Q-Seattle Events: Tacky Tourist Clubs

By noon on this, the first day of registrations, 105 couples had signed up at the Dolliver Building in Olympia for the state's new domestic partnership registry. (The number of reporters and TV crews there to cover the event isn't reported, but might be just as high.)

The secretary of state's office keeps a running tally of the registrations here. Among those registered are 43rd District Senator Ed Murray and his partner Michael Shiosaki and 43rd District Representative Jamie Pedersen and his partner Eric Cochran Pedersen. Murray was prime sponsor in the Senate and Pedersen prime sponsor in the House of the bill that grants domestic partnerships.

Equal Rights Washington asks everyone who is thankful for this baby-step toward marriage equality to thank legislators who passed the new law. They also suggest writing up a personal story and sending it to your local newspaper.

Like many reports, the Seattle Times story by Andrew Garber on the signups in Olympia mentions that many there -- including Murray and Pedersen -- feel that the new law doesn't go far enough.

For many, though, the celebration will be tinged with anger that lawmakers did not grant gay and lesbian couples the right to marry.

Sandy Mosel, who is Canadian, noted that she and Rachel are legally married in Canada, but the certificate has no legal weight in Washington. "I'm a full person in Canada, but when I cross the border I'm less than that," she said.

Washington's new law extends only a handful of the rights -- dealing with health care and death -- granted to heterosexual married couples. For example, married couples have the right to refuse to testify against each other in court. That right isn't extended to gay and lesbian couples under the new law.

"It's like signing up for second-class-citizen rights," said Sandy Mosel.

David Hopkins, of Seattle, has similar feelings. His partner wants to register, but Hopkins is resisting.

"It's a slice of a loaf when you should really get the whole loaf," he said. "I'm willing to wait until I'm admitted to the set of citizens who have full civil rights. I don't perceive this as giving me full civil rights."

Or, as the always entertaining blog G.A.Y puts it:

So remember the date, Washington kids: "7/23/2007 -- A Day Society Will Look Back Upon and Say, 'Wait, why did early 21st century Americans have to set up different ways for gays to achieve pseudo-parity? Doesn't that seem both short-sighted and un-American?!'"

Update: The secretary of state's counter might have become a bit overtaxed, since it didn't move much after noon. At 6pm it is showing a count of 155 registrations.

Labels: legislature, marriage equality, SB5336, Washington

Does the air feel a bit different out there today? Something beyond this uncommon summer rain? Do you feel the earth shaking under "traditional marriage"? Yeah... Probably not. But today is the day when domestic partnerships for gay couples and some straight couples officially become recognized in Washington. Of course, it doesn't make a lot of difference until the Secretary of State's office opens tomorrow morning at 8 am in Olympia to begin processing the registrations.

And if you are planning to head to Olympia tomorrow along with all the TV satellite trucks, the office of Secretary of State Sam Reed warns that you should expect to wait in line:

Monday July 23 is the first day that the Office of the Secretary of State will accept registrations at the Dolliver Building. The doors will open at 8:00 am.

We are expecting long lines and long waits on the first days of registration. It is likely that we will not be able to complete every registration that we receive on the first day. Review this information to help us complete as many registrations as possible on July 23

• Consider mailing or leaving the declaration form and fee to be filed. All complete registrations will be effective on the date received. We will mail the completed registrations, certificates, and wallet cards to you. You can register in person and receive your certificates on the spot, but you may need to be patient.
• Complete the forms before you come in. We will post the forms on this website on Wednesday July 18. The forms will be in PDF format. Download the form; complete it on your computer. Then print the form.
  
  If possible sign and notarize the form before coming to the Corporations Division. We will have notaries available, but notarizing the documents will add substantial processing time to each application. The more documents we have to notarize, the fewer registrations we will be able to complete on the first day.
• Parking and transportation. There is very limited parking available at the Dolliver Building. On-street metered parking is available in the area but it is difficult to find a space. Free parking is available at the Capitol Visitor parking lot. See Map. Intercity Transit offers the free DASH shuttle from the Capitol Visitors parking and the Capitol Campus. This service runs every twelve minutes and stops one block from the Dolliver Building. DASH Shuttle information.

The registration fee for partnerships is $50. Once the two of you are officially partners, each partner will receive an original (and, we trust, frame-able) "Certificate of State Registered Domestic Partnership" along with a wallet card showing the registration of the domestic partnership. (It's not clear from the website if they give a wallet card to each partner, or just one. In either case, a replacement card is available for $10.) The secretary of state's office will also provide one file stamped copy of the registration document.

Reed's office also offers a nifty FAQ to answer a few frequently asked questions about the partnerships.

Reporters have been searching out gay and lesbian partners to profile in preparation for the big day tomorrow. A few of the stories:

[Seattle PI:] After spending this weekend relaxing in Olympia, Laura Mansfield and Marilyn Guthrie plan to walk from their bed-and-breakfast to an office of the Secretary of State on Monday morning and file a notarized form. ...

For Mansfield and Guthrie, the registration comes nearly a year after their pastor at University Congregational United Church of Christ conducted a wedding for them in the front yard of their Ballard home.

"We made our commitment then, before family and God and friends," said Mansfield, 43, director of communications for Seattle Central Community College. "This (registration) is recognizing our relationship legally."

Guthrie said she hopes gay couples would gain "not only the benefits but the responsibilities of full marriage equality."

Among those, she said, is involvement in the care of partners who are hospitalized, especially when they are in intensive care. Under current law, hospitals could limit access to spouses or other close family members.

Being relegated to the hospital hallway is "sort of the big scary thing out there that you don't want to happen," said Guthrie, 46, storm water program manager for the Port of Seattle.

---

[AP via Boston Globe] Tom Richardson and Salvador Valenzuela first marked their commitment to each other with a city domestic partnership in Seattle. When Massachusetts became the first state to allow same-sex marriage, they married, and hyphenated their last names.

Now back in Washington state, the Richardson-Valenzuelas plan to register for a state domestic partnership here. ...

The only problem is that by doing so, they risk getting Salvador, a Mexican national, deported, because registering could jeopardize the temporary tourist visas he uses to enter the country.

