1. Do you support legal recognition of marriages between persons of the same-sex?
A. Yes. I support the goal of obtaining legal recognition of same-sex marriages. As the Ward 2 Council member, I would be willing to submit the legislation to Council. However, I doubt that Council would have the gumption to pass it. In fact, I doubt that it would even reach the floor because I do not believe that Council is not [sic] in favor of it and would opt to use Congress as the scapegoat and an excuse for not bringing it for discussion. After D.O.M.A., we know how any such legislation would be received by Congress, and the Council has no backbone to stand up for what is right. There is still a lot of educating to be done in Council and in Congress. I believe that I could help in both instances because of my being gay, I can give a realistic view, and by being Republican, I would be better positioned to liaise with the powers that be in the District Committee on the Hill. Back to the matter of strategy, in order for same-sex marriages to gain acceptance, it will initially have to be packaged so that the word "marry" (translated by many as a religious term) is not used, but in a manner that the participants would receive the same legal rights and responsibilities. This has been the tack used in domestic partnership campaigns, but the small steps for Domestic Partnership have been knocked to the side by antagonists who have thrust the issue into the arena because they knew the public was not ready to accept the correct stance on the issue. However, when we begin to speak of legalization of same-sex marriage, we are talking in terms of hitting a home run when we need to be working to get singles. Just as we begin to think that we are going to make it to first base in D.C., Congress throws us out as is evidenced by our domestic partnership legislation (D.C. Health Care Benefits Expansions Act of 1992). Nonetheless, going for that proverbial home run will at least have an effect -- It will educate people on the issue.
2. Will you oppose efforts by Congress or other parties to stop the District of Columbia from recognizing same-sex marriages performed in Hawaii or other places?
A. Of course I will oppose them, and if I am in the Ward 2 Council seat, I will be working in a position which has more footing from which to make that fight. Actually, I believe that the Supreme Court will ultimately say that the law passed by Congress (D.O.M.A.) is unconstitutional. However, this does not mean that gays and lesbians should simply sit and wait -- The Court can be swayed to a degree by overwhelming public opinion. Thus, it is most important to attempt to build a groundswell by educating all persons on the issue. Once people are made aware of all of teh reasons why those who enter these relationships should have protection and are made to realize that this is not a religious or family issue, they will be more supportive. It is a time-consuming process, unfortunately the zealots generally choose the timing, so lesbians and gays must be prepared on several fronts at all times. Again, by having a gay person on the Council, the process of educating the Council on lesbian & issues will be enhanced. No one can know every issue but the distance to be covered in the education process will be much shorter.
3. Do you oppose efforts by Congress or other parties to outlaw or restrict adoptions by unmarried couples in the District of Columbia?
A. I believe that this is none of Congress' business. It is a local issue and should be left to local authorities, so I will be mouthpiece for protest against any such interference by Congress. As for the issue of adoption by gays and lesbians, I believe that the first consideration should always be the welfare of the child. Is the child going to be in an environment where he or she is wanted and loved? Will the child be in a situation which is safe from harm and abuse? Are the person or persons wishing to adopt in a financially stable situation (above the poverty level)? When these questions are answered affirmatively, there should be no reason to say no to the applicant(s). The bottom line is that simply because someone is lesbian or gay should not be a determinant, factor, or consideration in the decision.
4. If Congress ever repeals the D.C. Health Care Benefits Expansion Act of 1992 that established the registration of domestic partnerships, will you vote to reenact the same law?
A. As I stated in answer to question 1, domestic partnership is the important first step for legal recognition of same-sex relationships with all of the rights and responsibilites attached thereto. Therefore, the answer is an easy yes. I must say that the D.C. version is a very, very weak first step in the necessary process. However, since Congress continues to refuse funding for this and all legally enacted piece of local legislation, it is the Council's responsibility to continue ramming the door until it finally breaks. It must be done over and over in whatever degrees that can be gotten through.
