Will Healthcare Inequality Strike Twice?

By: P.S. Johnson

Martin Cothran with the "Family" Foundation of Kentucky was quick to jump on this news today (below is an edited version of the email Kentucky Equality Federation on Wednesday).

Today, the Michigan Supreme Court ruled that same-sex partners could not get health benefits in government or public universities because of state’s 2004 constitutional amendment prohibiting gay marriage.

This decision is important to the Commonwealth of Kentucky’s LGBT population because conservative groups and lawmakers in Kentucky have been closely monitoring the Michigan Supreme Court case.

The Michigan Supreme Court’s 5-2 decision affirms a Michigan Court of Appeals ruling. Up to 20 public universities, community colleges, school districts and city governments in Michigan have benefits policies covering at least 375 gay couples. Some of the plans began as far back as the early 1990s.

After the appeals court ruled in February 2007, universities and local governments rewrote their policies to try to comply with the gay marriage ban (similar to what the University of Kentucky and the University of Louisville did after the Kentucky Attorney General issued a legal opinion on this issue in 2007).

Former Kentucky Attorney General Greg Stumbo referenced the Michigan court case, in addition to the Michigan Attorney’s General opinion in his 2007 legal opinion.

Michigan’s anti-gay law, which passed 59 percent to 41 percent, says the union between a man and woman is the only agreement recognized as a marriage "or similar union for any purpose."

Have a moment? Take our official survey's (listed under "Community") to help us improve ourself and know what issues are important to you!

Cothran apparently forgets that both Michigan and Kentucky are sovereign states within this Union. The conclusions the Michigan Supreme Court reaches have no jurisdiction here in Kentucky, and no one has any idea what the Kentucky Supreme Court would decide should the decision by Northern Kentucky University, University of Kentucky, and the University of Louisville to offer domestic partner benefits ever be challenged and heard all the way to the Kentucky Supreme Court.

I think Rep. David Watkins (D-Henderson) did a great job of putting the "Family" Foundation of Kentucky in their place in a House Health and Welfare Committee meeting to bar Kentucky's universities from offering domestic partner benefits.

Why is a "Family" foundation so opposed to people having healthcare? Oh, wait, it is just homosexuals they want to exempt.

NKU to offer same-sex benefits

Northern Kentucky University’s plan to allow same-sex domestic partner benefits (story) has reignited controversy about same-sex civil rights across the Commonwealth. The Board of Regents at NKU was wise to wait until the 2008 General Assembly adjourned before approving the new benefits.

This comes more than two years after NKU’s Faculty Senate President recommended the benefits package.

Some of the worst comments around the Commonwealth:

1. I am against anything which promotes or encourages same-sex partnership because the bible says that it is a sin. We need to encourage better moral standards for our children, even in college levels.
2. This is exactly what we needed, paying medical bills for nasty queers.
3. I have no problem with the decision IF the university would also apply this policy to heterosexual unmarried couples who "live in the employee's household for at least 12 months and be "financially interdependent" with the employee." That way the policy would be fair to everyone regardless of sexual preference. If the policy is only available to same sex partners than it is outright discrimination by a government entity. Just make it fair to everyone and everyone will be happy.

Comment # 3 makes a good point! Under this line of thinking, homosexuals are being discriminated against every day…..we cannot file joint tax returns, no marriage, no civil union, no criminal injuries compensation, no exemption from conveyance tax, no hospital visitation rights, no international immigration or Visa rights, etc., etc. Thanks for reminding us just how bad the Commonwealth of Kentucky treats us!

Congratulations to everyone at NKU and its Board of Regents......you did the right thing!

Kentucky Family Foundation slapped in the face!

If the House Standing Committee on Health & Welfare vote not to ban domestic partner benefits at the University of Louisville and the University of Kentucky proved one thing (as if we didn’t know)….. the Family Foundation of Kentucky is a bigoted, hateful organization. The Family Foundation of Kentucky hasn’t done anything to stop smoking, mental health, etc. They don’t want to embrace families; they want to divide them. Their sole purpose would seem to be to oppose homosexuality; organizations like theirs are one reason some teenagers in Kentucky are driven to suicide.

