Q-Seattle Events: Tacky Tourist Clubs

It has become a sure sign of fall, as G.A.Y. blog points out, when Human Rights Campaign releases the results of its annual survey of corporate policies toward LGBT employees.

The Corporate Equality Index, which this year rates 519 businesses, measures the extent to which employers protect their LGBT employees. 195 companies on this year's survey earned perfect scores on the HRC criteria compared to 138 in last year's version and only 13 on the first survey in 2002. (A larger group of employers has been rated each year.)

The Index rates employers on a scale from 0 to 100 percent on their treatment of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender employees, consumers and investors. The 195 businesses that met all of the criteria employ more than 8.3 million workers, according to HRC.

Local companies did fairly well in the survey with several companies -- Microsoft, Starbucks, WAMU, Nordstrom, REI -- getting perfect scores. Chicago-based Boeing, and San Jose-based Adobe also get perfect scores.

Seattle-based WAMU is one of a minority banking/financial services companies with a perfect score. That's more significant because only 32% of 100 rated companies in that industry achieved the top rank. Bank of America, KeyBank, US Bank, and Wells Fargo also earn perfect scores.

For the first time, Cincinatti-based Macy's joins Nordstrom as one of eight out of 11 apparel/department stores with perfect scores.

Issaquah-based Costco scored a 93 because it doesn't offer some transgender health benefits that are included in the HRC criteria.

Seattle-based Amazon.com scores an 80 because it still fails to provide protection from bias because of gender identity or expression and don't offer diversity training on that issue.

Safeco Corp. earns a 75 rating because it doesn't offer benefits, bias protections, or diversity training for gender-identity issues. 14 of the 29 rated insurance companies on the survey garnered perfect ratings, putting Safeco in the middle of the pack for that industry, but far better than AIG's 30 rating.

Federal Way's Weyerhaeuser Co. is scored at 75 because it offers a limited array of health benefits to unmarried partners of employees.

Among many law firms on the survey, Seattle's Perkins Coie is scored at 85 because it doesn't offer benefits to transgender employees and doesn't include gender identity issues in its employee handbook.

Among the 57 companies that have newly achieved a perfect score of 100 percent are: Allstate Insurance Co.(ALL), Electronic Arts Inc. (ERTS), Esurance Inc., J.C. Penney Co. Inc. (JCP), KeyCorp (KEY), Macy?s Inc. (M), Marriott International Inc. (MAR), Mastercard Inc. (MA), Waste Management Inc. (WMI) and Yahoo! Inc. (YHOO).

Although this year's version isn't yet available, HRC will eventually compile the survey results into a consumer-oriented brochure called "Buying for Equality". One company that remains firmly at the bottom in the current results is Houston-based Exxon Mobil which maintains its 0 rating -- making it one of the most hostile companies on the index. BP America and Chevron, by contrast, retain their perfect 100 ratings on this year's survey.

Cincinnati-based Kroger, which owns dominant local supermarket brands QFC and Fred Meyer, improved its score somewhat -- moving up to 75 from last year's miserable 35 rating. That score ties it with Safeway. The company that owns Albertson's -- SuperValue, Inc. -- gets a perfect score.

Labels: activism, business, equal rights

Under pressure of a lawsuit like that filed against Bellevue earlier this year, the Redmond City Council this week voted unanimously to grant benefits to the domestic partners of city employees that are equivalent to those offered to spouses of married employees. The move came only after the Eastside city had recieved a letter threatening suit by Lambda Legal.

Lambda Legal had threatened the city with legal action on behalf of two veteran city police officers, Cmdr. Kristi Wilson and Lt. Betsy Lawrence. In a strongly worded letter to the city on June 19, the organization called on city leaders to heed years of requests on the part of both employees and several unions, and grant equal benefits to all employees.

"We are pleased that Redmond has joined its municipal neighbors and other mainstream employers by adopting an equal family benefits plan for its gay and lesbian employees, said Lambda Legal Staff Attorney Tara Borelli. "Other cities should follow Redmond's lead by recognizing that their dedicated lesbian and gay employees deserve equal pay for equal work."

PI columnist Susan Paynter had given Redmond's council members added incentive to finally equalize its benefits package in a strongly-worded column published the morning before the vote was taken.

It's not a new benefit; it's one the city already provides. Certainly it's not "special treatment," says Redmond Police Cmdr. Kristi Wilson, a 20-year law enforcement veteran with 14 years on the Redmond force.

And, contrary to what cities and companies always say just before they cave, it's really not about money.

"If I were to leave (the job), they likely would hire a heterosexual to replace me and have to provide the same benefit they're denying me," Wilson told me. "The financial aspect just doesn't hold water. Look at the hundreds of companies around us. Microsoft, lots of other municipalities. The state. And they're not in bankruptcy."

The health-coverage scare struck home in January when Wilson was diagnosed with breast cancer. Thank God it wasn't her partner who wouldn't have been covered, or something catastrophic striking their two kids, now nearly 6 and 3 1/2 years old.

Equal benefits actually give employers an advantage in hiring and holding on to high-quality workers, not to mention the fact that it's just plain right, Wilson says. "There are human beings attached to this issue. I'm not an unknown commodity. They know me. My partner stays home to raise our kids. We are mainstream America."

Paynter's column, coming on the heels of Lambda's letter, may have helped humanize the issue for the council.

Redmond Police Lt. Betsy Lawrence has 23 years in law enforcement. She and her partner have five kids -- all but one of whom lives with them full time -- to feed and care for. And she has a deep sadness about the way we seem to crawl toward equality. "Employees with same-sex partners deserve the same compensations as those who are able to marry their different-sex partners," she said.

Ultimately, she'd love some legislative stroke of the pen to put this patchwork approach to bed. But, for now, this seems to be the way we do it.
Lawrence lauds the Redmond Police Department as the best bunch of dedicated, fair-minded folks she's ever worked with. If it were up to them, she said, they'd do this today. Instead, it's at the door of City Hall. ...

But, for Lawrence, her partner, and their kids -- 15, 11 and 5 and 19-month-old twins -- it's a matter of basic security. When the twins were born a month premature, the fragility of both their health and the family finances really hit her. Had she not rushed her already prepared adoption paper work to the courthouse within hours of the birth, hundreds of thousands of dollars from a month of ICU costs would not have been covered.

Lawrence thinks that everyone who works -- certainly those with jobs that put them in jeopardy -- ought to be able to handle a health care crisis without facing financial ruin.

She went into law enforcement in the first place in order to make people feel safer, to ensure that those who've already been hurt won't be harmed any more. "I just want the best for everyone, really," she said.

Labels: equal rights, politics, Washington

Just weeks after Bellevue responded to a lawsuit by allowing domestic partners of city employees to get the same benefits afforded spouses of married employees, Pierce County will consider following suit.