"It's really important for our relationship to be recognized," said Tom Richardson-Valenzuela, who said they both realize that the immigration laws may catch up with them. "We are a legitimate couple. If we have to leave the United States, as much as we don't want to leave the country, we will."

The AP story in the Globe warns couples that include a foreign national or a member of the armed forces to carefully consider the risks before signing up for a domestic partnership. The registry is public information subject to disclosure on request.

[The Columbian] One couple who won't be waiting are state Sen. Ed Murray, prime sponsor of the domestic partnership bill, and his partner of 16 years, Michael Shiosaki.

"In Olympia on Monday morning, amongst all the general excitement and with great joy and pride in our hearts, Michael and I will get in line with everyone else to be registered as domestic partners by the Secretary of State," Murray, a Seattle Democrat, said in a statement.

State Rep. Jim Moeller, D-Vancouver, another openly gay legislator, said he and his partner will not be taking advantage of the domestic partnership law.

"We will be holding out for the big church wedding," he said. "When that becomes legal , and we can get a legal notice in your newspaper, we'll take advantage of that."

AP writer Dave Ammons offers a brief history of the legislative road that led to the domestic partnership law.

The state's first openly gay legislator, Cal Anderson, and other lawmakers struggled for nearly 30 years to get the civil rights bill through Olympia last year. Democrats padded their majorities in both houses and came right back to pass marriage-like rights this year.

On Monday, Sen. Ed Murray, Anderson's successor in the Legislature and in leading the charge, and his 16-year partner, Michael Shiosaki, will line up at the secretary of state's counter in Olympia to register their domestic partnership.

Then Murray will drive home and get started on the next phase of the battle that has sometimes consumed him.

What's next? The gay community isn't much interested in civil unions but plans to seek full marriage equality. How long that takes, say the advocates, will depend on how quickly public opinion continues to turn their way.

"I believe we will get there in a decade, if not sooner," says Murray, the senior of five gay men in the state Legislature.

Foes say they'll fight every inch of the way and insist they still have public opinion on their side. One leading evangelical, though, believes it likely is a losing battle and that gays will someday be able to marry here.

Labels: marriage equality, politics, SB5336, Washington

Governor Christine Gregoire signed the domestic partnership bill into law yesterday in what's being described as an "emotional" ceremony in the capitol building's ornate Reception Room.

She was surrounded by legislators who guided the bill through the two chambers and by several of those who had told their stories in legislative hearings. The best report we've seen on the ceremony is from reporter Kathie Durban of The Columbian in Vancouver.

In a ceremony infused with joy and tears, Gov. Chris Gregoire signed a landmark bill Saturday that creates a state domestic partnership registry for gay and lesbian couples, allowing them to make health care and end-of-life decisions for each other.

"This is a very proud moment for me as governor," Gregoire told a standing-room audience in the Legislative Building?s ornate reception room . She urged those who felt tearful to "let 'er rip!"

Personal stories of troubles faced by lesbian/gay couples had been important elements in each of the public hearings held during the session. Several senators and representatives repeated those stories in explaining their votes in favor of the bill. The governor did the same.

The governor repeated the story of Charlene Strong, a Seattle woman whose partner of 10 years, Kathryn Fleming, died last December after she was trapped by rising water in the couple?s flooded basement studio.

Strong was barred from Fleming's hospital room, and the funeral director who handled arrangements after Fleming's death refused to acknowledge the couple's relationship, although "he was more than willing to accept (Strong's) credit card," the governor said.

Strong was present for the ceremony. Many lawmakers said it was her moving testimony before legislative committees this year that gave the bill the margin it needed to pass both chambers.

Gregoire also told the story of a lesbian couple from Spokane. When their 6-year-old son was injured in a bicycle accident, the doctor refused to treat him because the parent who brought him in for emergency care was not his biological mother, she said.

"It's difficult enough in these tragic circumstances," she said. "Why then do we compound the tragedy?" she asked.

"Love manifests itself not in some cookie-cutter way," the governor said. "Love comes in many forms. Our families are different, but every one of our families deserves our undivided support."

Some reporters turned to anti-gay activists like Bothell preacher Joe Fuiten to issue, but his warnings that this bill could lead to full marriage equality had already been explicitly stated by supporters of the bill.

Sen. Ed Murray, D-Seattle, who led the campaign for last year?s gay rights bill, called the domestic partnership bill "a significant step in undoing the hurt this Legislature inflicted" on gay and lesbian couples in 1998 when it passed the Defense of Marriage Act, defining marriage as between one man and one woman.

The state Supreme Court upheld the law last year. Sponsors of the domestic partnership bill made it clear when they introduced the bill in January that their goal is full marriage equality for same-sex couples and that they viewed domestic partnerships as an incremental step on that path.

Dawn Prentice of Olympia and her partner of four years, Kriscinda Hansen, said the two will "more than likely" decide to register as domestic partners in order to obtain the health care and end-of-life benefits the law provides.

"I'd like to see equal rights," Prentice said. "I'd like to be able to marry the person I love."

From an AP report:

"Today is a beginning, not an end," said Sen. Ed Murray, a Seattle Democrat who sponsored the measure and who is one of five openly gay lawmakers in the state Legislature. "It offers the hope that one day, all lesbian and gay families will be treated truly equal under the law."

And here's a surprise item from The Columbian's report about the effectiveness of Fuiten's and other anti-equality lobbying efforts:

Rep. Jim Moeller, D-Vancouver, one of five openly gay state legislators who worked for passage of the domestic partnership measure, said he had not received a single negative e-mail about the bill.

Here are details of the law from the AP story:

To be registered, couples must share a home, not be married or in a domestic relationship with someone else, and be at least 18.

In a provision similar to California law, unmarried, heterosexual senior couples are also eligible for domestic partnerships if one partner is at least 62. Lawmakers said that provision was included to help seniors who are at risk of losing pension rights and Social Security benefits if they remarry. ...

The new law will take effect July 22. Couples can either register with the Secretary of State in Olympia, or download the form from the Web site and send it in to register and receive a certificate of the partnership.

Labels: legislature, marriage equality, politics, SB5336, Washington

Governor Christine Gregoire will sign the domestic partnership bill in a formal ceremony Saturday, April 21 at 9:30 am in the State Reception Room.