I agree with Representative Watkins…. “these [family health such as smoking, mental health] things would seem to be a priority for a family foundation.” On the Family Foundation website, it says “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing" - Dr. Edmund Burke.” We couldn’t agree more; and we’re pleased the House slapped you all in the face!

Thank you to all Representatives and House Leadership who agreed to speak to Kentucky Equality Federation management and agents about the issue during the legislative session.

Watch the video: Click here and select: Mar 20 House Health and Welfare (this is a MUST watch for everyone)!

House Democrats attack Domestic-Partner Benefits

Democrats in the Kentucky House of Representatives have elected to attack domestic-partner benefits.

Are they crazy? There are over 550,000 Kentuckians without health insurance coverage!

During Governor Beshear’s Inaugural Speech he quoted Kentucky Senator Henry Clay as saying: “Government is a trust, and the officers of the government are trustees. And both the trust and the trustees are created for the benefit of the people.”

Some House Democrats apparently disagree.

Ryan Alessi at Pol Watchers is also reporting this (below):

Two Democratic state lawmakers are dredging up a controversial proposal to block public universities in Kentucky from extending health benefits to unmarried, live-in partners of the institutions’ employees.

The move by state Reps. Richard Henderson, D-Jeffersonville, and Ancel Smith of Leburn already has raised eyebrows among members of their own party — especially considering new Democratic Gov. Steve Beshear has repeatedly promised to veto any such bills. “I had expected it but not from those two,” said Rep. Tom Burch, D-Louisville, who said he opposes the bill. “I expected it from Republicans.”

Sixteen other Democratic lawmakers have signed on to the bill, which Henderson and Smith pre-filed yesterday in preparation for the upcoming General Assembly session that begins Jan. 8.

Both Henderson and Smith said they have received pressure from constituents to block universities that receive public funding from offering such domestic partnership benefits.

“I live in an ultra conservative district with 150 churches,” Henderson said.

Trustees at several Kentucky institutions, led by the University of Kentucky and the University of Louisville, have approved offering health care to domestic partners of unmarried employees, including to gay couples.

Let’s hope Governor Beshear keeps his promise to veto this horrible legislation.

Pets more important than gays; even if you're a U.S. Ambassador.

What a great man….a person who stood up to injustice for himself, his partner, and our entire community. How sad. The U.S. Department of State cares more about an Ambassador's pets than the person he or she loves; Dogs and Cats are higher on the "food chain" than humans.

By Glenn Kessler, Washington Post Staff Writer

Michael E. Guest, a tall, soft-spoken man with salt-and-pepper hair, looks every bit the diplomat. At the young age of 43, at the start of the Bush administration, he was named ambassador to Romania, and since he returned in 2004 he has trained new ambassadors before they ship out overseas.

But last month, after 26 years in the Foreign Service, he did something uncharacteristically undiplomatic.

Ambassador Guest resigned from the State Department, giving up a career he loved, in order to protest rules and regulations that he believes are unfair to the same-sex partners of Foreign Service officers, giving them fewer benefits than family pets. He had spent the years since his return from Bucharest trying to win changes in policies, appealing directly to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, but said his proposals were met with indifference and inertia.

"I've felt compelled to choose between obligations to my partner, who is my family, and service to my country," Guest told a crowd of 75 senior State Department officials, a few steps from Rice's office, at his retirement ceremony on Nov. 20, according to a transcript of his remarks. "That anyone should have to make that choice is a stain on the secretary's leadership, and a shame for this institution and our country."

Same-sex partners -- or unmarried heterosexual partners -- are refused anti-terrorism security training or foreign-language training and are not evacuated when eligible family members are ordered to depart. Unlike spouses, they do not receive diplomatic passports, visas or even use of the State Department mail system. They also must pay their own way overseas, get their own medical care and are left to fend for themselves if a partner is sent to a dangerous post such as Iraq.

Many of these rules, Guest said, could be changed with Rice's signature, which he said was not a matter of gay rights but of equal treatment.

There are 12,000 Foreign Service officers, and about 5 percent are gay.