5. Do you support the re-establishment of the Office of Human Rights as an independent, Cabinet-level agency whose Director has direct access to the Mayor?
A. Under my recommendation for the manager-council form of government, I should think that actually reporting to the Chair of the Council would be the appropriate reporting station. But as long as we are saddled with a popularity contest winner as the District's chief administrator, I believe that this position should report directly to the mayor. All one has to do is to look at the performance of DC government in the recent past (the Tara [sic] Hunter Case, the recent Laqcence [sic] beating at Dupont Circle, the inability to pay for AIDS services) to realize the need for the administration and the legislative branch to be educated and kept up-to-snuff on situations. By having a direct report, the lag time and information loss will be reduced.
6. Do you agree that the Boy Scouts of America is violating the D.C. Human Rights Law's ban on discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation by excluding gays from participating either as scouts or as leaders?
A. Sure they are in violation. First, they do not qualify for exemption from the law -- they are not a religious organization which receives no money from the government. In addition, just because a person is discovered to be gay does not mean that it is okay to expel him from the organization because of a pseudo moralistic stand taken by that organization. Second, when a person has spent the time necessary to go through all of scouting, has achieved the levels of training and experience necessary to be a leader, and there is a need for the leader, then that person should be one. This organization is not a church, thus it should not be acting like one. Let us leave it to the family and the church to teach morals.
7. Will you vote to repeal the Armstrong Amendment, which allows religiously-affiliated private educational institutions in the District to discriminate against student clubs that promote equal rights for lesbians and gay men?
A. If these institutions received no government money, I would then find it hard to abridge the right to spend their own money as they see fit. However, that is not the case here, and as long as these institutions are on the dole, they should be forced to follow the local laws of the District of Columbia. This has little to do with the principle because the prospective complainant in the case clearly received the money and did not want the law. The assertion of GLAA is totally correct. This law's enactment was simply another unrequested (by the potential complainants) law foisted on the District so the Congress could curry favor with the voters back home. It should be repealed.
8. Will you oppose efforts by Congress or other parties to abolish or restrict the right of our public school students to form clubs that promote greater understanding between gays and others?
A. Of course, because the only way bigotry and prejudice can be eliminated is by educating heterosexuals by exposing them to gays and Lesbians. When that happens, they can see that we are really just like them. These clubs not only serve as a support mechanism for their gay & lesbian members, but they educate the straights by exposing them to real living non-straights.
9. Do you support the designation of a third party to act as a fiscal agent for the distribution of federal AIDS money, such as the system recently adopted by the Financial Control Board?
A. In principle, I do not like to see our home rule infringed upon, but when the local officials have totally abrogated their responsbility, something has to be done. In this case, the solution seems to be working much more effectively. Under my council/manager form of government, productivity and responsiveness will be enhanced, thereby allowing services to be delivered on a more timely basis. Until such time as my proposed clean slate government is installed in D.C., we will continue to have irresponsibility and nonresponsiveness without accountability.
10. Do you agree that our own elected officials, past and present, bear much of the responsibility for the District's current financial plight because of their reluctance to make tough budgetary decisions, to establish priorities, and to demand maximum efficiency and productivity (rather than political loyalty) from all District government agencies and workers?
A. How can anyone in a right frame of mind disagree with that assessment? Sure, the congress sometimes acts as a roadblock, but members of both the Council and the Administration have found it to be too easy to do nothing and blame congress. And that is the case at present, D.C. Council Members nad the Administration are all dragging their feet right now, waiting to be forced to perform by the control board or Congress. It has been too easy for our locally elected officials. They have shown no action, no initiative, or any plans for rescuing the District, so it would be foolhardy to expect any proactive moves from them. My clean slate for D.C. is a plan that limits service on the Council to 4 years. That will allow members to be a little bit more outspoken on policy and a whole lot more responsive to constituents. Removing the administrative control from a popularity contest winner (mayor) and moving those responsibilities to a properly educated and thoroughly trained and experienced Manager will result in our government's being more effective. Productivity will be the word of the day because the manager will not pad the payroll to get votes he/she will be trying to save money for the District to save his/her own job.