The Tacoma News Tribune reports that the county executive, John Ladenburg, announced the plan Tuesday. It's expected to be introduced to the county council next month.

Under the plan, the county would extend medical, dental and sick leave benefits to domestic partners for both same- and opposite-sex relationships. The county has no estimate of how many domestic partners would be eligible.

"We're joining the many cities and counties around the country that already provide benefits to employee partners," Ladenburg said in a news release. "It puts us on equal footing when it comes to attracting and keeping good employees."

In addition to Bellevue, King and Snohomish Counties, and Seattle, Burien, and Spokane offer similar plans to their employees.

Labels: equal rights, marriage equality, politics, Washington

Bellevue's city council voted unanimously last night to grant to the domestic partners of city employees the same benefits now offered to married spouses of employees.

"It's definitely an exciting night and a giant leap forward for the city of Bellevue," George Einsetler, a Bellevue 911 dispatcher, told the Seattle Times.

Lambda Legal filed suit in April against the city on behalf of Einsetler and two firefighters who had been denied benefits for their partners. On May 14, the union representing Bellevue firefighters joined the suit. In a letter to Bellevue's mayor and council, International Association of Firefighters (IAFF) Local 1604 wrote, "We strongly urge the City Council to adopt a broad based domestic partner benefits program."

Bellevue firefighter Larry deGroen turned to Lambda Legal after being denied one day bereavement leave when his partner's father died.

deGroen told KING5, "I don't think I deserve to be treated like a second-class citizen, and I don't want my gay and lesbian co-workers to feel the pain that I felt in being told that my family doesn't matter... I think this lawsuit has really shown that... the time is right for the City of Bellevue to move forward."

deGroen is a firefighter and paramedic in Bellevue and has been an employee of the city for more than 12 years. He and life partner Tom Dixon have been together for more than 16 years.

Einsetler is the city's lead 911 dispatcher, and has been a city employee for 13 years. He and his life partner, Cameron Murdock, have been in a committed relationship for more than three years.

The other firefighter named in the suit, Faun Patzer, has a 17-year career as a Bellevue firefighter, and was the first female firefighter to successfully complete the city's prestigious paramedic training program. She has been with life partner Carrie Wurzburg for over four years.

IAFF had pressed for the domestic partner benefits in recent contract negotiations but had been rebuffed by the city.

After Lambda filed its suit in April, the city council directed staff to finally develop a "strategy" for equalizing city benefits. The council voted last night to adopt the staff recommendations, but benefits will not be implemented until the city's human resources department renegotiates contracts with unions, including IAFF.

In a May 14 letter to the city council, Lambda's lawyers for the case, Jennifer Pizer and Tara Borelli, wrote,

Lambda Legal and Local 1604 are delighted that the City Council is considering the adoption of a domestic partner benefits plan. As the plaintiffs in the deGroen lawsuit know well, a denial of family-support benefits inflicts real harms on dedicated, loyal City employees. Lambda Legal and Local 1604 therefore urge the City Council immediately to end the City's restriction of those benefits to only married employees.

King County and Seattle have both granted benefits to domestic partners for several years, as has the state, Snohomish County and other cities. The Seattle Times report notes that lack of benefits in Bellevue might have cost the city some employees.

Several gay employees have left the city in recent years because of the lack of benefits, according to the employees involved in the suit.

[Bellevue Mayor Grant] Degginger said he hopes the new benefits will help the city retain and recruit workers. "It's a challenging job market out there," he said.

Labels: equal rights, marriage equality, politics, Washington

The National Gay & Lesbian Task Force has released results of what they call "the largest-ever national survey of Asian and Pacific Islander (API) lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) Americans."

The Task Force study of the results is titled Living in the Margins and shows high reported rates of discrimination.

Nearly every respondent (98 percent) had experienced at least one form of discrimination and/or harassment in their lives.

• Eighty-five percent had experienced discrimination and/or harassment based on their race or ethnicity
• Seventy-five percent reported that they had experienced discrimination and/or harassment based on their sexual orientation
• Nearly seven in ten (69 percent) transgender respondents said they had experienced discrimination because they were transgender.
• Nearly all respondents (89 percent) agreed that homophobia and/or transphobia is a problem within the broader API community.
• Seventy-eight percent agreed that API LGBT people experience racism within the predominantly white LGBT community.

A Task Force press release on the study quotes Mala Nagarajan of Trikone-Northwest in Seattle. "The lives of Asians and Pacific Islanders are complex," Nagarajan said, "and they are made invisible by popular perceptions of our community as 'the model minority.' This report helps shatter those myths and raises important issues from which we as a community can and need to mobilize."

Despite being the "largest ever" such survey, it still draws data from what strikes us as a relatively small sample. We're far from statistics experts, and the Task Force report doesn't list the survey's margin of error, but the data is drawn from "more than 860 respondents" in 38 states and the District of Columbia. That looks to our inexpert eye like a small group, which means that some of the results might be skewed.

The Task Force collaborated with API LGBT community organizations to administer the survey. The results show a high level of political involvement among respondents.

67 percent reported that they planned to vote in the 2006 mid-term election (approximately 20 percent reported that they were ineligible to vote).

Of those eligible to vote, a strong majority (67 percent) of respondents were affiliated with the Democratic Party, with 20 percent not affiliated with any political party. Two percent were Republican.

Strong majorities of respondents also reported that they participate in other political activities, including signing petitions (81 percent), participating in marches or rallies (65 percent) and contacting their elected officials (55 percent).

This is a point where the sample size and the methods of finding respondents -- through community organizations that are more likely to attract politically active members -- might lead to imbalanced results.

But, despite those possible problems, it's a fascinating report that goes a long way toward fulfilling the study's goal:

to collect basic demographic data on API LGBT Americans and quantitatively analyze the effect of multiple minority identities on their experiences of discrimination and harassment, as well as their political and civic participation.

The study authors conclude in the report's Executive Summary:

This study reveals insights into the lived experiences of API LGBT people. Through understanding the intersections of racism, homophobia/transphobia, sexism and classism and how these affect API LGBT people, key issues emerge as recurring opportunities for proactive organizing. The issues addressed in this report cut to the heart of community members' experiences as a racial or ethnic minority in predominantly white LGBT settings, and likewise, as LGBT participants in predominantly heterosexual API environments.

An anecdotal example of the complexity demonstrated by the survey data is provided on the website of the Seattle group Tricone-Northwest. Tricone describes itself as "a vibrant, diverse group of individuals creating a social, supportive, educational, and political space for differently oriented South Asians and their family, friends and community."

The group's goal is to "to create a safe and inclusive world where differently oriented South Asians can freely express themselves and reach their unlimited potential by building community, increasing social and political visibility, and promoting racial and sexual equality."

