Comments on: Federal domestic partnership benefits bill introduced

By: LaoBlue

LaoBlue — Sun, 05 Feb 2012 01:20:50 +0000

Interestingly, some large federal government agencies (Department of State and DHS) already provide a number of benefits to partners – and their children – while posted overseas (housing and post allowances, health services, etc.). However, when an employee returns to the US to continue employment within the agency – nada. That is not fair – in fact, it’s a bit perplexing how an agency provides and then takes away just because an employee moves back to the US. A case in point that shows the need for a law that forces agencies to provide equally to all families in all circumstances!

By: Nick Literski

Nick Literski — Mon, 21 Nov 2011 16:33:40 +0000

This same bill has been introduced multiple years. Last year, it made it through committees for both the House and Senate, but never came to the floor. Lieberman (who is touted here as a cosponsor) promised in the Senate committee not to bring it to the floor without a full explanation of how the cost would be offset by other spending cuts, etc. The GAO showed that the cost would be mostly set off by the newly-paying healthcare premiums, but since that wasn’t a “complete” cost coverage, nothing further was done.

I’m a federal employee who truly needs this legislation due to my partner having a chronic illness. Unfortunately, the current political climate is to CUT benefits to federal employees (or as some in Congress are proposing, actually slash salaries). I don’t see this bill making it through the House committee this time, given the current conditions.

By: Michael S

Michael S — Sun, 20 Nov 2011 04:28:48 +0000

As a Federal Employee, this is welcome news. I’m curious about its chances of passing. Does it even have a shot, or is it just to make a point — again? I know previous efforts have failed. Where can I keep watch on this bill, and how can I get involved (without violating my agency’s code of conduct, of course)?

By: Ben M

Ben M — Sat, 19 Nov 2011 17:05:11 +0000

@customartist – Since both are simply matters of statute, I believe the norm is to is that the newer statute abrogates a prior statutes where they are inconsistent. On the other hand, a court seems more likely to find that domestic partnerships are, in the view of the “conflicting laws,” so unlike a marriage that DOMA and domestic partnership laws do not conflict.

It is an implicit statement that a domestic partnership and marriage are not that same that had allowed some States with constitutional provisions against marriage equality to pass domestic partnership laws.

By: customartist

customartist — Sat, 19 Nov 2011 14:19:25 +0000

Understanding that there are Straight Domestic Partners, but not addressing those, I fail to understand just how this does not defy DOMA?

Isn’t this Federal Recognition of “something like Marriage”?

Will this chip away one small piece of DOMA?

By: Lucrece

Lucrece — Sat, 19 Nov 2011 04:12:50 +0000

It makes me so happy that I can cast my vote for her. She’s the politician any other politician of any party should look up to.

Her articles on El Nuevo Herald (Spanish version of Miami Herald) are always a delight to read, especially those addressing the failure of a body we know as the UN.