AZ Legislature Moves To Strip Domestic Partner Benefits

Jim Burroway

June 6th, 2009

Here’s a story that goes to show that marriage opponents will lie, cheat and steal to have their way.

Last summer, Arizona lawmakers broke Senate rules in order to place an anti-marriage amendment on the 2008 ballot. At the time, they said that Prop 102 would not endanger domestic partnerships, and that all they wanted to do was “define marriage” in the state constitution. Marriage opponents went on to make this a key centerpiece on their Prop 102 campaign, that they had no interest in denying anyone’s domestic partnership benefits.

Well now we know that was yet another bold-faced lie:

State lawmakers are moving to strip the domestic partners of state and university employees of the health insurance coverage they gained just a year ago.

A provision in the state budget would legally define “dependents” of state employees who are entitled to coverage as a spouse or a child younger than 19 — or younger than 23 if a full-time student. Changing the law would override regulations adopted last year that added domestic partners and their children to the list.

The state Department of Administration says about 750 workers who have signed up for the benefits would be affected.

The measure passed the House last night and is now on the governor’s desk. Gov. Jan Brewer (R), who became governor when Janet Napolitano (D) became Homeland Security secretary for the Obama administration, was on record in 2006 for opposing domestic partner benefits for state employees.

Equality Arizona is urging state residents to call Governor\’s office (602-542-4331 or toll free at 1-800-253-0883) or email the Governor here.

Bearchewtoy75

June 6th, 2009

I live here in AZ and I’m not all surprised. They used cheap tactics to get prop 102 on the ballot to begin with… see attached website.

Matt

June 6th, 2009

Hmm, I wonder if this might be a way for states like Nevada and others that offer DP benefits to “go behind the back” of the law by claiming that they’re “doing it to save money”

If so, that would seem to be another argument for nothing BUT full marriage equality.

Christopher Waldrop

June 6th, 2009

In a way this decision, along with the lunacy of Prop 8, can be a very good argument in favor of finally granting federally recognized full marital benefits to same-sex couples. As of now same-sex couples exist in a perpetual state of limbo. If they gain benefits they only have those benefits until the next election, or until the next special election, or until the state legislature decides to strip them of those benefits. By allowing existing same-sex couples to remain married while denying any new couples from marrying the California Supreme Court declared some couples’ unions to be more valid than others–which is the whole problem in the first place.

And in Arizona I can’t see that same-sex couples have any legal recourse because they’re not allowed to marry.

Jason D

June 7th, 2009

this is another reason why the “compromise” of civil unions/DP isn’t really a compromise.

It’s been made clear in this, and other cases, that the goal is to shut us out completely. So the only way is full-marriage, as anything else is just too tenuous.

Patrick M

June 7th, 2009

Us gays will believe most anything someone tells us, we’re compasoniate, caring, loving, thoughtful. This article just goes to show we can’t trust the claims of those who would deny rights for us. Compromise is and should never be an option. Full MARRIAGE rights is the only way to go. Besides it keeps the process simple. No new laws need to be written, discussed, or voted on. Repeal DOMA Accept nothing less than FULL MARRIAGE RIGHTS for all.

Richard

June 7th, 2009

Bravo, Patrick M, My thoughts exactly!

Paul

June 7th, 2009

This is exactly what happened in Michigan in 2004 when the marriage amendment was put on the ballot — the same claim that DPs would be unaffected, the same rush to eliminate DP benefits once the amendment was in effect (it happened so fast the ink didn’t have time to dry). One gets mighty tired of the ease at which Commandment #9 is violated.

homer

June 7th, 2009

I sent Pamela Gorman, one of the main supporters of this bill in the Legislature, a nicely worded email asking her if why she was interested in removing insurance benefits for children. I doubt she will respond. Republicans never like to be called on their hate.

PDQ

June 8th, 2009

Boycott Phoenix, Scottsdale, Sedona, the Grand Canyon, etc. Boycott Arizona. If you have a group meeting or event booked – cancel it and let them know why you did.

paul

June 9th, 2009

maybe we need to show the legislature how many of us there are if maybe 10thousand plus gathered at the capitol to let them know we will not forget this 2010 is our chance to remove these folks from office if we have the will together with our straight allies we can do this

Eddie89

June 9th, 2009

For what it’s worth, I contacted my State Senator (R) and both Representatives (R) and the Governor’s office (R) and let them know that I am opposed to stripping these 750 state employees of their domestic partner health benefits, which would only save the state about $5 million dollars. How petty.

With every passing day, the New England area is looking more and more friendly.

Would I trade searingly hot summers and mild winters for mild summers (in comparison to Phoenix) and freezing winters? If it means equality under the law?