These kinds of statements are usually hammered out by consensus in group meetings. Notice that even the usual alphabet soup of "LGBTQA" (choose at least three) doesn't seem to work. Instead, the group shows the complex nature of its intended membership by using the term "differently oriented."

They describe the term:

By differently oriented we mean those individuals who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or queer and those who choose not to accept a label or prefer other identities such as hijra, kothi, meti, men who have sex with men (MSM) or women who have sex with women (WSW).

The survey breaks out results for the 30 respondents who live in Washington. That's a tiny sample size, but the results are generally in line with the overall survey results with a few notable exceptions. Washington respondents were more politically active, with 80% saying they planned to vote in the upcoming elections, compared with 67% of those in the overall survey.

Within the small and politically active sample, Washington respondents also identified slightly different political priorities, showing more interest in two issues -- marriage equality and discrimination -- recently addressed (partly) by the state legislature.

• Marriage equality ---------------- WA: 40%, Overall: 35%
• Immigration ----------------------- WA: 37%, Overall: 32%
• Media representations ---------- WA: 33%, Overall: 37%
• Job discrimination/ harassment - WA: 33%, Overall: 29%
• Hate violence/harassment -------- WA: 33%, Overall: 39%

In the overall results, one-third of respondents reported being in a committed relationship, and 10 percent had a domestic partner. Washington respondents were more likely to be partnered, with more than double the number having a "domestic partner" even before the state-wide DP registry takes effect. In Washington 20% of respondents reported being in a committed relationship, 23% had a domestic partner, 7% were dating and 37% were single. The remaining chose various other categories.

The Washington sample shows how the issue of labels plays out in the numbers (where respondents could choose multiple labels). Results from the larger survey are included in square brackets:

50% self-identified as gay [47%], 27% as lesbian [19%], and 3% bisexual [9%], while 20% identified as "queer" [20%]. The remaining chose various other categories.

Local LGBT groups should note one startling stat in the Washington breakout. The Washington respondents were more likely to report "that API LGBT people experience racism/ethnic insensitivity within the predominantly white LGBT community." 87% of the Washington respondents agreed with that statement compared with 78% in the overall survey. Again, the small sample size might skew things, but the number indicates that there is probably much work to do in these parts. The number is high here and elsewhere despite long-time presence from API groups in local Pride marches and in some community organizations.

Labels: equal rights, gay news, gay organization, Seattle, Washington

Oregon Gov. Ted Kulongkoski appeared delighted Wednesday (see video below) as he signed into law a bill that protects LGBT citizens of that state from discrimination in employment, housing and public accommodations.

An analysis by the National Gay & Lesbian Task Force shows that 52% of the US population will be protected by state anti-bias laws when the Oregon measure and similar bills in three other states take effect.

Since Jan. 1, 2007, the legislatures in four states -- an all-time high -- have passed nondiscrimination laws. Three of those states -- Iowa, Oregon and Colorado -- moved to extend protections to lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people, and the Vermont Legislature passed a bill amending its existing nondiscrimination laws to include transgender people. As a result, the percentage of the U.S. population living in jurisdictions protecting lesbian, gay and bisexual people from discrimination will rise to 52 percent, crossing the halfway mark for the first time. The laws of Iowa, Oregon and Vermont prohibit discrimination in employment, housing and public accommodations, among other categories; Colorado?s law covers employment only.

Kulongoski had a special reason to be pleased with the measure he signed this week because he had co-sponsored a bill in the 1975 legislature that would have added sexual orientation to Oregon's civil-rights law. As happened here in Washington where a similar anti-discrimination bill passed in 2006, the anti-bias bill rattled around in the Oregon legislature for decades before its final passage.

When the anti-bias law takes effect there in January, 2008 Oregon will join Washington and California in granting broad protections from discrimination. In a story that offers further analysis of the NGLTF date, the Ohio gay paper Gay People's Chronicle points out that the anti-bias laws fall into clusters

State laws group in four geographical areas: the Northeast including all of New England with New York, New Jersey and Maryland; the three West Coast states plus Nevada and Hawaii; a Midwest cluster with Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois and Iowa; and pair of mountain neighbors, Colorado and New Mexico.

Oregonian video via QPDX blog.

Labels: equal rights, LGBTQ, oregon

The long-running attempt by some of Alaska's legislators to deny court-ordered benefits to the same-sex partners of several dozen state employees hit a roadblock Monday when the House declined to authorize a constitutional amendment to block the benefits.

The push for a constitutional amendment blocking same-sex benefits hit a roadblock Monday when a resolution proposing the amendment failed to pass the House.

Rep. John Coghill, a Republican from North Pole and sponsor of the proposal, said he was disappointed by the vote but not surprised.

The House voted 22-14 in favor of the resolution, with four members excused; 27 votes -- representing two thirds of House members -- were needed for approval.

Coghill requested the House be allowed to vote again at a later date, and said after the floor session that he might be able to get two House members to change their minds.

But Coghill acknowledged he needed more than two extra votes.

"I don?t know if I can get it back," he said.

An AP story from Anchorage Daily News (free registration required) offers this summary of the long and expensive attempt spearheaded by Coghill to deny the benefits.

The court fight over the benefits has gone on for years. It ended when the state Supreme Court in October 2005 ordered the state to provide benefits to partners of gay employees. The court found that denying the benefits to same-sex domestic partners violated the state constitution's guarantee of equal protection.

Further political and legal wrangling postponed the benefits until the state's high court this winter told the state it was tired of the delays and ordered it to provide the benefits as of Jan. 1.

During the open enrollment period, 67 state employees signed up their partners for benefits, according to the state Department of Administration. Based on the average claim costs in 2006, the 67 new enrollees could cost the state about $350,000 a year.

In an April 3 advisory vote, 53 percent of Alaska voters said lawmakers should send the proposed constitutional amendment to the November 2008 ballot. However, that vote -- which cost the state about $775,000 -- had no binding authority.

A Senate resolution that also would have to pass along with Coghill's House measure hasn't yet made it out of committee. The Legislature adjourns May 16.

Labels: Alaska, equal rights

Alaskans had the chance to play the game we played last month here in Seattle when they were asked to weigh in on an expensive advisory vote. We were voting about what to do with an rickety old highway on the waterfront. They voted yesterday on what to do about a few government employees who were granted insurance benefits for their same-sex partners by a state court ruling.

Voters were asked if they wanted the legislature to craft an amendment that would deny benefits to the domestic partners of state and municipal employees.

State employees have been eligible for the benefits since the start of this year. Domestic partners of employees of the University of Alaska, city of Juneau, municipality of Anchorage and other public entities have been eligible for benefits for longer than that, and also would lose them under the proposed amendment.

And the voters decided-- well... Both sides are still arguing about what the voters decided. With virtually all precincts counted Wednesday morning, 53.4% favored holding a vote to amend the state's constitution. 46.6% voted against voting on an amendment.