According to an announcement from Equal Rights Washington (ERW), the ceremony will be held in the State Reception Room on the third floor of the Capitol Building in Olympia.

The LGBT lobbying group calls Saturday "a historic day for the LGBT community in Washington State. This bill will provide emergency protections for many LGBT couples and families until the full rights and responsiblities of marriage are secured. "

ERW's statement urges all supporters of the legislation to thank their legislators for passing the historic measure. "The emails and letters you sent and the conversations you had with your legislators, friends, and families made a huge difference," according to the statement, which also recognizes that the new law goes only part of the way toward establishing full equality of rights for all citizens of the state. "We look forward to continuing our partnership with you," ERW states, "as we move toward marriage equality."

Labels: legislature, marriage equality, politics, SB5336, Washington

Conservative Christian activist Gary Randall said today that his pro-discrimnaition group, Faith & Freedom Network, will not attempt to field a referendum or initiative to target the domestic partnership law that was passed yesterday in Olympia.

Andrew Garber, of the Seattle Times, called me last night and asked if we were going to run a referendum to try to kill the domestic partnership law. I told him no, we have already launched a referendum on the lawmakers. We plan to "Change The State, in '08'".

He said that his group will sponsor an intensive effort to find voters and candidates who support their views on religion, politics, and civil rights.

He urges his followers on with this exhortation:

You, not gay and secularist lawmakers from Seattle and elsewhere, can decide what Washington State will look like for your children and grand children.

So, is domestic partnerships another step toward redefining marriage and society or is it a call to action?

It's all up to you.

Indeed.

For its part, Equal Rights Washington praised lawmakers who voted for the bill in a press release:

Equal Rights Washington (ERW) applauds the House for passing the Domestic Partnership bill today. The Governor, a longtime supporter of equality for gay and lesbian Washingtonians, has said she will sign the bill. ERW wants to especially thank Senator Ed Murray and Representatives Joe McDermott, Jim Moeller, Jamie Pedersen and Dave Upthegrove for working to immediately protect Washington's LGBT families, while simultaneously championing the cause of marriage equality.

ERW (as Randall tells his minions) has vowed to continue to work toward full marriage equality.

"We view this bill as an emergency protection act. We will continue to talk about the lives of LGBT families and the importance of marriage equality," said Barbara Green, ERW's Interim Executive Director. "The Domestic Partnership bill offers only a fraction of full marriage protections. This bill has been an important vehicle for talking about all the rights and protections currently unavailable to families formed by gay and lesbian couples. ERW will continue to work for marriage equality until we achieve it."

According to Green, "Marriage provides a legal and social safety net that is unparalleled in protecting families during times of crisis. Same-sex couples need the 400 plus statewide protections, and the 1,000 plus federal protections that come with civil marriage. Nothing short of marriage will provide LGBT families with the protections and dignity we deserve."

ERW has urged everyone who supports equal rights for everyone in the state to thank the lawmakers who voted yesterday for passage of the domestic partnership bill.

[Update:] Pastor Ken Hutcherson doesn't appear to be as willing as his sometime-political partner Gary Randall to leave this off the ballots. He asks his "Prayer Warriors" on his church email list

We need to pray for the state of Washington...last night they passed SSB 5336. Our state needs to work hard to get this bill repealed!

Also, pray for me tonight, Channel 13 news at 10:00, that my words will be used as I speak them, unedited, and will be used by God.

He doesn't explain what working hard "to get this bill repealed" will entail, but don't count out a referendum.

Labels: legislature, marriage equality, politics, SB5336

The Washington House easily passed the domestic partnership bill yesterday on a lopsided vote of 63-35 .

Three Republicans voted for the bill -- Shirley Hankins (R-8, Richland), Fred Jarrett (R-41, Mercer Island), and Maureen Walsh (R-16, College Place). Two Democrats voted against the bill, Mark Miloscia (D-30, Federal Way) and Tami Green (D-28, Lakewood).

TVW includes highlights of the abbreviated debate at the start of the April 10 Legislative Week in Review audio program. The full floor debate is also available in audio format only. Debate on the domestic partnership bill (SSB 5336) begins at time-stap 02:

The PI explains the debate process this way:

Under the current balance of power in the House and a three-minute rule that abbreviated debate, Democrats merely waited out a squall of opposition and voted down a flurry of Republican amendments.

Because some of the amendments required a voice vote, the debate is scattered, but here are a few highlights with timestamp:

[02:14:02] Rep. Mark Miloscia, one of the Democrats who voted against the bill said he was in favor of the underlying legislation except for the provision that would allow senior couples to enter into demestic partnerships.

"Our society in its history has treated terribly those individuals with a different sexual orientation those individuals who are gay and lesbian -- couples, even," Miliscia said in the floor debate on an amendment that would have stripped the senior-partnership provisions.

"Many of the institutions and parts of our society have treated these individuals in a horrible manner, and I feel a little guilty about that. And we have to deal with our brothers and sisters who are lesbian in a different way.... And we have to provide rights and protections to them and their families that they need."

But Miloscia argues that the provision that allows senior couples to enter domestic partnerships provides "an alternative to marriage for heterosexual men and women." He argues that this "marriage light" provision would "send the wrong example to our next generation."

Miloscia's amendment would have stripped that provision. It failed, as did all the others, but indicates that the vote was even closer than it appears from the 63-35 vote count alone.

It was a generally reasonable debate. Several of the proposed amendments would have significantly changed the intent or effect of the bill.

The floor discussion on the bill itself begins at 02:28:10 with remarks by Joe McDermott (D-34, West Seattle), one of the original House sponsors of the bill. McDermott admits that "I wish we were here to talk about marriage. Unfortunately in my opinion, we are not. Married couples recieve over 400 rights, responsibilites, and privileges under state law when they make this commitment. But same-sex couples are prohibited from doing this under our marriage laws, as are elderly couples who may suffer significant financial penalty. Therefore, today we advance a domestic partnership registry that provides some immediate protection for these couples."
McDermott went for a flourish with his conclusion: "From the Palouse to Alki Point, across the sate, this bill provides real relief. If you've ever fallen in love, I call on you to support this bill."

During the debate on the bill and the amendments, several opponents charged that supporters were trying to use the bill as "a precursor to same-sex marriage" [02:31:45].

