Wisconsin candidates differ on same-sex marriage

October 18, 2004
Associated Press

EAU CLAIRE, Wisconsin (AP) -- U.S. Senate candidate Tim Michels said Saturday he opposes marriage between homosexuals and that people should not have "gay values" imposed upon them.

Debating U.S. Sen. Russ Feingold, Michels answered a question from the audience about what he would do to protect the rights of gays and lesbians. He began by saying they should be treated just like other Americans before launching into his opposition to gay marriage.

"When you bring it out of your house and onto the public street, that's where I differ. I believe in family values. I believe in traditional family values," said Michels, a Republican.

Michels later clarified he did not mean homosexuals should not bring their sexuality into public but people shouldn't have "gay values" imposed upon them.

Feingold, a Democrat, said he was confused by Michels' remark and did not understand what he was trying to say.

"My answer is we should treat gays and lesbians like everybody else," said Feingold, who opposes a proposed amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would ban gay marriage. "We all should have the same rights. The federal government shouldn't be changing the Constitution. We should be focusing on other priorities."

Feingold and Michels met Saturday in the third of their six scheduled debates leading up to the November 2 election. Libertarian Arik Khan and independent Eugene Hem are also seeking the seat but were not included in the debate sponsored by the Western Wisconsin Press Club and WisPolitics.com.

Michels' remarks on gay rights were prompted by a question from Travis Welke, 31, of Eau Claire. The graphic designer, who is gay, said he was confused by Michels' comments but was not offended.

"Most gay people don't want to take it out on the street. They just want some sort of life with certain dignities," Welke said.

Michels, a construction company executive, and Feingold, a two-term incumbent, spent much of the debate offering a sharp contrast between their positions on issues ranging from the war in Iraq to trade. They also spent much of the debate attacking each other and accusing the other of distorting their records. Feingold often complained Michels wasn't answering the questions posed.

They did share one laugh when the moderator mistakenly called Michels "Sen. Michels."

"I like that," Michels joked.

"Not so fast," Feingold countered.

The two again went after each other over the war in Iraq and the Patriot Act, which expanded police powers to fight terrorism but has been criticized by some as an infringement on personal liberty.

Feingold said the war in Iraq diverted the United States' attention from the real threat, Al-Qaeda. Feingold, who voted against the war, said he could vote to support a pre-emptive attack against a nation that posed a real threat to the nation's security but said Iraq was not it.

"You have the wrong priorities when it comes to national security," Feingold told Michels. "The priorities are Al-Qaeda and national security."

Michels accused Feingold of distorting his position by implying the Republican had no qualms about pre-emptive wars. Michels said he would always support U.S. troops and do whatever necessary to protect the country.

He said that included supporting the renewal of the Patriot Act, which he credited with helping prevent any terrorist attacks in the U.S. since September 11, 2001.

Michels took a swipe at Feingold for being the lone senator to vote against the legislation and said the Democrat's claims of civil liberty violations under the legislation were a myth.

"We can win this war on terror, but we need to have leaders in the U.S. Senate who are willing to make the difficult decision. Ninety-eight senators made the difficult decision to pass the Patriot Act and one did not and he was wrong."

Feingold countered the war on terror could be won without infringing upon citizens' rights and mocked Michels' contention that there have been no civil rights violations using powers granted under the bill.

"How can he possibly know? It's secret. It's classified. It's even kept from me, let alone Mr. Michels," Feingold said.

The two agreed on few points, including their opposition to bringing back the draft.

In his closing arguments, Michels took a shot at Feingold, noting he's been in politics for 22 years -- 12 in the U.S. Senate and 10 in the state Legislature.

"I think his American dream is to be in politics for 28 years," Michels said.

Feingold implied in his closing comments that Michels wasn't up to the job of a U.S. senator and would be a rubber stamp.

"That's the job of a U.S. senator, to open the hood and look at it, kick the tires and not just say 'Me, too,"' Feingold said.