Getty Images

Over the last 10 days, seven Senate Democrats have announced their support for marriage equality, a flurry of progressive activity that was hard to predict just a few weeks ago. But on the Republican side of the aisle, progress has been significantly quieter -- Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio), citing his gay son, endorsed same-sex marriage, but he was the only one in his caucus to do so.

This morning, he got a little company.

Illinois Sen. Mark Kirk on Tuesday became the second Senate Republican to support marriage rights for same-sex couples, saying that "government has no place" in blocking loving marriages. [...]

"Same-sex couples should have the right to civil marriage. Our time on this earth is limited, I know that better than most," Kirk added. "Life comes down to who you love and who loves you back -- government has no place in the middle."

Though Portman's announcement broke new ground, I'd argue Kirk's announcement is more admirable -- the Illinois Republican didn't endorse marriage equality because it affects someone close to him; he declared his support for equality because it's the right thing to do.

Incidentally, as my colleague Tricia McKinney reminded me, there's also a cumulative figure to keep in mind: there are now 50 senators -- 48 Democrats and two Republicans -- on board with marriage rights. There are no bills pending on the issue, but one more would have the symbolic significance of crossing the majority threshold.

Also, for those keeping score, there are now two Senate Republicans and two House Republicans who have publicly endorsed same-sex marriage. Or put another way, there are 277 Republican members of Congress -- 232 in the House, 45 in the Senate -- and four of them support marriage equality.

That's about 1.4%, which isn't much, but I suppose it's a start.

Associated Press

Sen. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) suffered a major stroke nearly a year ago, which kept the senator away from Capitol Hill during a difficult rehabilitation process. Fortunately, Kirk worked hard, received excellent care, and today, he'll climb the Capitol steps with his colleagues to mark the beginning of the 113th Congress. The senator has shown an enormous amount of heart and courage, and he's to be congratulated for how far he's come over the last year.

I'm sure he'll receive a warm welcome from the chamber today, and there's no doubt he'll have earned it.

That said, as Kirk reenters public life, he's beginning to give interviews again, and there's something he told the Chicago Sun-Times yesterday that stood out for me.

[Kirk] has a new perspective on the Illinois Medicaid program. "I will look much more carefully at the Illinois Medicaid program to see how my fellow citizens are being cared for who have no income and if they suffer from a stroke," Kirk said.

He said in general a person on Medicaid would be allowed 11 rehab visits in Illinois. "Had I been limited to that I would have had no chance to recover like I did. So unlike before suffering the stroke, I'm much more focused on Medicaid and what my fellow citizens face."

Obviously, it's hard to find silver linings to a health crisis as serious as Kirk's, but if he's prepared to look anew at Medicaid policy, now with a more sympathetic eye, I'm glad. As Harold Pollack explained, "The simple truth in these comments commands respect. Kirk required aggressive rehabilitation services at one of America's finest facilities for patients recovering from stroke. Such a profound physical ordeal -- and one's accompanying sense of profound privilege in securing more help than so many other people routinely receive -- this changes a person."

But there's a larger context to keep in mind.

Given his party's desire to cut Medicaid, the senator is likely to bring a critical, first-hand perspective that should help influence the debate. Kirk will be able to offer insights his colleagues need to be aware of.

I do wish, however, that we might see similarly changed perspectives without the need for direct personal relevance. Many policymakers are skeptical about federal disaster relief until it's their community that sees devastation. They have no interest in gay rights until they learn someone close to them is gay. And they're unsure of the value of Medicaid until they see its worth up close.

Perhaps the key to social progress is more life experiences?

Associated Press

As Sen. Mark Kirk's post-stroke rehabilitation continues, the Illinois Republican appears to have an unfortunate controversy awaiting his return to Capitol Hill.

Last week, Kirk's ex-wife filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission alleging that, during his 2010 campaign, the Republican hid campaign funds he directed to his then-girlfriend, after buying his ex-wife's silence.

Late last week, the story got a little more complicated for the senator (thanks to reader R.P. for the tip).

U.S. Sen. Mark Kirk was a leading sponsor of congressional legislation that has meant $5.3 million for two clients of his onetime girlfriend, and he is backing another bill that could bring millions of dollars to a third group she represented.

Kirk supported bills directing the Treasury Department to mint and sell collectible coins, with a surcharge for three nonprofit groups -- all of which had hired Arcadian Partners, a public relations firm led by Dodie McCracken, Kirk's ex-girlfriend and former congressional staffer.