J. Michelle Schohn, an officer in the intelligence bureau, said she gave up a budding career in archaeology and joined the Foreign Service simply because of the hassles she encountered when her partner was based in Azerbaijan, shortly after the Soviet Union collapsed. One of her partner's colleagues got married and his spouse immediately got a diplomatic passport, but Schohn was treated no differently than any American tourist. Because of the difficulties, she ended up flying to Azerbaijan a month at a time to stay with her partner, and received no housing allowance for staying home.

At one point, during violent protests, "had there been an evacuation, we would have had to pay to evacuate me," she said.

Once Schohn joined the Foreign Service, she said, the department "has been very good to us," posting the two together in Jerusalem and now back in Washington, though same-sex couples technically cannot bid for jobs in tandem.

Another Foreign Service officer, speaking on the condition of anonymity because of her counterterrorism work, said she had to pay for her partner's evacuation when she was based in an African country that erupted in conflict. Her partner was not allowed to attend embassy security briefings and was prohibited from using the diplomatic postage service. "Effectively, she doesn't exist," she said.

The travel costs of family pets, however, are paid for by the State Department.

When Guest was ambassador, he signed a waiver allowing his partner and other unmarried partners to pay to use the embassy medical facilities. When Guest returned to Washington to head the management and leadership school at State's Foreign Service Institute, he began a campaign to get the rules altered. He won an annual award in 2006 from AFSA for "constructive dissent," but saw little or no response from top officials. Finally, he wrote Rice directly in December, knowing that soon he would be posted again overseas.

"This was my last chance. I never got a response," Guest said yesterday. "I don't know that I expected a response. What I wanted was attention to the issue." He said that in the State Department culture, "one word from the secretary" would have spurred action.

"That's what I was hoping, that I would somehow get to her heart," he said.

HRC playing "catch-up" with the "Wal-Mart issue"

The Human Rights Campaign (HRC) appears to be playing catch-up with the “Wal-Mart issue.”

The Human Rights Campaign is giving Wal-Mart (WMT) a red "do not buy" rating in its new consumer guide, bestowing a lump of coal on the retail giant just in time for the holiday shopping season. Citing Wal-Mart's refusal to offer domestic partner benefits to its gay and lesbian workers, the HRC said Tuesday that the USA's biggest private employer has "more work to do in furthering equality." It advised gays and their supporters to shop elsewhere.

Wal-Mart rated a red 40 on a scale of 100, down from a yellow 65 in 2006. It was among 54 companies that scored 45 or lower in HRC's 2008 Corporate Equality index, which assigns ratings to 519 large companies.

Also in the red: Toys R Us, RadioShack (RSH) and AutoZone (AZO).

Wal-Mart rival Target (TGT) rated a "green" 80, meaning that "consumers should make every effort to support these businesses." Last year's guide was downloaded from the group's website (www.hrc.org/buyersguide) more than 250,000 times.

But, we covered this story back in July:

• Wal-Mart shuns gay groups!

If you shop at Wal-Mart you can find the same (or better) prices at Meijer, K-Mart, Family Dollar, Kroger, or Save-A-Lot. Stop shopping at Wal-Mart! Forget about the so called "convenience" of "everything" being in one store, it is time for the gay community to stand their ground against Wal-Mart.Let us forget for a moment that this company destroys the "American Dream," exploits their employees, and contracts labor for less than $1.00 per hour in other countries.

Let us not forget that Sam Walton, Wal-Mart's founder sit on the Board of Directors of Winn-Dixie for nearly a decade (thereby learning the grocery business) and opened the first Supercenter (with groceries) less than a year after Winn-Dixie retired him. Let us not forget that Wal-Mart targets other stores to run them out of business: K-Mart, Winn-Dixie, Sloan's (Lexington), Rose's, Kroger, Toys "R" Us, Publix (Florida), Food Lion, A&P, Grand Union, Colonial/Big Star and Piggly Wiggly, and Target.

As it stands Wal-Mart remains the only national discount chain that does not offer partnership benefits (both Sears Holding Company and Target offer same-sex domestic partnership benefits). Wal-Mart also has the dubious distinction of being one of the few companies to ever pull back a GLBT initiative.

Ohio wins domestic partner court victory

Great news for the gay couples and domestic partners in the State of Ohio. Maybe Kentucky educational institutions should take note:

Miami University’s (university town of Oxford, Ohio) practice of offering benefits to same-sex “domestic partners” of its employees survived another court challenge Tuesday.