Rep. John Coghill, a Republican from the town of North Pole who's been pushing hard for the amendment, spun the vote as a victory for his campaign. "I'm going to say to my colleagues, 'They said yes. Give us a constitutional amendment we can debate on,'" Coghill told the press Tuesday night.

But opponents of the amendment who have managed to bottle it up in the legislature for over a year said that the margin of the vote and the small number of voters who turned out at the polls sends a different message. Jesse Cross-Call of the Alaskans Together campaign against the constitutional amendment was positive Tuesday night, despite trailing at the polls.

"The other side is looking for an overwhelming vote, and I really don't think we're seeing an overwhelming vote tonight," he said.

Republicans control both houses of the Alaska Legislature. Their caucus opposes the benefits, but their leaders have been unable to win the necessary two-thirds vote in each house to place a constitutional amendment on the ballot. GOP leaders had hoped to persuade reluctant colleagues with the advisory vote, which is estimated to have cost the state $1.2 million.

State Sen. Kim Elton, D-Juneau, who opposes the amendment, called the results of the vote "resoundingly not definitive."

Such a close vote is unlikely to win more support for the measure in the Senate, he said.

"They didn't have it last year, and they're further away this year," he said.

[Quotes from Juneau Empire report. Registration required.]

A column in today's Juneau Empire from a voter who cast a "No" ballot, hints at some of the other issues that played into the balloting:

[I]t flies in the face of fiscal conservatism to spend more than $1 million of scarce public funds for an ancillary exercise in gauging public opinion. I am quite certain a far more exact picture of public sentiment on the underlying issue would result if Dave Dittman or another reputable pollster were given a fraction of the money and allowed to conduct a scientific survey.

Benjamin Brown says that legislators failed in their duty by approving the advisory vote.

A dispassionate analysis of the advisory vote, if one is possible, shows some value-neutral reasons to vote in the negative. I was particularly taken by the analysis of the League of Women Voters, which pointed out that when we elect legislators, we empower them to introduce the resolutions necessary to bring constitutional amendments before voters. It is not the ordinary course of business to conduct costly statewide elections to get a legislator to muster the courage to drop a bill or resolution in the hopper.

Activists who favor amending the state's constitution tried to cast the vote as a plebiscite on gay marriage

The signs are popping up all over town: "Vote Yes -- Protect Marriage."

Jim Minnery with a group called Alaska Family Action is behind the signs.

"We're often identified as the bigots and the hate-filled religious radicals, and in fact, what we're trying to do is have an open dialogue on what the vote was in 1998," said Minnery.

In 1998, Alaska voters passed a constitutional amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman.

In 2005, the state Supreme Court ruled the state and municipalities must offer employment benefits to partners of same-sex couples.

"What the Supreme Court said was that because gay and lesbian couples cannot get married in our state, we should give them benefits that are equivalent to marriage and basically in our view create a counterfeit marriage in everything but name," said Minnery.

"The people of Alaska dealt with marriage in 1998," said Jesse Cross-Call, Alaskans Together campaign manager. "What we're talking about Tuesday is benefits and if you look at the language on the advisory vote the word benefits is in there. The word marriage is not."

An Associated Press report on the vote offers this summary:

The court fight over the benefits has gone on for years. It ended when the state Supreme Court in October 2005 ordered the state to provide benefits to partners of gay employees. The court found that denying the benefits to same-sex domestic partners violated the state?s constitution?s guarantee of equal protection.

Further political and legal wrangling delayed the benefits until the state?s high court this winter told the state it was tired of the delays and ordered it to provide the benefits as of Jan. 1.

During the open enrollment period, 67 state employees signed up their partners for benefits, according to the state Department of Administration. Based on the average claim costs in 2006, the 67 new enrollees could cost the state about $350,000 a year.

Labels: Alaska, equal rights, politics

In Wednesday's Seattle Times, columnist Danny Westneat asks a politically incorrect question that many others have been asking: Why doesn't the state let churches keep the word "marriage" for themselves and abandon regulation of "civil marriage" licenses altogether.

I have long thought the solution to the marriage fight is to get government out of the marriage business. Let churches marry -- or refuse to marry -- whomever they choose. Have the state support families through civil contracts. For the most part, families are what they define themselves to be.

It's not a new argument. Local columnist Michael Kinsley argued for a similar solution years ago in Slate.

Westneat points out that heterosexual couples have been redefining "marriage" for years.

For the first time in more than a century, married households now are the minority in America. In Seattle, a whopping 67 percent of households are headed by unmarried adults.

A Washington Post story Tuesday said marriage now is "a luxury item" that "only the well educated and well paid are interested in."

That leaves a lot of families that don't fit the old stereotype. Most are heterosexual. If we're giving the oldest ones a new legal option for familydom, why not the rest? The middle-aged, the twentysomethings? Any couple that live together and care for one another?

So I agree: Why can't it be for everyone?

The answer is that because once it is for everyone, the rationale for keeping marriage laws as exclusive as they are evaporates. There'd be no reason for marriage laws at all.

It's an argument that is often advanced in web posts about the issue, but don't expect to see this kind of argument picked up anytime soon by marriage equality groups like Equal Rights Washington or Legal Marriage Alliance. Although the original charges of a "homosexual agenda" were overblown when they first appeared over a decade ago, gay activist groups eventually recognized that it would be valuable to adopt some kind of agenda even for the wildly diverse viewpoints of the LGBTQ folks they hoped to represent. And the word "marriage" is very much a part of the agenda adopted by activist groups.

Westneat found out why:

Rick Bartholomew, a family attorney in Olympia who backs [the domestic partnership] bill, says the path to equality is to grant gay marriage. He said my idea of instead giving everyone the same options for domestic partnerships is nuts.

"If you think it's tough winning gays the right to marry, wait until you propose to end civil marriage," he said. "That's a complete non-starter."

What's odd, however, is that religious groups including the Catholic Church and Gary Randall's pro-discrimination lobby group, Faith & Freedom Network tried to extend the domestic partnership bill to include a wider array of non-married couples. Theirs was not a genuine attempt to broaden rights to cover all, but rather an attempt to sabotage the DP bill by adding complex array of rules and regulations to it. But still, they were the ones who proposed the notion of a broadly available "marriage light" that would probably do more to make the government program of civil marriage even more irrelevant than it already is.

We're not going to see marriage equality groups like ERW supporting this notion of "marriage light" any time soon. Their agenda is tied maintaining civil marriage as a state program.

It's an example of the strange-bedfellow syndrome in politics wherein both the groups opposed to and supporting marriage for gay and lesbian couples insist that marriage itself as a government institution should be supported. It has become even odder in this year's legislature as anti-equality groups have tried to extend "marriage light" in the legislature to cover a broader group of people while the gay activist groups and legislators were busy protecting marriage -- as a civil contract -- from dilution.