Rep. Lynn Kessler (R-4) appears to assume her most ominous voice as she says, "This is a step, just as the civil right bill last year was a step. And that's the way I see it.... The next step is to solidify the domestic partner relationship in a marriage contract." [02:47:05]

The argument was less effective than it might have been because the supporters of the partnership registry admitted that full marriage equality is, indeed, their ultimate goal.

At a press conference after the vote, Rep. Jamie Pedersen said, "It's not marriage. There are more than 400 state law rights or obligations that don't come with domestic partnership and we are going to have our hands full trying to get those rights and protections, too. "

"Fifteen down, 408 to go," Pedersen added, referring to the oft-repeated list of rights, responsibilities, and privileges bestowed by the state's marriage laws.

At 02:33:00 into the floor debate, Rep. Jim Moeller (D-49, Vancouver), another of the prime sponsors, tells of burying his "gay peers" during the 80s and of the fear that, in death, they would not be able to share the life they'd built with a partner.

At 02:39:50 Rep. Dennis Flannigan (D-27, Tacoma) argues that the bill is a part of a broader long-term stuggle for civil rights. "Those of us who are not gay or lesbian have just as much a stake in this as anyone else." He said he was standing in the chamber only to grant to everyone the same rights. "I'm not here to do anything other than give you what I have, which is the right to visit my sister, to visit my partner, to visit my wife, to visit whomever needs to see me at any moment in any time, to have the right to go out and purchase a tombstone, to do the things that are so simple, so alive to the very purpose of living that I cannot be silent when it seems to me that the souls of the business we're in are at stake. Please support."

At 02:41:00 Rep. Jim McCune (R-2, Graham) gives a summary of the revisionist-historical argument that the chamber should be there to do God's work, which -- he argues -- the bill harms.

02:42:15 "Today, we did something that will help families who care for and love one another," said Rep. Lynn Kessler (D-24, Hoquiam). She recounts her days in the probate department of a Seattle law firm where she saw the effect that a reliable inheritance could have as survivors face the death of a loved one.

02:45:00 Rep. Schindler argues that she is only trying to protect "an institution that has been around for thousands of years." She argues that contract law should be enough for lesbian and gay couples. (She doesn't explain why contract law shouldn't also be adequate for heterosexual couples.)

At 02:49:00 Rep. Jamie Pedersen (D-43, Seattle), another of the bill's prime sponsors, points out that the Supreme Court decision upholding the state's "Defense of Marriage Act" also pointed out the gross unfairness of current law.

Rep. Glenn Anderson (R-5, Roslyn) makes a speech at 02:51:30 that might well be used as a platform plank for the satirical Iniative 557. "It's about children," Anderson inisists. He dismisses the stories that had been recounted in hearings about problems that couples face under current law because, he insists, that "the institution of marriage is about children.... Government's interest is not about how we love each other, but about how we care for our children."

You can hear the final vote, taken without reponse, at 02:58:30.

[5:00 An update adds a press-coference quotation from Jamie Pedersen. Sources linked.]

Labels: I, legislature, marriage equality, politics, SB5336, Washington

Consider this: A domestic partnership bill is introduced into a state legislature but fails to make it through before mandatory adjournment of the session. The state's governor considers the bill important enough highlight it as one of the items he asks legislators to reconsider in a special session.

Where would that be? It might be a good guess that it could happen somewhere in New England. Maybe it will, but that's not where this story comes from. Instead, the story comes from one of the mountain states, New Mexico. The governor is Bill Richardson, who also happens to be running for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination.

Gov. Bill Richardson says lawmakers did great work in the legislative session that ended Saturday - just not enough of it.

The governor said while it was the most productive session in state history, "we still have business to finish."

He said he will call the Legislature back into a special session beginning Tuesday to act on a highway package, ethics measures, crime bills, a domestic partnership proposal, and more.

"We're on a roll, so let's continue that roll," Richardson told a room full of bleary-eyed legislative leaders and cabinet secretaries just after the 60-day session ended, by law, at noon.

In urging the lawmakers to reconsider the domestic partnership bill, Richardson told the legislators, "New Mexico families deserve our respect, no matter their race, creed or sexual orientation."

Contrast Richardson's stance with that of Washington Gov. Christine Gregoire who has given only tepid support to the weaker provisions of this state's domestic partnership legislation. The governor has quietly (oh, so quietly) indicated that she would sign SB 5336, the Washington law, but hasn't gone far out on a limb (or maybe it shoud be called a viaduct on-ramp) to promote it.

The bill in New Mexico that Richardson actively supports is modeled on a California law and is more comprehensive than the law making its way through the Washington legislature.

The proposed law would provide domestic partner rights and benefits, regardless of whether they are same sex. Gov. Bill Richardson, who rescued the bill from its near death in a Senate committee, said he will sign it.

With its passage, New Mexico would join the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Maine, and California in providing domestic partnership or reciprocal beneficiary laws that allow same-sex couples many of the rights that heterosexual couples enjoy.

Richardson's willingness to highlight this law in a special session is even more remarkable because he's running for president. Although all of the other Democratic candidates have indicated at least lukewarm support for something like domestic partnerships, the others have tried to keep the issue off of the front burner in their campaigns.

Of course, it's a sign that you're probably a political junkie if you even knew that Richardson was running along with a pack of others for the presidential nomination. Beltway media have assigned Richardson and the others to a "third tier" of candidates who rarely get mentioned in their frequent stories about Obama, Clinton, and -- sometimes -- Edwards.

This isn't the first time that Richardson has distinguished himself from the pack of candidates on an issue of interest to gay and lesbian folk.

Last week, both Richardson and John Edwards were quick to decry the remarks last week after the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Peter Pace, said the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" (DADT) should stay in place in place because homosexual acts are -- according to Pace -- "immoral."

"I voted against it when I served in Congress," Richardson said. "People should not be judged based on their sexual orientation. Throughout my entire career I have fought for equal rights and against discrimination of any kind."

Richardson said he supports civil unions and he pointed to legislation that he signed into in law that extends civil rights protections based on sexual orientation.

Richardson called Pace's remarks "unfortunate" and said the Bush administration should reject them.

When he was a Congressman in 1993, Richardson had joined a small minortity that voted against DADT.