The Ohio 12th District Court of Appeals ruled that State Rep. Tom Brinkman Jr., a Cincinnati Republican, did not have legal standing to sue the university over its benefits policy.

Brinkman had argued the same-sex partnership policy violates an Ohio constitutional ban on civil unions that went into effect in 2004.

As a taxpayer and the parent of two Miami students, Brinkman said he had a legal right to sue.

The appeals court, however, upheld a lower court decision last year that dismissed Brinkman’s lawsuit.

Both courts concluded Brinkman did not have standing as a taxpayer because the school uses private donations to reimburse the state for tax dollars spent on its domestic partner benefits.

Miami began offering benefits to domestic partners of employees in July 2004. School officials have said about 30 people have the benefits at a total cost of less than $100,000.

Bigoted organizations that wrongfully right in the name of righteousness.

As the American Family Association continues its boycott of Ford, others are actually sponsoring the national hate group that lists the following on their website:

• The mandate for marriage continues. Voters in seven states passed amendments that protected the institution of a man and a woman.
• Homosexual groups are pushing to place gender confusion and the cross-dress identities into the youngest levels of public education. American Family Association (AFA) says it has now secured over 700,000 signatures from those pledging to boycott the Ford Motor Company over its continued support of same-sex marriage and homosexual advocacy.
• Supporters of hate crimes laws routinely deny that these politically correct laws are intended to silence religious speech or opposition to gay rights political agendas. Yet, when given the chance to prove this claim, the supporters of hate crimes show their true colors.
• AT&T needs to hear from you today! Ask them to stop sponsoring the mockery of God on TNT network.

Who supports and sponsors the American Family Association, and the Louisville based American Family Association of Kentucky?

• Kroger
• Thornton's
• Wal-Mart (click here for a related post about Wal-Mart)

When you visit the national American Family Association website and click "donate," there is an annoying cartoon-like character of Don Wildmon, their Chairman, thanking you for your donating. Well, thanks but no thanks Don, I'll be keeping my money for a more worthwhile cause other than supporting an intolerant, bigoted organization such as yours.

The United States of America has over 300 million citizens. The American Family Association claims nearly 3.3 million members which accounts for 1% of the total population. Is it really a stretch to believe that 1% of the total United States population are closet homosexuals or have gay issues they haven't addressed yet? Why else would they be so terrified of a minority group and do everything possible to deny constitutional freedoms to them? I know one thing.....I'm sick of them spoon feeding rhetoric to the public.....I'm fighting back, starting with this post.

Though the American Family Association claims nearly 3.3 million members, their Kentucky chapter could only manage to gather a mere 200 people to visit the Kentucky Capital the day they held a rally and no lawmaker was present.

LOGO presidential debate - gay marriage.

Six of the candidates seeking the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination participated Thursday in a two-hour forum in Los Angeles devoted to issues of concern to gays and lesbians. The event — moderated by journalist Margaret Carlson was broadcast live on Logo, a lifestyle cable channel aimed at gay and lesbian viewers.

For anyone who missed the LOGO presidential debate you can watch it here.







The basic subject of the LOGO debate was gay marriage, non-discrimination, etc. This is what Law Digest says about gay marriage:

The legal issues surrounding same-sex marriage in the United States are complicated by the nation's federal system of government. Traditionally, the federal government did not attempt to establish its own definition of marriage; any marriage recognized by a state was recognized by the federal government, even if that marriage was not recognized by one or more other states (as was the case with interracial marriage before 1967). With the passage of the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996, however, a marriage was explicitly defined as a union of one man and one woman for the purposes of federal law. (See 1 U.S.C. § 7.)

However, many aspects of marriage law affecting the day to day lives of inhabitants of the United States are determined by the states, not the federal government, and the Defense of Marriage Act does not prevent individual states from defining marriage as they see fit; indeed, legal scholars have stated that the federal government cannot impose a definition of marriage onto the laws of the various states.

Kentucky Constitution, Section 233A: Only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in Kentucky. A legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized.