Labels: equal rights, marriage equality, politics

Because it can't enforce state rules on employee benefits covered by a federal statute, the state's Human Rights Commission yesterday declined the rule on the substance of the first case brought before it under the state's newly modified civil rights law.

The measure protects gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered Washingtonians from discrimination in matters of housing, lending, employment, and insurance. But most insurance programs offered by private employers are covered under the 1974 federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) which supersedes state law.

Senator Ed Murray, who guided the civil rights law through most of its 30-year journey in the legislature, told reporters that he wasn't surprised by the ruling. "We can't regulate the federal insurance market," he said. "That would be true of any health care issue we're talking about right now."

"We never addressed the issue of health benefits in the bill -- just as the underlying anti-discrimination law does not address the issue of health benefits," said state Sen. Ed Murray, D-Seattle, a prime sponsor of last year's bill.

"Frankly, that's a separate discussion, and one that we're having this legislative session, as we seek to extend domestic partnership benefits for same-sex couples," he said.

"There's no story here. Our progress has not been curtailed. Our protections remain in place."

The case was brought by a woman named Sandi Scott-Moore who worked for Honeywell International in Redmond. Scott-Moore claimed discrimination because Honeywell offered insurance benefits to the unmarried domestic partners of lesbian and gay employees, but did not offer similar benefits for her unmarried male partner.

The Right Commission, which is charged with investigating civil right complaints, did not rule on the substance of Scott-Moore's complaint because its investigators determined that federal law applies in the situation.

"Effectively, because of the federal law, in this type of case, our hands are tied," said commission director Mark Brenman.

Brenman said the hole in the state law's coverage illustrates the need for federal statutes prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation.

"It's not pointing up a problem with the state law," Brenman said. "It's pointing up a problem with the lack of protection on the federal level."

A federal employment non-discrimination act (ENDA) has been introduced for many years in Congress, but has rarely gone beyond preliminary hearings. The law is expected to do better under the Democratic leadership of the current session.

Labels: equal rights, politics, 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

Legislators in Alaska made another bizarre move this week in their years-long effort to deny court-ordered benefits to the partners of LGBT state employees. The state house voted to authorize a non-binding advisory vote on the issue. The balloting would cost the state about $1.2 million, according to some lawmakers. That's about four times the annual cost of the benefits that the legislature is refusing to pay.

The ballot measure was first approved in a special session last November. This week's vote occurred after its Republican sponsor offered another bill to cancel the election.

"I still think that's the right thing to do, to ask the question. I was just really pondering, is it the right time, can we get enough information out?" Rep. John Coghill, R-North Pole, said when he introduced the bill.

But then Coghill, who had been the prime sponsor of the bill that set up the ballot, appeared to change his mind again and decided he might let it go ahead.

One exasperated Democrat in the Republican-controlled house commented, "If our purpose is to find out what Alaskans think about same-sex benefits, we should pay 12,000 bucks and get a scientific statewide opinion poll, not pay $1.2 million for an unscientific opinion poll."

Several Democrats have offered a bill that would delay the vote until the legislature to passes a special $1.2 million appropriation to pay for the vote.

All of this stems from a lengthy series of court cases responding to a 1999 suit that was filed by the ACLU and nine state employees in 1999. After several circuits through the judicial system, the state and the municipality of Anchorage had been given a January 1, 2007 deadline to begin offering the benefits. Anchorage complied and now offers benefits to same-sex partners of city employees.

The state tried to block benefits despite some stern words from the courts that had first mandated the benefits in 2005. The legislature went into an expensive special session late last year to address the issue. They authorized the advisory ballot and also passed a law specifically denying the benefits. That law was deemed unconstitutional, however, by the state's attorney general and was reluctantly vetoed by the state's new governor, Republican Sarah Palin. That allowed benefits to be offered.

The benefit enrollment period for the employees began Jan. 1. AP reports that [#] 55 same-sex dependents are now under state health plans and another 22 are pending, according to the state Department of Administration. The cost of the 77 new enrollees is estimated to be $313,562 a year.

The vote authorized by the legislature would be a non-binding vote because the court ruling that requires the benefits cannot be overcome without an amendment to the state's constitution. It would take a two-thirds vote in both the house and senate to put a proposed amendment on the ballot. Opponents of the benefits have not been able to muster the super-majority needed to put an amendment on the ballot.

In an editorial today, the Anchoage Daily News scolded legislators [free reg required] about their waste of money.

Perhaps legislators are realizing it's a million-dollar public opinion poll dressed up as an election.

This isn't like the 1999 advisory vote that buried a proposal to use some Permanent Fund earnings to help balance the state budget. That was a purely political decision that did not involve the fundamental law of the land and equal-rights protection. The Supreme Court's benefits ruling does.

That leaves foes of same-sex benefits a straightforward path to follow if they're serious: They need a two-thirds vote of each legislative chamber to put a constitutional amendment before the voters.

If there's passion enough for that, let the Legislature try to summon the votes. If not, then let's not bother with a vote that doesn't count. Anchorage Rep. Mike Doogan and 11 of his colleagues have introduced a bill that would stop the special election. If lawmakers act quickly, they can pass the bill and save a million dollars.

Let's cut our losses at the $175,000 already spent on ballot printing and let life go on.

Labels: Alaska, equal rights, gay news, legislature, politics

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

The Rev. Ken Hutcherson now has a number for his initiative "related to discrimination." It will be Initiative 963.

Remember that number, decline if you're asked to sign 963.

Although the number is assigned, the initiative text is not yet available from the secretary of state's site. You should be able to read it shortly by following the link above.

Labels: equal rights, gay news, I-963, initiative, ken hutcherson, politics, Washington

Equal Rights Washington (ERW) has issued a request for contributions as it lobbies for passage in this session of the domestic partnership (DP) bill.

As we said last week after the Senate hearing, opponents of the bill are now arguing that it is discriminatory. Opponents of DP seemed pleased with their lobbying trick. ERW notes

The radical right, the Catholic Conference and religious reactionaries have stooped to a new low. They are arguing that the DP bill discriminates against brothers and sisters because they may not register as Domestic Partners. Never mind that siblings already enjoy the protections such as automatic hospital visitation and inheritance rights that the DP bill would extend to same-sex couples because they are denied the right to marry.

The first hearing for the House version of the bill in the Judiciary Committee will be tomorrow, Wednesday, February 25 starting at 1:30pm, in House Hearing Rm A of John L. O'Brien Building in Olympia, a one minute walk from the Capitol building [get directions]. Remember to sign in, in support of the bill when you arrive.

Here's a page with parking and transit information for the Capitol complex. And here's a more detailed map of the campus.

The Senate hearing last week attracted an overflow crowd. Fundamentalist opponents of the bill are expected to again bring in many to voice their opposition to equality of rights. You are welcome to attend the hearing if you can.