In constrast, the annointed front-runners for the nomination, Obama and Clinton, both waffled before expressing disagreement with the general's remarks.

Democratic candidates Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama initially tried to sidestep the issue when asked about it this week, but both sought to clarify their opposition to Pace's comments on Thursday.

Obama did not directly answer on Wednesday when asked if same-sex relationships were immoral, Newsday reported. Obama issued a statement on Thursday, saying, "I do not agree with General Pace that homosexuality is immoral. Attempts to divide people like this have consumed too much of our politics over the past six years."

Clinton told ABC News Wednesday that it's for "others to conclude" whether homosexuality is immoral. On Thursday, she put out a statement saying that she'd heard from gay friends who said her answer sounded evasive.

"I should have echoed my colleague Senator John Warner's statement forcefully stating that homosexuality is not immoral because that is what I believe," her statement said.

Blogger Chris Crane contrasted the approaches of the candidates.

On the official campaign "Bill Richardson Blog," a poster argued that the governor's support for LGBTQ issues set him apart from the pack.

He's a principled Westerner who can compromise to get things done, but will always stand strong for our Democratic values when those values are under attack. Human equality, and the dignity of every single person, is a core Democratic value. More people should be asking where all of the major candidates stand on this issue.

Whatever happens in next year's telescoped and front-loaded nomination process, it is refreshing to see that one of the choices -- for now, at least -- is a candidate like Richardson who isn't afraid to address issues of interest to LGBTQ folk. It is unfortunate only that it's so rare in this too-early campaign season.

[Note: See a frequently updated digest of gay news items on our Squidoo gay news page.]

Labels: DADT, politics, SB5336

The state public affairs network, TVW, will present a live webcast and telecast this morning of the House Judiciary Committee which will be voting on SB-5336, the domestic partnership bill that has passed Senate. The meeting is scheduled to start at 8 am.

TVW is on channel 23 on Seattle Comcast systems.

This is one of several bills that will be considered by the committee. Since the bill is almost assured of passage for consideration by the full house, there might not be much debate. But, then again, opponents of the bill attempted to saddle it with complex amendments in the Senate and will probably do much the same thing in the House.

[Update:]

The testimony

An audio archive of the hearing is now available from TVW. It was the first bill considered by the committee. The bill is introduced and a staff summary starts at 1:30 into the archive. Testimony starts from about a dozen people at 6:21 with Rev. Caroline Peterson who speaks in support of domestic partnerships for older adults. At 8:30 Adrea Jesse tells a wonderful story about her "white picket fence family" from Redmond.

Opponents start at 16:10 with several "faith-based" appeals for discrimination along with the classic "agenda" warnings. As happened in the Senate, the Catholic Church and others suggest that the bill should have been made far more complex by attempting to modify the existing rights of blood relatives.

At 23:00 Rep. John Ahern (R-6) suggests that the bill would cost a bunch of money by making a domestic partner eligible for higher Social Security payments. He becomes the first to use the "slippery slope" phrase. Staff explains to him that Social Security payments are governed by federal law which cannot be altered by this state law.

All of the comments are polite and at least arguably tolerant. Most comments follow the usual script from both sides, but an interesting curmudgeonly comment by Rene Lise [spelling unclear] starts at 31:08.

She introduces herself as a "lesbian over 30 years" and tells the legislators that the bill is not supported by "the homosexual community." She says that she has never been subject to discrimination because she's lesbian and claims that "the homosexual of today has more rights and privileges than the heterosexual."

She tells the legislators, "Homosexuals want to be left alone, want to live, love, and be loved."

Labels: legislature, marriage equality, SB5336, TV

Take a moment this weekend to write a note of thanks to your senator if he or she voted yesterday for passage of the domestic partnership bill, SB 5336. And while you're at it, it would be a great idea to write another note to your representatives urging them to vote for the bill when it comes to the House. (Find your legislators with this web form.)

Here's the roll call of votes on the bill. Each name links to the senator's email form at the legislature's website. You'll have to add in your physical address so the system can check to see if you live in the senator's district. (It will still let you send a message even if you don't live in the district.)

Note: In general, the form of a direct email address is last.first@leg.wa.gov. Here is the list of all direct email addresses. Some senators may not monitor for messages at the address, however, so the web form is a safer bet.

These are the senators who voted for passage:

• Berkey, Jean (D-38)
• Brandland, Dale (R-42)
• Brown, Lisa (D-3)
• Eide, Tracey (D-30)
• Fairley, Darlene (D-32)
• Franklin, Rosa (D-29)
• Fraser, Karen (D-22)
• Haugen, Mary Margaret (D-10)
• Hobbs, Steve (D-44)
• Jacobsen, Ken (D-46)
• Kastama, Jim (D-25)
• Kauffman, Claudia (D-47)
• Keiser, Karen (D-33)
• Kilmer, Derek (D-26)
• Kline, Adam (D-37)
• Kohl-Welles, Jeanne (D-36)
• Marr, Chris (D-6)
• McAuliffe, Rosemary (D-1)
• Murray, Ed (D-43)
• Oemig, Eric (D-45)
• Poulsen, Erik (D-34)
• Prentice, Margarita (D-11)
• Pridemore, Craig (D-49)
• Regala, Debbie (D-27)
• Rockefeller, Phil (D-23)
• Spanel, Harriet (D-40)
• Tom, Rodney (D-48)
• Weinstein, Brian (D-41)

Voting Nay: Senators Benton, Carrell, Clements, Delvin, Hargrove, Hatfield, Hewitt, Holmquist, Honeyford, McCaslin, Morton, Parlette, Rasmussen, Roach, Schoesler, Sheldon, Stevens, Swecker, and Zarelli

Excused: Senators Pflug and Shin

Labels: legislature, marriage equality, politics, SB5336, Washington

The domestic partnership bill introduced this year by the legislature's gay caucus passed through over its major hurdle today when it was passed by the Senate on a 28 to 19 vote.

The bill is expected to easily pass in the House where half of the members have signed on as co-sponsors. Gov. Christine Gregoire has indicated that she will sign it when the measure reaches her desk.

