU SO MUCH
FOR BEING HERE.
>> IT IS A PLEASURE TO JOIN YOU.
>> SENATOR, FIRST, WE WANT TO
ASK YOU WITH THREE DROPPING OUT,
WILL YOU NOW FORMALLY ENDORSE
MANDELA BARNES?
>> I WILL BE TALKING WITH THE
REMAINING CANDIDATES, AND,
CERTAINLY, AS I'VE ALWAYS SAID,
I'LL BE BEHIND THE NOMINEE.
IT APPEARS THAT WILL BE MANDELA
BARNES, AND I'M VERY EXCITED
ABOUT THE RACE AHEAD.
>> BECAUSE WHAT DOES THE
THINNING OF THE FIELD SAY ABOUT
HIS CANDIDACY IN YOUR MIND?
>> WELL, I THINK IT'S A STRONG
CANDIDACY.
HE IS CERTAINLY RUNNING A VERY
GOOD RACE AND GETTING ALL AROUND
THE STATE, AND TALKING TO THE
WISCONSIN VOTERS, BUT THE
CONTRAST IN THE GENERAL ELECTION
COULD NOT BE MORE CLEAR, AND
MANDELA BARNES IS SOMEONE
FOCUSED ON THE PEOPLE OF HIS
DISTRICT.
WHEN HE USED TO BE IN THE STATE
LEGISLATURE, AND NOW ALL OF THE
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF WISCONSIN
AS LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR.
>> SO AS TO THE RESPECT FOR WHAT
WE INVITED YOU ON TO TALK ABOUT,
WHY IS THIS BILL NEEDED NOW?
>> WELL, IN THE WAKE OF THE
SUPREME COURT OVERTURNING ROE V.
WADE, IT HAS IM IMPLICATED A NUR
OF OTHER CASES THAT THE COURT
HAS DECIDED ON SIMILAR GROUNDS.
WHETHER THAT'S ACCESS TO
CONTRACEPTION OR SAME-SEX
MARRIAGE OR INTERRACIAL
MARRIAGE, ALL WERE BASED IN PART
ON CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO
PRIVACY, WHICH THE MAJORITY SAYS
DOES NOT EXIST, AND SO PEOPLE
NEED CERTAINTY.
THIS IS A GREAT TIME OF FEAR AND
ANXIETY, BUT WHETHER SAME-SEX
COUPLES' MARRIAGE LICENSE WILL
BE VALID, AND THE RIGHTS AND
RESPONSIBILITIES ASSOCIATED WITH
MARRIAGE ARE CRITICALLY
IMPORTANT FOR ONE'S FAMILY, AND
SO THE RESPECT FOR MARRIAGE ACT
WOULD CODIFY THE OBERGEFELL AND
GRISWOLD V. CONNECTICUT
DECISION, AND PEOPLE COULD REST
ASSURED THEIR MARRIAGE
CERTIFICATE IS VALID.
>> NOW, I UNDERSTAND YOU NEED
TEN REPUBLICAN SENATORS TO VOTE
YES.
WHAT'S YOUR CURRENT COUNT?
>> THERE ARE FIVE REPUBLICANS
WHO HAVE PUBLICLY STATED THAT
THEY WILL SUPPORT THE RESPECT
FOR MARRIAGE ACT, AND I HAVE
SPOKEN WITH A ADDITIONAL MANY, T
FIVE ADDITIONAL MEMBERS HAVE
INDICATED THEY ARE LEANING IN
SUPPORT, BUT I THINK BECAUSE OF
HOW CROWDED THE CALENDAR IS FOR
NEXT WEEK, WHICH IS OUR LAST
WEEK BEFORE THE AUGUST RECESS,
AND IN LIGHT OF THE FACT THAT WE
CAN'T HAVE ANY ABSENCES, WE NEED
EVERYBODY THERE, AND WE HAVE A
FEW MEMBERS WITH COVID, THIS IS
PROBABLY GOING TO BE A VOTE THAT
OCCURS, WHAT I WOULD HOPE, IS
EARLY SEPTEMBER.
>> SO ON THE VOTE, THOUGH, THE
LATEST GALLOP POLL ON THE MATTER
SHOWS 70% OF THE PUBLIC SUPPORT
SAME-SEX MARRIAGE, INCLUDING 55%
OF REPUBLICANS.
IS THERE A DISCONNECT FOR
ELECTED OFFICIALS AS SO WHY, YOU
KNOW, YOU HAVE TO TALK TO THESE
OTHER FIVE?
>> THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED
STATES, SADLY, HAS OFTEN
FOLLOWED PUBLIC OPINION RATHER
THAN LED PUBLIC OPINION, AND I
AM STILL VERY HOPEFUL THAT WE
WILL HAVE -- IN FACT, I BELIEVE
WE DO HAVE THE TEN VOTES
NECESSARY TO AVOID A FILIBUSTER,
BUT, YEAH, IT IS SOMETHING WHERE
I HAVE -- IN THE ARENA OF CIVIL
RIGHTS, THE U.S. PUBLIC IS OFTEN
AHEAD OF THEIR ELECTED
REPRESENTATIVES, AND THAT'S TOO
BAD.
THERE'S ALSO, YOU KNOW, SADLY, A
VERY STRONG DIFFERENCE BETWEEN
THE PARTIES.
EVERY DEMOCRAT IN THE U.S.
SENATE SUPPORTS THE RESPECT FOR
MARRIAGE ACT, AND I DON'T THINK
THIS SHOULD BE AN ISSUE FROM A
PARTISAN DIVIDE, BUT IT SEEMS IT
STILL IS.
>> THERE IS SENATOR RON JOHNSON,
ARGUABLY, ONE OF THE MOST
CONSERVATIVE MEMBERS, SAID HE,
QUOTE, HAD NO REASON TO OPPOSE
THE MEASURE, BUT THEN HE CAME
BACK ACCUSING DEMOCRATS OF
CREATING A STATE OF FEAR OVER AN
ISSUE TO FURTHER DIVIDE
AMERICANS FOR POLITICAL BENEFIT.
HOW DO YOU RECONCILE THAT?
>> WELL, I'M GOING TO TAKE HIM
AT HIS WORD WHEN HE SAID THAT HE
HAS NO REASON TO OPPOSE IT, AND
I WOULD VIEW THAT AS THAT HE
WOULD SUPPORT IT, BUT I THINK
THAT WE HAVE BEEN TRYING VERY
HARD NOT TO POLITICIZE THIS AND
TO RESPOND, AGAIN, TO THE FACT
THAT THE SUPREME COURT
OVERTURNED ROE VERSUS WADE,
PRESIDPRECEDENT OF 499 YEARS ANR
REASONING LEADS PEOPLE TO
LEGITIMATELY FEAR THAT THE
SUPREME COURT WOULD LATER
OVERTURN CASES INVOLVING ACCESS
TO CONTRACEPTION AND CASES LIKE
THAT DEAL WITH INTERRACIAL
MARRIAGE AND SAME-SEX MARRIAGE.
>> YOUR CALL FOR THE BILL COMES
AS A RESULT OF THAT CLARENCE
THOMAS CONCURRING THE OPINION IN
RAISING THE ISSUE OF REVERSING
ROE, BUT ON THAT, AS YOU KNOW,
REVERTS BACK TO THE 1849 LAW
WITH NO EXCEPTION FOR RAPE OR
INCEST.
WHAT DO YOU THINK OUR STATE
LEGISLATURE SHOULD DO ON THIS?
WHAT IS YOUR MESSAGE?
>> WELL, I THINK THAT THEY
CERTAINLY SHOULD NOT SEND WOMEN
BACK TO THE MID-1800s WHERE,
AT A TIME WHEN WOMEN DID NOT
EVEN HAVE A VOTE.
IT IS UN-- IT'S HARD TO PUT
WORDS -- INTO WORDS HOW CHAOTIC
THIS CASE HAS MADE THINGS IN
TERMS OF WOMEN BEING ABLE TO
ACCESS THE HEALTHCARE THEY NEED
AND TO BE ABLE TO HAVE BODILY
AUTONOMY AND CHOOSE WHEN AND
WHETHER TO HAVE A FAMILY.
THE FACT THAT WISCONSIN WOMEN
HAVE A FEWER FREEDOMS THAN THEIR
MOTHERS AND GRANDMOTHERS IS JUST
HARD TO WRAP OUR ARMS AROUND.
I THINK THE STATE LEGISLATURE
NEEDS TO APPEAL THAT 1849 LAW,
AND I BELIEVE THAT THEY SHOULD
CODIFY A STATE VERSION OF
SOMETHING SIMILAR TO ROE VERSUS
WADE.
>> WE NEED TO LEAVE IT THERE.
SENATOR TAMMY BALDWIN, THANK YOU