Even if you can't get to Olympia in person, it's important to contact legislators about the DP bills because they're definitely hearing from conservatives who oppose the measure.

Although personal mail (snail-mail type) is considered more effective, email and calls are also important. ERW has an automated form for sending email to a legislator who hasn't signed on as a supporter, and a suggested thank you letter for sponsors of the legislation.

If you'd rather not use the form, find the email address of your legislators using the search feature on the legislature's website.

The snail mail address for Senators is PO Box 404## (substitute your legislative district for the '##'), Olympia WA 98504

Because, apparently, some people still use those things, the fax for Senators is (360) 786-1999.

The general address for House members is PO Box 40600, Olympia WA 98504-0600

They don't have a general fax number.

ERW and Lambda Legal are planning a series of local events throughout the state to discuss the DP bill and other equality lobbying efforts. Seattle's meeting will be Thursday, February 8 at the First Baptist Church on First Hill [get directions]. The meetings will focus on coalition building, education, advocacy, and getting people excited about Equality Day in Olympia, currently set for February 26th in Olympia.

Track the bills progress with the state's nifty bill tracking feature. Here's the House version, 1351. Here's the Senate version, 5336.

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

Prayer Warrior, horse-breeder, quickly washed-out football player, and discrimination activist Ken Hutchinson, who is awaiting review by the Secretary of State's office of his new discrimination initiative, admits to the Seattle Times writer Janet I. Tu that he has a "tremendous ego."

"That's why I played pro football," he said. "I'm taking that same ego and energy that benefited me in football and now putting it in for the glory of God to do his will and his work."

In that regard, his ambitions are bigger than ever. He talks of organizing an international summit: "I am building a force around the world."

And he's starting by trying to build pro-discrimination coalitions with Slavic immigrant churches in the Puget Sound area. Tu takes a look at one of them, in Kent, for today's fawning piece in the Times.

Hutcherson now hopes the alliance will result in signatures for an initiative he filed last week seeking to repeal a state law, passed a year ago, that adds sexual orientation to a state law banning discrimination based on race, gender, religion and other categories.

"We've got a lot of churches to reach," said Hutcherson, who must gather at least 224,800 valid signatures by July 6 to put the initiative on the fall ballot.

"We want to get the Slavic churches, the Russian-speaking churches, the Korean churches, Philippine, Chinese, white, cross-cultural. ... If we're going to win this fight on protecting traditional marriage, we're going to need all churches to work together."

But even if he doesn't eventually get the signatures, Hutcherson is generating plenty of publicity for his ministry at a church in Redmond that holds Sunday services in a public high-school. And he does seem to enjoy that publicity.

Ken Schramm, a fellow who apparently passes for something other than a right wing conservative within Fisher Broadcasting's local media constellation, last week awarded Hutcherson a Schramm bobble-head doll boobie prize called "The Schrammie" that seems to be a regular feature of one of Schramm's programs. Said the Schramm:

It takes a special kind of person to openly advocate for discrimination.

In this instance, it takes a man of stilted thinking; a man of narrow-minded focus, not to mention bigoted determination.

Indeed, in this case it takes...a man of God.

So would Rev. Ken Hutcherson please, step away from the pulpit and come on down.

Last week found the senior pastor at Antioch Bible Church trudging to Olympia to file an initiative that would repeal a state law banning discrimination against gays and lesbians.

It's been a while since we heard or saw one of his commentaries, but Schramm seems downright reasonable in this one instance:

The otherwise personable Rev. Hutcherson is on a crusade to smite those who seek nothing more than fair and equal treatment under the law.

So, for rising to his self-imposed challenge by sinking to an ecclesiastical low; for his disdain of the human condition and his spiteful desire to steal civil rights under the guise of God, take a bow Rev. Hutcherson, 'cause this "Schrammie's" for you.

Of course, he got plenty of emails from good Christians who attempted to explain to him why the man Schramm called "holier-than-thou self-proclaimed tool of God's avenging hand" really is just that. (But who didn't seem to explain why on earth that -- even if it's the case -- should be the basis for a state's laws.)

The reason we're not up on the current state of Mr. Schramm's thinking is this: The closest we ever get to KOMO, KVI, or any of Fisher's radio outlets is the wonderful Blatherwatch blog where Michael Hood is a kind of Perez Hilton of local talk radio (except, or course, that Blatherwatch uses funny and often insightful words instead of silly pictures -- which makes him not at all like Perez).

But even BlatherWatch had to mention Hutcherson clarifying an earlier note about what Ken Hutcherson does in his spare time.

We said Rev. Ken Hutcherson who raises race horses. We were wrong. He wrote to say: "I do not own race horses, they are cutting horses, quarter horses, for roping and cutting out cattle from the herd." The mega-churched ex-Seahawk preacher began his referendum signature drive to undo civil rights legislation for gays on Monday.

Hmm. "Cutting out cattle from the herd." We're not surprised he'd be enjoy that kind of thing.

BlatherWatch adds parenthetically (and probably all too hopefully):

If he doesn't succeed in getting it on the ballot and getting it passed, that'll prove once and for all that God is on the gays' side, and the good reverend will just go away, right?

After reading, in Slog, a reprint of Hutcherson's Prayer Warrior announcement touting yet another in an endless stream of media appearances, Northwest Progressive Institute detected a certain misunderstanding of the whole initiative process.

They kindly schooled the preacher in the technicalities, before concluding,

The real difficulty is getting enough signatures. It's hard to distort what this is about -- legalizing discrimination -- and most Washingtonians aren't interested in condoning bigotry. A signature drive that lacks a ton of money needs superb organization and coordination to make the ballot. At this juncture Hutcherson doesn't appear to have either, and that's good news. We'll be watching closely to see if he gets any help from someone who knows what they're doing.

Labels: equal rights, gay news, I-963, initiative, ken hutcherson, local bites, politics, 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

• Hutcherson on Signorile: Redmond's Rev. Ken, who likes to call himself the "Prayer Warrior" and whose antics are well-covered by Slog, will appear this Friday on The Michelangelo Signorile Show on Sirius Satellite Radio. The show airs 11 am to 3pm (PT) on OutQ, channel 106 on the radio service. They'll be debating Hutcherson's proposed pro-discrimination initiative.
• New cha-cha: The cha-cha is now on Broadway -- not the Pine St. bar, but rather brass dance-steps in the concrete of the new low-income apartment building/Walgreen's store at the corner of Pine and Broadway.
• Old guys reminiscing: The same P-I article adds another paeon to The Elite's Broadway location. The bar's going away party on Broadway will be this Saturday, but it will stay open there until January 31. The grand opening on Olive is still expected in February.
• Odd folks protesting: The legislature passed a bill restricting protests by the rabidly anti-gay Westboro Baptist Church, but only when they happen -- as they too often do in the twisted logic of this "Christian" outfit -- at the funerals of service members.
  