Among other things, the bill would allow domestic partners to:

• Inherit when there is no will.
• Give consent for health care if a partner isn't competent.
• Make funeral arrangements.
• Authorize organ and tissue donation.

The bill requires a central state registry of domestic partnerships that would be kept at the Secretary of State's Office. Couples would have to file an affidavit of domestic partnership with the office and pay a filing fee.

A semi-snarky PI blog post includes extensive excerpts from the floor debate that is described by the Times as "long, emotional and at times heated."

Here's part of Ed Murray's speech:

Imagine for a moment if your spouse was in the hospital, if your spouse was in the hospital and dying, and you could not go into your spouses room, you couldn't hold their hand. Well for lesbian and gay families in this state, that has happened and this bill will do the work of justice and end that hurt.

Imagine if you were trying to make the funeral arrangements for your spouse and you couldn't and you couldn't have the right in the future to be buried next to them. That has happened to lesbian and gay families in this state and this bill will do the work of justice and end that hurt.

Imagine that you lose the home that you lovingly created over years, that has happened to gay and lesbian families in this state and this bill will do the work of justice and end that hurt.

There are some who argue against this bill because they believe it will lead to marriage equality for lesbians and gays in this state. Legally it will not and we know that. I wish it would and morally I believe it will, but legally it will not. I hope though, that through this debate you will realize when you hear the stories of our families, that there is really only one answer for all families and that is marriage.

But this bill will not allow me and my partner Michael who we have shared our lives together for 15 years, it will not allow us to marry. We still won't be able to marry. We met when Michael was in his 20's and I was in my 30's and I am in my 50's and still I can't marry.

There are some who argue against this bill because they believe that rights can be purchased, these rights can be purchased at a reasonable price or because it goes against the beliefs of a particular religion. Such a position defies the promise of the American Revolution, the promise of equality that brought so many people to our shores....

My grandparents left a country were rights were purchased, and where a state religion dictated beliefs that were not their own. Our grandparents did not move to this country for their grandchildren to have to purchase rights. We are citizens of a republic not subjects of a monarchy."

An audio webcast of the Senate floor debate is now available from TVW. after the usual housekeeping matters, the debate begins at 47:10 with an amendment by the Republican caucus that tried to circumvent passage of the bill by sending it to a public vote. The amendment was defeated on a vote of 18-29-2.

The actual debate starts with Murray's statement at 55:50. Sen. Val Stevens's (R-39) frightfully bigoted speech in opposition starts at 1:03:00. Hold onto something that can't be tossed before listening to her.

In his more reasoned statement at 1:08:00, Sen. James Hargrove (D-24) introduced the arguments that have been pressed by right-wing discrimination activists like Gary Randall and Joe Fuiten.

At 1:17:17 Sen. Rosa Franklin (D-29) begins a touching statement in support of the bill. She says that she stands on the shoulders of those who came before her, who fought for rights so that she, a grandchild of slaves, could sit in a legislature and vote on such a law. "The civil rights movement... brought people together of all religions... in order to fight for the rights that were denied to Africans Americans. ... Standing on the shoulders of my ancestors -- and I did not get here alone, I got here with the help of everyone ... -- so to my good friend, your partner, and all who contribute, gay lesbian, I support you."

Labels: legislature, marriage equality, politics, SB5336, Washington

If the domestic partnership bill becomes law this year as expected, there will no doubt be celebratory gatherings in Seattle and other cities as there was last year when the civil rights law finally passed.

If it happens, we could expect to see at the Seattle gathering most members of the legislature's informal gay caucus along several pastors and rabbis from Religious Coalition for Equality There would also be the by-now standard parade of executive directors from an alphabet soup of agencies. One name that we probably wouldn't hear and one face that we certainly wouldn't see is that of reclusive Denver philanthropist and former software entrepeneur Tim Gill. We won't hear from him, but if the bill passes, he might deserve as much credit as any of those who take the podium during the celebration.

Gill is profiled in a long article in the current Atlantic Monthly. Former Washington Blade editor and now blogger Chris Craine reflects on his importance to gay politics here and here.

The Atlantic mentions that Washington was one of nine states where Gill targeted contributions in local legislative races that he thought could tip the balance of state control to a more gay-friendly majority. According to the article, the consultants at Gill's action fund compiled a national list of "seventy races in which a key antigay candidate was vulnerable or the outcome of a race was likely to affect control of the legislature."

The article doesn't explain how the Gill Fund affected state races, especially not the ones here in Washington. But a search of Public Disclosure Commission (PDC) records tells more of the story.

In Washington, Gill gave moderate contributions to six candidates, according to Public Disclosure Commission records:

Candidate	Dist/Chamb	DP Spon?	Gill contrib.
Oemig, Eric	45-S	Y	675
Tom, Rodney	48-S	Y	675
Kilmer, Derek	26-S	N	675
Seaquest, Larry	26-H	N	675
Eddy, Deborah	48-H	Y	675
Green, Tami	28-H	N	675

That's an interesting list of candidates. All of them also recieved donations from Equal Rights Washington (ERW) PAC. Five of the six got contributions from Washington Won't Discriminate (WWD), a group that was formed to counter an expected initiative to invalidate last year's civil right law. After the anti-rights initiative failed to get on the ballot, WWD disbanded and distributed the money it had raised to candidates.

Rodney Tom was one of the candidates endorsed by both ERW and SEAMEC, the Seattle Metropolitan Elections Committee. He's a former-Republican turned Democrat who voted for the LGT civil-right bill when he was in the house and ran against conservative Republican Luke Esser for an open senate seat.

Like Tom, Oemig was ran as a Democrat in an eastside district that had long sent only Republicans to Olympia. In its endorsement of Oemig, the PI noted that Oemeg's GOP opponent "votes against the district's interests on too many important issues, including transportation, school funding and gay civil rights."

Oemig eventually won the seat that had been relinquished by Bill Finkbeiner, a Republican who shocked his caucus in 2005 by casting the deciding vote that allowed the LGT civil rights bill to squeak through despite votes against it by a few Democrats.

The election of Tom and Oemig, along with Derek Kilmer's victory in Kitsap County helped the Democrats gain a more solid majority in the senate. Although it's still not certain to pass in the upper house, it's unlikely the domestic partnership bill would have made it through this year without that extra margin.