11. Do you support the condom availability programs that have been established in the District's public schools and prisons?
A. Yes I support this precept to the n-th degree. I support these programs because they are not set up to promote sexual activity -- They are set up to inform people of the consequences of having sex, and to offer them the materials (condoms and information) necessary for making an educated choice. Parents have the obligation to teach a child their beliefs and morals, but ultimately the choice lies with the child. Additionally, just because the condoms are in people's hands does not make them have more sex. Many of the condoms distributed will simply decay in someone's wallet or purse. But if one life is saved or if one unwanted life is not created because of the use of a condom that was distributed, then the hard work is worth it.
12. Will you support legislation that will establish an effective civilian complaint review system for our Metropolitan Police Department?
A. Yes, I support this concept and will work for its enactment and use if elected. The board should be made up of civilians to review possible errors and mistakes made by the police personnel. I believe there should be a non-voting representative of the Police administration (a white shirt) included on the board. This position should for informational purposes only. I believe the insight would be worth it, but I also believe that with a vote the representative could sometimes influence the process, too much. In addition, there is an internal affairs group which should have already investigated the complaint, presumably without resolution. Otherwise, it would not reach an external review board. This white shirt could serve as a conduit to funnel information back to the force, and could also be used by the rest of the board to understand the inner workings of the Police Department.
13. Do you support sensitivity and community relations training for all elements of our public safety system (police, fire department, etc.) that includes strong recognition's of gay and lesbian community concerns, so that the District will never again tolerate the kind of insensitivity and incompetence reflected in the Fire Department's handling of the Tyra Hunter case?
A. Yes, sensitivity training is obviously needed by all of D.C. direct emergency service personnel. The Tara [sic] Hunter debacle and the mishandling of the recent Dupont Circle gay bashing are only two of the most blatant examples -- there are many other less grand but nonetheless very stressful occurrences of disservice or worse. Education through exposure to gays and lesbians as well as forthright conversation is needed badly.
14. Do you oppose legislation or initiatives that would authorize organized prayers in our public schools, thereby encouraging the harassment of individuals who choose not to participate?
A. I am a big proponent of the doctrine for separation of church and state. There is no rational need to have organized prayer in school -- religious values and moral beliefs should be taught by the parents and church, and the children can practice it silently. I believe that God appreciates a silent prayer just as much as one that is broadcast over a school's intercom. Plus, when one prays silently, the act does not infringe on anyone else's religious beliefs, whether the prayer is Christian, Jewish, Islamic, Hindu, or whatever. Of course, if structured prayer is a required element at schools, students who choose not to participate will not only be subject to ridicule but will also branded as social misfits. In addition, their grades will suffer because teachers will ultimately be deducting points from students' averages because of their failure to participate. (Just like gym days.)
15. Do you oppose efforts to abolish or drastically curtail the powers of our elected Board of Education?
A. Yes. The problem with the board has not been a misuse of power -- It has been a wholesale giveaway of decision-making authority to its own administrative personnel. They have failed to exercise their oversight responsibility. Perhaps now that the Board of Education's elective offices are included under the Hatch Act (of course the courts still have to weigh in on this), office holders will running for this office simply for name recognition before gearing up for a campaign for a Council seat. Now, they will be forced to resign before initiating a campaign for a Council seat. I considered whether to have these positions be appointed under my clean slate for D.C., but I believe that enforcement of the Hatch Act will help alleviate the problem because we should be getting persons who are really interested in the education of youth and are qualified to run for these job. When that occurs, more money can be devoted to plant, equipment, and in-classroom teachers. Ulimately, the bottom-line is that the Board holds the purse strings -- They simply need to be prodded into tugging on them a bit. Lastly, voters have to be educated, then we must hope that they will vote responsibly.
Signed,
Roger L. Moffatt