You betcha!

StraightGrandmother

February 17th, 2012

I’m no expert, but it seems to me that this is another Romer case. I am very impatient for any of the various Civil Rights for Sexual Minorities cases to make it’s way to the Supreme Court.

My heart breaks for all of you who live your lives without full Equality to every other citizen. Even those states that have Civil Marriage for Sexual Minorities, our Federal Government does not recognize it. We all just have to keep on fighting the good fight.

Leave A Comment

All comments reflect the opinions of commenters only. They are not necessarily those of anyone associated with Box Turtle Bulletin. Comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

(Required)
(Required, never shared)

PLEASE NOTE: All comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

 

Latest Posts

Will the FDA Gay Blood Ban Finally Go Away?

How the Media Misses The Big Story

Today's Agenda Is Brought To You By...

This Month In History, 1940: Homosexuality and Lesbianism Treated With Metrazol

Born On This Day, 1940: Mel White

Today's Agenda Is Brought To You By...

Today In History, 1808: Australian Court Convicts Two Of "Most Disgusting and Abominable" Crime

Today In History, 1865: Dr. Barry's Death Reveals a Lifelong Secret

Featured Reports

What Are Little Boys Made Of?

In this original BTB Investigation, we unveil the tragic story of Kirk Murphy, a four-year-old boy who was treated for “cross-gender disturbance” in 1970 by a young grad student by the name of George Rekers. This story is a stark reminder that there are severe and damaging consequences when therapists try to ensure that boys will be boys.

Slouching Towards Kampala: Uganda’s Deadly Embrace of Hate

When we first reported on three American anti-gay activists traveling to Kampala for a three-day conference, we had no idea that it would be the first report of a long string of events leading to a proposal to institute the death penalty for LGBT people. But that is exactly what happened. In this report, we review our collection of more than 500 posts to tell the story of one nation’s embrace of hatred toward gay people. This report will be updated continuously as events continue to unfold. Check here for the latest updates.

Paul Cameron’s World

In 2005, the Southern Poverty Law Center wrote that “[Paul] Cameron’s ‘science’ echoes Nazi Germany.” What the SPLC didn”t know was Cameron doesn’t just “echo” Nazi Germany. He quoted extensively from one of the Final Solution’s architects. This puts his fascination with quarantines, mandatory tattoos, and extermination being a “plausible idea” in a whole new and deeply disturbing light.

From the Inside: Focus on the Family’s “Love Won Out”

On February 10, I attended an all-day “Love Won Out” ex-gay conference in Phoenix, put on by Focus on the Family and Exodus International. In this series of reports, I talk about what I learned there: the people who go to these conferences, the things that they hear, and what this all means for them, their families and for the rest of us.

Prologue: Why I Went To “Love Won Out”
Part 1: What’s Love Got To Do With It?
Part 2: Parents Struggle With “No Exceptions”
Part 3: A Whole New Dialect
Part 4: It Depends On How The Meaning of the Word "Change" Changes
Part 5: A Candid Explanation For "Change"

The Heterosexual Agenda: Exposing The Myths

At last, the truth can now be told.

Using the same research methods employed by most anti-gay political pressure groups, we examine the statistics and the case studies that dispel many of the myths about heterosexuality. Download your copy today!

And don‘t miss our companion report, How To Write An Anti-Gay Tract In Fifteen Easy Steps.

Testing The Premise: Are Gays A Threat To Our Children?

Anti-gay activists often charge that gay men and women pose a threat to children. In this report, we explore the supposed connection between homosexuality and child sexual abuse, the conclusions reached by the most knowledgeable professionals in the field, and how anti-gay activists continue to ignore their findings. This has tremendous consequences, not just for gay men and women, but more importantly for the safety of all our children.

Straight From The Source: What the “Dutch Study” Really Says About Gay Couples

Anti-gay activists often cite the “Dutch Study” to claim that gay unions last only about 1½ years and that the these men have an average of eight additional partners per year outside of their steady relationship. In this report, we will take you step by step into the study to see whether the claims are true.

The FRC’s Briefs Are Showing

Tony Perkins’ Family Research Council submitted an Amicus Brief to the Maryland Court of Appeals as that court prepared to consider the issue of gay marriage. We examine just one small section of that brief to reveal the junk science and fraudulent claims of the Family “Research” Council.

Daniel Fetty Doesn’t Count

Daniel FettyThe FBI’s annual Hate Crime Statistics aren’t as complete as they ought to be, and their report for 2004 was no exception. In fact, their most recent report has quite a few glaring holes. Holes big enough for Daniel Fetty to fall through.