Barney Frank: “To begin, I have read this amendment. And if it were to be law in an hour, it does not appear that it would affect…”

“To begin, I have read this amendment. And if it were to be law in an hour, it does not appear that it would affect anything that's now happening in the Federal Government. The gentleman said that they were trying to undermine the act and that they should enforce it. In fact, the administration has been very clear: while they disagreed with the act, they would like it repealed, they in fact believe it's unconstitutional, it is now on the books, and nothing is being done in contravention of the Defense of Marriage Act. That is, there are no things now going on where the Federal Government recognizes the rights of same-sex marriage. So I guess my main opposition to this is that the bill is already big enough, but it doesn't add anything in substance. It adds a few words. I would yield if anyone can tell me what the reference is to not enforcing the act. Now it is true the administration declined to defend the act in court, but not defending an act in court in no way means that you are contravening any enforcement. Going to court is a different story. As a matter of fact, the House Republican leadership has voted to go to court to defend it. So I, again, would be glad if someone would tell me. The Defense of Marriage Act says the Federal Government will grant no rights to same- sex married couples that come from marriage. It's not doing that. I agree the administration doesn't like that, but the suggestion that they are undermining the law is simply wrong.…”