Kentucky Revised Statutes
Section 402.005: Definition of marriage. As used and recognized in the law of the Commonwealth, "marriage" refers only to the civil status, condition, or relation of one (1) man and one (1) woman united in law for life, for the discharge to each other and the community of the duties legally incumbent upon those whose association is founded on the distinction of sex.

Gay marriage? It isn't going to happen in Kentucky anytime soon. I'd settle for the following for now (progress takes time):

• A Kentucky law prohibiting discrimination in employment based on sexual orientation or gender identity.
• A Kentucky law prohibiting discrimination in housing based on sexual orientation or gender identity.
• A Kentucky law prohibiting discrimination in credit based on sexual orientation or gender identity.
• A Kentucky law prohibiting discrimination in service based on sexual orientation or gender identity.
• A Kentucky law giving me the legal right to visit my "partner" in the hospital.
• The Governor, as well as the Kentucky House of Representatives and Senate to leave the issue of "domestic-partner" at Kentucky educational facilities alone.

For additional coverage about the debate visit InterstateQ.

Fletcher reappoints Regents that support domestic-partner benefits.

Governor Fletcher's policy flip-flops are legendary, and this article in yesterday's Herald-Leader about his reappointments to the Board of Regents takes the cake:

Governor Ernie Fletcher filled three spots on the University of Kentucky and University of Louisville boards of trustees Wednesday with people whose stances run the gamut on the controversial topic of providing domestic-partner benefits to college employees.

Three of those named — two from UK and one from U of L — are reappointments of trustees first given those plum assignments by Fletcher’s Democratic predecessor, Governor Paul Patton.

The governor reappointed Louisville civic activist Owsley Brown Frazier, the retired vice chairman of the board of Brown-Foreman Corp. Frazier was among the 14 U of L trustees who backed a proposal to provide health benefits to the unmarried partners of university employees, which would allow gay couples to be covered.

Fletcher recently has urged lawmakers to pass legislation that would block agencies that receive state funds, such as universities, from offering such benefits and included that issue among 67 items on his agenda for a special legislative session. That was a change from the governor’s stance this spring, in which he said such decisions about benefits should be left up to the universities.

Fletcher now has appointed a total of 10 to UK, including extending the terms of May and Miles, and has chosen 12 of U of L’s trustees, which includes Frazier’s reappointment.

This is yet another example of how Governor Fletcher doesn't have any core values of his own, his moves are a pure calculation of how he can stay in office, by reaching out to the conservative right wing and asking the Kentucky House and Senate to pass legislation to ban domestic-partner benefits.

If Governor Fletcher doesn't want the universitys to decide the issues on their own (as they are supposed to), why did he reappoint members back to the Board of Regents that voted in favor of domestic partner benefits?

Family Foundation wants religion to govern the land (judging from the signs they held).

"The Family Foundation of Kentucky, our 'KKK members with church clothes on' are holding signs deliberately bringing religion into government even though it is prohibited by the Commonwealth's Constitution. Neither domestic-partner benefits nor marriage have anything to do with religion; marriage is granted and dissolved by the state, not the church." - Jordan Palmer, Kentucky Equality Federation President

Kentucky Equality Federation united with Kentucky Fairness Alliance, Louisville's Fairness Campaign, Berea Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG), Louisville Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG), the University of Louisville Faculty and Staff for Human Rights Coordinating Committee, and the Kentucky Gay-Straight Alliance Coalition pledge to stand strong and not give up this fight.

Children holding signs that read “Marriage: Gods Way” and senior citizens in wheelchairs with stickers that demanded protection of marriage joined the crowd that filled the Capitol Rotunda today protesting domestic-partner benefits.

“It’s a good thing (the children) are here today because this institution we’re protecting is for them,” said Rep. Keith Hall, D-Pikeville.

“Some political extremists still attack the Trustees’ actions, and I think this is unfair,” stated Kentucky Attorney General Greg Stumbo. “The Governor selected these prominent citizens to keep Kentucky’s universities competitive and modern. Although the Trustees erred in extending domestic partner benefits to a narrow class of people, they have promptly taken corrective action in light of my recent opinion upholding the Marriage Amendment."

Senate President David Williams said after his short address that it seems unlikely the issue of domestic-partner benefits will be on the agenda of an anticipated Aug. 13 special session unless both chambers agree to take it up.

