King would pass a general Democratic litmus test: He is prochoice on abortion, supports gay marriage, backs President Obama's health care law, and opposes GOP efforts to transform Medicare into a voucher program.
Indeed, he has endorsed Obama for reelection.
But he insists that he has conservative values when it comes to fiscal responsibility. "I think you should have a 'pay-as-you-go' system,'' he said.
Source: Boston Globe, "Independent", on 2012 Maine Senate Debates
, Apr 19, 2012
We piously judge slaveowners; would we endure peer censure?
One of our stops was the terrific Charleston museum, the oldest museum in the United States. It was very well done, with a lot of local history; I found the images of slavery on the rice plantations especially moving, and appalling.
Now, barely 150 years later, we are incredulous that such an institution could exist in our midst, and somewhat piously judge these benighted souls who maintained and fought for it.
I devoutly hope that we are, in fact, more enlightened; but which of us would brave the censure of our peers, given a different context? The vote for secession at the South Carolina convention of
December 1860 (the precipitating factor was Lincoln's election a month before), for example, was unanimous.
Required Maine insurers to recognize domestic partnerships
A bill just inked by Maine Governor Angus King requires state health insurers and HMOs to offer coverage to domestic partners, effective January 2002. The law defines domestic partner as a mentally competent adult who has "legally
domiciled" with the health plan member for at least a year. Eligible partners can obtain health coverage under the same terms and conditions as spouses of married health plan members.
Source: CBS Business Network Resource Library, "Domestic Partner"
, Jul 1, 2001
Support principles embodied in the Equal Rights Amendment.
King adopted the National Governors Association policy:
In 1976 the National Governors Association expressed support for ratification and implementation of the Equal Rights Amendment, which would constitutionally guarantee full citizenship rights and opportunities for women. In 1982 the drive for ratification fell short, and efforts to initiate the amendatory process were taken.
The National Governors Association reaffirms its support for the principles embodied in the Equal Rights Amendment, i.e., that equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any state on the basis of gender.
Source: NGA Executive Committee Policy EC-14: Equal Rights Policy 01-NGA1 on Feb 15, 2001
Let states recognize same sex marriage.
King signed Respect for Marriage Act
Congressional Summary: Amends the Defense of Marriage Act to let states recognize same sex marriage. Defines `marriage` to provide that an individual shall be considered married if that individual`s marriage is valid in the state or country where the marriage was entered into. Removes the definition of `spouse` (currently, a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife).
Wikipedia and GLAAD history: In United States v. Windsor (2013), the U.S. Supreme Court declared Section 3 of DOMA unconstitutional under the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) struck down the act`s provisions disallowing same-sex marriages to be performed under federal jurisdiction. The Supreme Court case did not challenge Section 2 of DOMA. Section 2 declares that all states have the right to deny recognition of the marriage of same sex couples that originated in states where they are legally recognized.
Heritage Foundation
recommendation to vote NO: (3/20/2013): Americans respect marriage, not only as a crucial institution of civil society but the fundamental building block of all human civilization. This is why 41 states and the federal government affirm that marriage is between a man and a woman. The government isn`t in the business of affirming our loves. Rather it leaves consenting adults free to live and love as they choose. And contrary to what some say, there is no ban on same-sex marriage. In all 50 states, two people of the same sex may choose to live together, and choose to join a religious community that blesses their relationship. What`s at issue is whether the government will recognize such relationships as marriages--and compel others to recognize and affirm same-sex relationships as marriages.
Legislative outcome: Died in Committee (never came to a vote).
Sponsored bill for ratifying Equal Rights Amendment.
King co-sponsored Removing deadline for ERA ratification
H.J.Res.17: Removing the deadline for the ratification of the equal rights amendment: This joint resolution eliminates the deadline for the ratification of the ERA, which prohibits discrimination based on sex. The amendment was proposed to the states in House Joint Resolution 208 of the 92nd Congress, as agreed to in the Senate on March 22, 1972. The amendment shall be part of the Constitution whenever ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the states.
Opinion to vote YES (Rep. Terri Sewell (D-AL-7): The ERA was first proposed in 1923, shortly after women gained the right to vote. [The original] 1979 deadline was later extended before it expired. By the end of 1982, 35 of the 38 required state legislatures had voted to ratify the ERA. Nevada ratified the ERA in 2017, Illinois in 2018 and, in January 2020, Virginia became the 38th and final state required to ratify it. If passed in the Senate, H.J. Res. 79 would remove the arbitrary 1982 deadline.
Opinion to vote NO (Rep. Doug LaMalfa (R-CA-1): H. J. Res 17 would retroactively remove the deadline for the ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment. Regardless of your thoughts on the ERA, the deadline for the states to ratify the amendment expired four decades ago. By passing this resolution, House Democrats are virtue signaling and trying to take a shortcut around what is required in our constitutional amendment process. Those who want to pass an ERA will need to start this process from the beginning. Today`s vote mocks the intentionally high bar set by our Founders to make changes to our precious Constitution.
Legislative Outcome: Passed House 222-204-4 on 03/17/2021; received in the Senate and read on 3/23. [OnTheIssues notes on the duration for ratification that the 27th Amendment to the United States Constitution was passed by Congress in 1789 and was ratified by 3/4 of the States and became law in 1992, a ratification period of 202 years].