Labels: equal rights, gay bar, gay news, initiative, local bites

Discrimination activist and Eastside preacher Ken Hutcherson on Friday filed his expected pro-discrimination initiative with the Secretary of State. It has not yet been given a number, but is expected to be virtually identical to a version that he filed in November.

Hutcherson filed the new initiative under his name using an Olympia PO Box, Antioch Church telephone numbers, and the email address HutchforTraditionalMarriage@hotmail.com. In November, 2006, he pre-filed an initiative "Related to amending the laws against discrimination." Last year's filing allows for quicker review of the current version. The text of the 2006 initiative is available here, in pdf format.

Hutcherson, a one-time NFL football player who is pastor of a large Redmond church that meets in a school building, achieved a spot of fame in 2005 by protesting Microsoft's then-quiet support for the anti-discrimination law that finally passed last year. Hutcherson managed to get Microsoft to temporarily withdraw its support for the law in 2005, but it was a short victory. After an outcry from employees, the Redmond company reaffirmed its support for the law and backed its passage last year.

After the anti-discrimination law passed last year, Hutcherson announced that he would lead a boycott of Microsoft because of that stance, but little was heard about the boycott beyond an initial flurry of press releases from Hutcherson's church.

Hutcherson's November filing was what liberal blogger David Goldstein called a "warning shot" that had this extra advantage:

By refiling the identical initiative on Jan. 2, with the initiative language already approved, Hutcherson gets a few extra days in 2007 to gather signatures, and four extra weeks this month [Dec. 2006] to organize his anti-fag army. Hutcherson is many things, but stupid is not one of them.

That initiative was, in turn, virtually identical to Tim Eyman's Initiative which failed to qualify for the ballot last year. It "This measure removes references to "sexual orientation" or "sexual preference" including heterosexuality, homosexuality, bisexuality, gender expression, identity, appearance and behavior from the state's law against discrimination in employment, housing, and public accommodations."

Goldstein wasn't impressed by last year's Equal Rights Washington (ERW) spinoff that was set up to battle Eyman's initiative.

It will take far more than a smug (and white) group of Seattle libs launching a web site and handing out flyers to derail Hutcherson. It will take money -- a lot of it. It will take a prolonged statewide media campaign featuring a bipartisan roster of Washington's political, business, and cultural leaders. And it will take serious outreach into Hutcherson's religious base of support, speaking with pastors, other religious leaders, and their congregations about, for example, Jesus' teachings on discrimination, forgiveness, and the judging of others.

Goldstein's smug Seattle-lib dismissal of last year's efforts by the awkwardly named "Washington Won't Discriminate" (which becomes "WWD" and therefore sounds vaguely Cheneyesqe) fails to recognize that WWD was born of two groups, both ERW and the "Religious Coalition for Equality". The Coalition's "Faith Statement in Support of Antidiscrimination" and outreach to religious leaders throughout the state did just what Goldstein says they should have done.

WWD was disbanded after Eyman's initiative failed to qualify, but the campaign certainly seemed to understand the need for media outreach and for the money needed to make that happen. Would their campaign have worked or would they have dismissed as "a smug (and white) group of Seattle libs"? Since the campaign never really got under way, it's impossible to tell. Unfortunately, we'll have another chance this year to find out.

Labels: equal rights, gay news, I-963, initiative, ken hutcherson, politics, Washington

The anti-equality activist at the so-called "Faith & Freedom Network," (aka Gary Randall) reports that a hearing will be held in the House for the domestic partnership bill on Thursday, January 25 at 3:30 p.m. in Olympia.

He promises, "We will be at the hearing."

Labels: equal rights, gay news, HB1351, legislature, marriage equality, politics, 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
• Darlene Fairley, D-32 Shoreline, Lake Forest Park, Kenmore
• Rosemary McAuliffe D-1 Bothell, Mountlake Terrace, Maltby
• Eric Oemig, D-45 Redmond, Woodinville, Duvall
• Rodney Tom, D-48 Bellevue (north), Redmond, Clyde Hill, Medina
• Brian Weinstein, D-41 Bellevue, Mercer Island, Newcastle

Snohomish, Pierce, and Kitsap County sponsors

• Jeane Berkey, D-38 Everett, Marysville
• Steve Hobbs, D-44 Snohomish, Marysville, Lake Stevens, Mill Creek
• Phil Rockefeller, D-23 Bainbrige, Kingston
• Debbie Regala, D-27 Tacoma (Commencement Bay)
• Rosa Franklin, D-29 [President Pro Tem] Lakewood, Parkland, University Place

Other Puget Sound area sponsors

• Harriet Spanel, D-40 Bellingham, San Juan Islands
• Karen Fraser, D-22 Olympia, Tumwater, Lacey

Sponsors from beyond Puget Sound

• Craig Pridemore, D-49 Vancouver, Hazel Dell
• Lisa Brown, D-3 [Majority Leader] Spokane (Gonzaga area)

Sponsorship of a bill is only one sign of the eventual support it might have. The DP bill and its companion marriage equality bill (which doesn't yet have a Senate co-sponsor to join Murray) haven't yet been given even their initial hearings. The DP bill, especially, is likely to gather more support from legislators willing to vote for it, but not to sign on as sponsors.


But the early list of sponsors shows that the bill already runs the risk of being tagged an urban measure. The problem is obvious even in King County where sponsorship support falls off significantly in the south end.

The county's expansive 5th District, which stretches along I-90 from Issaquah to Snoqualamie Pass and includes Maple Valley, is represented in the Senate by Cheryl Pflug, a Republican and in the House by two Republicans, Jay Rodne and Glenn Anderson. Like all members of the GOP caucus, they're keeping their distance from the DP measure.

South of there, the 47th District, encompassing much of the Green River valley including Covington and Black Diamond, is represented by three Democrats, Senator Claudia Kauffman and Reprentatives Geoff Simpson and Pat Sullivan. Although there is significant support in their party caucus for the DP measure, none of those legislators has signed on to sponsor the bill. [Update: Both Rep. Sullivan and Rep. Simpson are co-sponsors of the house bill. Sen. Kauffman has not signed on as a co-sponsor of the senate version.]

The 30th District (Federal Way, Milton, and Pacific) is reprented by two Democrats -- Sen. Tracey Eide and Rep. Mark Miloscia -- and a Republican -- Rep. Skip Priest . None of them have become co-sponsors.

The 31st District, including Auburn, Enumclaw, Sumner, and Buckley, is split between King and Pierce Counties and represented by the Roach family -- Ma' Pam in the Senate and sonny Dan in the House -- and by Democratic Rep. Christopher Hurst. The Roaches are among the more conservative salons in Olympia and are likely to be active opponents of the bill. Hurst is a former cop who returns to the House after leaving his seat six years ago. He contributed to the Democrat's landslide last November by winning a tightly contested race but his is considered a conservative district. He's an unlikely sponsor.