Without the extra margin of tolerance that the election of Tom, Oemig, and Kilmer provide, the GOP might, instead, have been able to push through its marriage-discrimination amendment this year.

It looks like Gill picked just the kind of tipping-point candidates described in the Atlantic article.

"The strategic piece of the puzzle we'd been missing -- consistent across almost every legislature we examined -- is that it's often just a handful of people, two or three, who introduce the most outrageous legislation and force the rest of their colleagues to vote on it," Gill explained. "If you could reach these few people or neutralize them by flipping the chamber to leaders who would block bad legislation, you?d have a dramatic effect."

All of the candidates that Gill backed in Washington won in tight races. All of them defeated an opponent who had been a vocal opponent of equality of rights.

But still, whatever the significance of the candidates Gill contributed to, $675 is barely enough to make a ripple in campaign funding. It might print a small stack of yard signs or a few stacks of campaign brochures, but it isn't significant by itself. Both Tom and Oemeg won razor-thin victories, however, which means that even small infusions of cash might have made a difference.

An oddity in the contribution figures for those six candidates demonstrates the kind of networking described in the Atlantic article: Most of the candidates on Gill's list also show $675 donations from the same group of six out-of-state donors. In each case, those out-of-staters donated only to candidates on Gill's own list. Some of them donated only to four or five of the Gill-supported candidates.

We've combined the donations of those six out-of-staters into the "Gill group" column in this table. It also shows amounts donated by the Equal Rights Washington (ERW) PAC, by Washington Won't Discriminate (WWD), and by Vashon Island donor George Heidorn, a retired Microsoft engineer, who is one of ERW's largest donors.

Candidate	Dist.	Spn.	Gill group	Heidorn	WWD	ERW	Total
Oemig, Eric	45-S	Y	4725	1400	1400	1400	8925
Tom, Rodney	48-S	Y	4725	1400	1400	1400	8925
Kilmer, Derek	26-S	N	4725	1400	1400	1000	8525
Seaquest, Larry	26-H	N	4725			700	5425
Eddy, Deborah	48-H	Y	3375		1400	700	5475
Green, Tami	28-H	N	4050		700	700	5450

Here's more background on four of the contributors that we've identified as the "Gill group" in this table. WWD, ERW PAC, and Heidorn all donated to a far broader list of legislative candidates.

$4725 tips toward a significant contribution amount for any candidate. When combined with donations from other LGBT-supportive donors, the amounts given by that group of out-of-staters begins to give financial teeth to the "gay agenda" that right-wing groups have often propped up as more powerful and significant than it usually was.

Labels: HB1351, philanthropy, politics, SB5336, tim gill, Washington

The two bills that would grant significant rights to gay, lesbian, or senior unmarried couples have cleared all committee hurdles and are now just a vote in each house away from passage. Gov. Gregoire has indicated she will sign the measure.

Although she told the Times' David Postman that she hasn't yet counted the votes, Lisa Brown (D-Spokane), the senate majority leader said, "I believe we will have enough votes to pass it."

Over half of the legislators in the house have signed on as co-sponsors of the bill, so passage there is virtually assured.

Nonetheless, a right-wing pastor from Bothell is making a last-ditch effort to scuttle at least one of the bills.

House Bill 1351 and Senate Bill 5336 would give partnered gays or lesbians and unmarried seniors rights to visit a partner in the hospital, inherit property when there's no will, and to make decisions on such matters as emergency health care and funeral arrangements.

Even right-wing Bothell pastor Joe Fuiten indicated to the TNT reporter (#) that he thinks the bills will pass. But that hasn't stopped him from issuing an "Urgent Call for Action!" [pdf] that he expects fellow right-wing pastors to distribute during services this Sunday.

In the alert, Fuiten tells fellow discrimination activists that

The constitutional lawyers tell us that a bill like this will be used as the basis for overturning our DOMA laws in federal court. We see this as a critical bill for the eventual imposition of gay marriage upon an unwilling public.

Hoping to strip away just enough votes to defeat the measures, he asks church-goers to contact their legislators about the bills through the legislature's hotline at 800-562-6000.

He, of course, asks callers to tell their legislators to vote against the bills. But that last-minute field-turf-lobbying makes it just as important to contact legislators urging them to vote for the bills. If you're not sure which district you live in, find out by entering your address in the legislature's district-finder (Click the "Find your district" tab). And then call 800-562-6000 and tell your senator and house members that you support SB-5336 or HB-1351 as a matter of basic fairness.

ERW also has a relatively automated email service that allows you to send a customized email message to your legislators.

As we indicated earlier, support for the senate bill has been weak in districts outside of the Puget Sound circle. That makes it especially important for those who live beyond Seattle and the eastside 'burbs to contact senators, since those are the districts that Fuiten's group has been targeting.

That makes a second step even more important for those of us who live within Washington's blue circle: Send emails to friends beyond the inland coast urging them to contact their legislators. (You could even email a link to this post with a personal note if you think that might help. Click the envelope icon below.)

Labels: equal rights, gay news, HB1351, legislature, marriage equality, politics, SB5336, Washington

We missed this on Saturday when he posted it, but the Times' David Postman has a great explanation of what one opponent of the domestic partnership bills is doing to stop the bills.

Right-wing Bothell Pastor Joe Fuiten is sponsoring an intensive lobbying effort to convince selected legislators to vote against both the domestic partnership bills (HB 1351 and SB 5336) and the sex-education bills (HB 1855 and SB 5297) [see prior post]. Postman posts a copy of the robo-call sent to districts represented by members of the House judiciary committee.

Equal Rights Washington sent out an action today alert asking supporters of the bills to contact their legislators and, of course, to contribute money to them so they can counter the money Fuiten's Positive Christian Agenda is pouring into their campaign against the bills.

The domestic partnership bills are still given a good chance of passage, despite the intensive lobbying efforts of Fuiten's group and of his former political partner, discrimination activist Gary Randall of the "Faith and Freedom Network."

Labels: HB1297, HB1351, HB1855, legislature, marriage equality, politics, SB5297, SB5336

In the first of several meetings around the state to prepare for Equality Day lobbying event later this month, advocates of marriage equality met in Olympia last week to discuss the domestic partnership bills (HB1531 and SB5336) and the marriage equality bills.

