Coronavirus: Rep Andy Biggs says giving sick leave to gay couples would mean 'redefining family', votes against bill
An Arizona Republican lawmaker has voted against the coronavirus stimulus bill because it provided sick leave benefits to domestic partnerships.
Rep. Andy Biggs was one of 40 lawmakers who voted against the 'Families First Coronavirus Response Act' which passed in the House of Representatives on Friday, March 13, to support citizens during the COVID-19 pandemic that has seen over 6,500 infected around the country.
Among other things, the law proposes expanded coverage for COVID-19 diagnostic tests and provisions to provide tax credits to cover two weeks of limited paid sick leave and up to three months of family and medical leave payments to care for those affected by the novel coronavirus.
Biggs' issue with the bill was a subsection of the paid sick leave provision of the bill that referenced "committed relationships".
"They’ve redefined family for the first time in a federal — in a piece of federal legislation, to include committed relationships," he said on a radio program produced by the conservative Christian group Family Research Council.
"The problem with that is it’s really hard to define a committed relationship, and it’s really hard to define anything related to that."
The paid sick leave provision defined children eligible for care under the proposed law as a "biological, foster, or adopted child, a stepchild, a child of a domestic partner" and went on to define a domestic partner as two individuals in a "committed relationship," at least 18 years of age.
It also said, to qualify, these two individuals will have to act as "the other’s sole domestic partner with shared responsibility for each others’ common welfare" and included "couples in same-sex domestic partnerships or same-sex unions."
Biggs also said during the program that he had voted against the bill because he opposed the provisions relating to abortion, which he claimed contained measures to repeal the Hyde Amendment — an amendment that prevents federal funding to abortion procedures.
"Two provisions that have nothing to do with the coronavirus are basically thrown into this thing," he argued. "And that’s just par for the course for the left, the activist left."
However, the bill had no such text to indicate that federal funds would be disbursed for any such procedure.
It's not the first time that Biggs has made such a controversial statement either. The lawmaker had previously called the Supreme Court case 'Obergefell vs Hodges,' which recognized the right for same-sex couples to marry, an attempt to "redefine marriage" and "an affront to the millions of Americans who believe marriage is between a man and a woman."