According to the Chicago Tribune, Congress is "allowed to pass only two commemorative coin bills a year, creating fierce competition among organizations, with some hiring lobbyists and public relations professionals to influence lawmakers."

In this case, Dodie McCracken's firm wanted its clients to have the inside track on the lucrative commemorative coins, and wouldn't you know it, Kirk also wanted to lend a hand to groups that had hired his girlfriend.

To be sure, it could be a coincidence -- maybe Kirk just liked these specific organizations, and it just so happens they hired his then-girlfriend's p.r. firm -- but the circumstances raise legitimate questions about the lawmaker's motivations.

Charles Tiefer, a University of Baltimore School of Law professor and former deputy general counsel of the House of Representatives, told the Tribune Kirk's conduct may not have crossed the legal/ethical line, but said, "It's a question of appearances."

Kirk will presumably have these questions and more waiting for him once his health improves. For now, his office has dismissed allegations of impropriety as "baseless and unfounded."

Associated Press

Sen. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) suffered a major stroke earlier this year, and has been on the long road to recovery ever since. By all indications, the Republican senator's health is improving, and he will eventually be able to return to his official duties on Capitol Hill.

When he does, Kirk will apparently have some uncomfortable questions to answer.

Soon after Mark Kirk's ex-wife announced she would no longer support his 2010 run for the U.S. Senate, he brought her onto his campaign team, then quietly paid her after his victory.

But Kimberly Vertolli, a lawyer who received $40,000 from the campaign, again is at odds with her ex-husband, filing a complaint with the Federal Election Commission alleging that Kirk and his then-girlfriend may have broken campaign finance law.

The girlfriend, Dodie McCracken, who works in public relations, has acknowledged receiving more than $143,000 in fees and expenses for her campaign work.

The story may seem a little complicated -- campaign-finance allegations often are -- but Kirk is effectively being accused of hiding campaign funds he directed to his then-girlfriend, after paying his ex-wife.

According to Vertolli (the ex-wife), the Republican funneled money through a company working for his campaign in order to give funds to McCracken (the girlfriend.) McCracken's name did not appear on Kirk's campaign finance disclosure forms because he did not pay her directly.

The Chicago Tribune quoted experts who wondered why the campaign didn't simply hire McCracken or her firm directly: "One Washington lawyer who handles election law said that generally speaking, 'intentionally obscuring the actual payee of a campaign expenditure is a violation'" of the law.

As for Vertolli, she claims she was paid $40,000 in part to keep her silent about her concerns regarding the money going to McCracken.

One assumes the FEC investigation will be delayed until Kirk's return to the Senate, but it looks like a mess that will be on his desk, awaiting his return. For its part, the Republican's aides are characterizing Vertolli as an aggrieved ex-wife making "groundless" complaints.

From a gallery by Rich Hein/Chicago Sun-Times

The governor and his wife leave home for court.

Fresh from the Chicago Sun-Times, the conviction of former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich, Democrat, on 17 of 20 counts for trying to horse-trade the seat of outgoing Senator Barack Obama:

Blagojevich had his hands clasped as he listened to the guilty verdicts read aloud in court, then leaned back into his chair as he heard all the guilty determinations.

His wife, Patti Blagojevich, began crying before the verdicts were even read. As each "guilty" was read, she sank into her brother’s shoulder. Aftward, she buried her head in her husband’s shoulder, and he put a hand on her back to comfort her.

In a January 2009 interview that became an issue in the just-concluded trial, Mr. Blagojevich said it would be "absolutely" wrong to exchange the seat for anything of value to him. Last year, Mr. Blagojevich was convicted of lying to the FBI. Now he faces an amount of prison time aptly described as really, really long. The judge left the sentencing date open.

NBC News reports that the three charges on which the jury did not convict Mr. Blagojevich include two having to do with the Illinois Tollway (counts 16 and 17 here) and one involving an alleged shakedown of former Congressman Rahm Emanuel for a grant to a school in his district (count 11).

The office of Republican Senator Mark Kirk of Illinois weighs in with this: "Today's verdict is a stark reminder that no one is above the law." Mr. Kirk is co-sponsoring the Congressional Integrity and Pension Forfeiture Act, which would take away the pensions of lawmakers convicted of public corruption committed while holding any government office.