Rep. Jim Gooch, who was one of three Democrats to attend the rally, told the crowd the issue would likely not be taken up until January, but asked them to continue pressing for legislation.

The group also circulated a list of home and office numbers of legislators. Rep. Jim DeCesare, R-Bowling Green, told the crowd he’d recieved 59 voicemails regarding the bill when he checked his messages this morning. All of them, he said, were in favor of banning domestic partner benefits.

Sections of this post taken from Poll Watchers.

KKK with church clothes on......Family Foundation of Kentucky

Someone posted a comment on Kentucky Progress stating "The Family Foundation is nothing but the KKK with church cloths on. The Kentucky Citizen publication they peddle is out right hate speech." We could not agree more!

"The KKK with church clothes on" will be holding a rally in Frankfort today attempting to stop Kentucky families from having health insurance coverage.

Denied!

This is a listing of "disabilities" the gay community must put up with. Conservatives say their is no use for civil unions, etc. well, what about the following rights homosexual couples are not entitled to:

- Accidental death benefit for the surviving spouse of a government employee;
- Appointment as guardian of a minor;
- Beneficial owner status of corporate securities;
- Bill of Rights benefits for victims and witnesses;
- Consent to post-mortem examination;
- Control, division, acquisition, and disposition of community property;
- Criminal injuries compensation;
- Death benefit for surviving spouse for government employee;
- Disclosure of vital statistics records;
- Eligibility for housing opportunity allowance program of the Housing, Finance and Development Corporation;
- Exemption from claims of Department of Human Services for social services payments, financial assistance, or burial payments;
- Exemption from conveyance tax;
- Funeral leave for government employees;
- Income tax deductions, credits, rates exemption, and estimates;
- Insurance licenses, coverage, eligibility, and benefits;
- Legal status with partner’s children;
- Making partner medical decisions;
- Payment of worker's compensation benefits after death;
- Permission to make arrangements for burial or cremation;
- Right to inherit property;
- Rights and proceedings for hospitalization and treatment (both voluntary and involuntary);
- Spousal privilege and confidential marriage communications;
- Tax relief for natural disaster losses;
- Right to marry someone out of the country, and bring them back here to the U.S.

The denied rights we judge to be the worst have been placed in bold.

In a "free society" where homosexual couples must also pay taxes.....why not refuse? If the government refuses to recognize our relationships maybe we should refuse to recognize their authority (just a thought, but gosh that would be funny).

Is this list missing anything?

Washington leaves Kentucky behind with new Domestic Partner laws.

New laws go into effect in the State of Washington on Monday:

• The right to visit a partner who's in the hospital.
• The ability to make important medical decisions for that person if necessary.
• Registered couples can now inherit property from a partner who dies without a will and administer their estate.
• Domestic Partners will now have the ability to sue for the wrongful death of their loved one.

Did you realize you don't have these rights if you're in a same-sex relationship in the Commonwealth of Kentucky?

Get involved today and help us change Kentucky!

Your thoughts and comments are always welcome!

Kentucky Senate Passes Ban on Domestic-Partner Benefits.

As most of you probably know, the Senate passed a bill to ban domestic-partner benefits at all Kentucky public institutions.

Senate Bill 5 (passed 28-6): Create a new section of KRS Chapter 61 to define a "public agency" as any agency participating in a state-administered retirement system or plan, any agency participating in the state health insurance plan, and any public institution subject to KRS Chapter 164; define "family member" as the employee's spouse, natural or adopted children, stepchildren, and children for whom legal guardianship has been awarded; require public agencies to allow the employee to select health insurance coverage for only the employee and family members of the employee.

Amend to make technical changes; add grandchildren for whom legal guardianship or legal custody has been awarded to the definition of "family member"; declare an EMERGENCY.

It remains to be seen what the House of Representatives will do with Senate Bill 5 when and if it makes its way to the House after the "cooling off period."

Fletcher's appeal to his right wing ultra-conservative voters appears to be paying off. Hasting Wyman's Southern Political Report released a poll conducted by InsiderAdvantage/Majority Opinion showing Democrat Steve Beshear with a 41 percent to 38 percent lead over Republican Governor Ernie Fletcher.