According to The Olympian,

Josh Friedes, advocacy director for Equal Rights Washington, urged people to tell legislators, as well as neighbors and co-workers, why they support same-sex marriage.

"When people know the truth about our lives, they support us," Friedes said. "We will win if we simply talk to everyone we know."

Attendees also heard from Jerry Hebert, Washington's human-rights commissioner.

"I believe with all of my heart that marriage equality is a natural progression in equal rights," Hebert said. "I believe it's our obligation ... to show the world, not just the state of Washington, that we here are forward-thinking and progressive."

The Senate version of the DP Bill, SB5336, was passed out of committee last week. Its next step is a floor vote which has not yet been scheduled.

Sen. Adam Kline, D-Seattle, one of the bill's sponsors told the Associated Press that the partnership bill is just a small step in granting equal rights to all of the state's citizens. He said that are more than 400 legal rights connected to heterosexual married couples, while the partnership bill addresses only a dozen or so.

"This is hardly a gay-marriage bill," he said. ?We're affording some (rights) to a small minority who do not have the legal right to marry."

The advocates meeting in Olympia, sponsored by Equal Rights Washington and Lambda Legal, was the first of five. A similar meeting will be held Wednesday in Spokane at the Unitarian Church at 4340 West Fort George Wright Dr. A Seattle meeting will be held Thursday at the First Baptist Church, 1111 Harvard Ave. The final meeting will be held Sunday in Vancouver at the YMCA.

The meetings are designed as preparation for major citizen lobbying event, Equality Day, that will take place on the Capitol campus in Olympia on Monday, February 26.

On Equality Day, members of LGBT communities are expected to gather with clergy and people of faith -- both straight and gay -- and with other allies to lobby their legislators to end legal discrimination against gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender individuals and families.

A noontime rally will provide legislators and others an opportunity to hear prominent clergy and community leaders speak in support of gay rights. The Equality Day rally typically draws over 1,500 attendees.

Labels: equal rights, HB1351, legislature, marriage equality, politics, SB5336, Washington

One thing you've got to say for the opponents of the domestic partnership bill over at Faith & Freedom Network (FAFREN): They've figured out these interwebs tubes better than the folks at Equal Rights Washington (ERW).

While ERW sticks with occasional notes to their well-worn old-timey email list-server, FAFREN pumps out frequent updates on their issues by both email and and active blogs.

And it was FAFREN, not surprisingly, that got the first news to the tubes about today's hearing on the DP bill. And, in so doing, offer an early interpretation of the bill that oddly matches the criticism it's been getting from the hipsters at Slog [or maybe it's just the any-way-to-get-at-Pederseners at Slog].

Their report was written by FAFREN Olympia lobbyist Jon Russell and posted not just once, but four times to their site:

SB 5336 grants benefits commonly associated with marriage to same sex partners and unmarried heterosexual couples where at least one partner is over the age of 62.
The committee hearing-room was packed with an overflow audience in another room for large screen viewing. The testimony was broken into a panel of 8. Four people spoke in favor and four spoke against SB 5336.

The proponents of SB 5336 were four middle-aged lesbian women who have all experienced problems in life due to a non-legal standing associated with their choice not to be married [sic. Playing one of their old tunes]. All of the four proponents recognized that all of these domestic benefits are already available to them, but they have to pay more money than a married heterosexual couple to obtain legal contracts.

As for the opponents of the bill, four individuals spoke about the discrimination aspects of this bill. Our side was able to explain that by only limiting benefits to two groups of people, the bill discriminates against other relationships. This bill should also include siblings, a daughter taking care of her ailing mother and so forth. They also made the argument that the bill would most undoubtedly be challenged in court for discrimination of non-married heterosexual couples under the age 62.

The post doesn't mention if FAFREN will lobby to amendments to include more people within the scope of the bill, but it seems logical to expect that they will if this is really what bothers them about it. The post also doesn't explain why siblings or children aren't covered under current family visitation rules.

Russell notes that both a lawyer [unnamed in the post] who testified after the panels and Sen. Ed Murray both said that the difference between civil marriage and domestic partnerships would be "a political and emotional benefit."

Russell was pleased with his activist group's showing at the hearing:

As I sat and watched the faces of the supporters of SB 5336 standing around the room, I could tell we had called them out on their discrimination game. They expected our side to come in and use the same argument of incremental-ism. But truth has been revealed: this is a discriminating bill which is poorly written and, in our opinion, will not stand in a court of law. For this they had no answer.

A liberal State Representative was overheard in the hallway saying, "This most certainly changes the debate."

Labels: equal rights, legislature, marriage equality, politics, SB5336, Washington

The domestic partnership (DP) bill introduced early in this session has garnered 21 co-sponsors in the 49-member Senate and 56 co-sponsors in the 98-member House. Senate cosponsors include both the chamber's majority leader, Lisa Brown of Spokane's 3rd district, and the president pro-tem, Rosa Franklin, who represents Lakewood, Parkland, University Place in Pierce County.

That's a good start, but a map of the Senate sponsors' districts demonstrates the kind of Cascade + Sound curtain that is all too familiar in Washington politics.

Blue on the map shows the districts of the Senate sponsors. There isn't a lot of blue on a statewide map because most of the initial support for the bill comes from Senators who represent heavily populated urban districts. (Legislative districts are drawn to give each a statistically equal population, so more densely populated districts cover less area.)

Even Brown's Spokane district which wraps around Gonzaga is the most densely populated district in that mostly Republican county. There is also a touch of blue in Clark County where Craig Pridemore represents much of Vancouver and the area north toward Hazel Dell.

King County sponsors

• Ed Murray, D-43 Seattle (Capitol Hill, U District)
• Jeanne Kohl-Welles, D-36 Seattle (Queen Anne, Ballard, Fremont)
• Adam Kline, D-37 Seattle (Madrona, Rainier Valley, Seward Park)
• Ken Jacobsen, D-46 Seattle (Laurelhurst, Lake City, Northgate, Greenwood)
• Erik Poulsen, D-34 West Seattle, Vashon Island
• Margarita Prentice, D-11 South Seattle, Tukwila, Renton
• Karen Keiser, D-33 Des Moines, Sea Tac, Kent