But the eventual fate of the bill will depend on supporters of this baby-step toward equality contacting their legislators in all those parts of the map that aren't colored blue. Equal Rights Washington [ERW] urges supporters to contact legislators. Anti-equality activists are also gearing up to defeat even the relatively innocuous domestic-partnership bill.

The marriage-equality bill is not expected -- even by its sponsors --to pass in this session, but the simpler partnership bill that would grant limited rights and benefits to domestic partners including "hospital visitation, health care decision-making, organ donation decisions, and other issues related to illness, incapacity, and death." [From the bill [pdf].]

The regional and the urban/rural split in sponsorship indicates that bill's fate depends a great deal on the statewide network that both ERW and the Pride Foundation claim to have built. This will become a significant test.

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

The Seattle Times' David Postman reports that the legislature's unofficial gay caucus has now unveiled its two bills for marriage equality.

The bill that would grant equal marriage rights to gay couples is considered a long-term goal. Another bill would create a state-wide domestic partnership registry. The registry bill would be open to heterosexual couples where one partner is at least 62 years old.

It's seen as a first step in marriage equality, said Sen. Ed Murray, D-Seattle. As he and other lawmakers pledged to continue pushing for same-sex marriage, they said they would also work to incrementally increase domestic partnership benefits. They recognize that gay marriage will be difficult to get approved by the Legislature and could take years.

In an AP story on the announcement, Murray called the registry bill a stop-gap measure.

Murray said he wants to make sure at the very least that benefits are extended this year -- but he emphasized that a domestic partnership law is not enough.

"This is not about domestic partnership; this is about marriage," said Murray, the main sponsor of both bills in the Senate. "The only reason we are introducing the domestic partnership bill is to further the cause of educating the public."

The other legislators sponsoring the measure in the House echoed Murray's sentiments.

"Our goal is marriage equity, and we will work for that," said Rep. Joe McDermott, D-Seattle, one of the Legislature's five openly gay lawmakers who are working on the measures. "In the meantime, our effort is to provide immediate relief, immediate benefits, to same-sex couples."

McDermott said the benefits sought in the partnership bill include health-care decision making, funeral planning and inheritance rights.

"An incremental approach provides the opportunity to educate people," said Rep. Dave Upthegrove, D-Des Moines. "People may see that just because these two loved ones can visit each other in the hospital and plan funeral arrangements, the sky isn't falling."

According to the AP story, the domestic partnership measure will be co-sponsored in the Senate by majority leader Lisa Brown (D-Spokane).

"These are very practical issues that same-sex couples face," said Brown, who said she believed the bill had a good chance of passing the Senate.

And they are also issues often faced by senior couples which is why they are included in the domestic partnership bill.

[Update:] And here is Josh Feit's post about the press conference on the boldly redesigned Slog. Feit explains

The incremental approach is certainly about gaining rights, but it's also about highlighting what rights gays and lesbians don?t have. Murray and Pedersen believe this is a way to dramatize the issue for those who may oppose gay marriage....

"What's central to going about it this way," [Rep. Jaime] Pedersen told me, "is that we can make this progress this year. If we were going to do a symbol bill where we don't think we're going to pass it, why don't we just do marriage? Or do comprehensive domestic partnership legislation. We're doing what we can do this year, knowing that we're going to keep on doing this and keep on adding things every session until we get marriage."

[Update 2:] And here's Josh Feit's excellent explanation about the part of the domestic partnership bill that specifically includes hetero senior couples:

There are elderly couples that don't get married because if they do marry, they may lose the pensions that their original spouse left them.

Meanwhile, since they aren't married to their new partner, they don't have any of the hospital visitation rights, funeral arrangment rights etc.. with that new partner. Getting a domestic partnership allows them to collect their previous spouse's pension, while also being able to have rights regarding their new partner.

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

AP (via the PI) has this update on plans to introduce equality bills tomorrow in the legislature:

Two bills dealing with same-sex couples are scheduled to be announced at a press conference Thursday: one to allow same-sex marriage, the other calling for domestic partnership benefits for same-sex couples.

Supporters say the dual approach is necessary to extend benefits such as hospital visitation rights and end-of-life decisions to same-sex couples, while continuing to push for full marriage rights.

"Our goal is marriage equity, and we will work for that," said Rep. Joe McDermott, D-Seattle, one of the Legislature's five openly gay lawmakers who are working on the measures. "In the meantime, our effort is to provide immediate relief, immediate benefits, to same-sex couples."

McDermott said the benefits sought in the partnership bill include health-care decision making, funeral planning and inheritance rights.

"An incremental approach provides the opportunity to educate people," said Rep. Dave Upthegrove, D-Des Moines. "People may see that just because these two loved ones can visit each other in the hospital and plan funeral arrangements, the sky isn't
falling."

Also working on the measures are Rep. Jim Moeller, D-Vancouver, Rep. Jamie Pedersen, D-Seattle, and Sen. Ed Murray, D-Seattle, who spearhead a gay civil-rights bill that became law last year.

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

The five openly gay members of Washington's legislature are expected to introduce bills tomorrow that would grant everyone in the state the same (or similar) rights and privileges to marry that are now enjoyed by a restricted group.

Senator Ed Murray of Seattle's 43rd District, the prime sponsor in the Senate, told the Seattle Times that the marriage equality bill probably won't pass in this year's session.

Murray said he's realistic about the odds of getting a bill passed this year allowing gay and lesbian couples to marry: basically nil.

"It's always hard for people who work on this to realize that most members have not really thought a lot about the issue. Most people in the state have not thought about the issue," said Murray, who led a long and ultimately successful effort to pass gay-rights legislation last year.

"It's going to take a number of years to educate people in the state as a whole and not just the Legislature," he said.

The legislators won't introduce their bills until tommorrow, but anti-equality activists like Gary Randall who calls himself the "Faith and Freedom Network" are already gearing up for a fight:

We do not expect them to immediately put forward a gay marriage bill, but rather several bills that will be incremental steps toward gay marriage.

Make no mistake about it; they do not merely want to extend a few rights and benefits. They want gay marriage.

Times political reporter David Postman notes that the legislators are following the advice of the state's Supreme Court with the bills.

The Legislature's five openly gay members are taking up the state Supreme Court's many hints that lawmakers could craft a bill to legalize same-sex marriage in the state.

They are also following a now common course of dealing with this often contentious issue on the state level rather than in the US Congress. A forthcoming report by the Human Right Campaign Fund finds that state legislatures had considered a broader range of LGBT equality issues -- most of them not directly related to marriage:

The ... bills covered other areas, including sexual orientation discrimination, hate crimes, family recognition, parenting, and education and schools, the HRC report shows.

"State capitols continue to be the epicenter in the quest for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender equality," says an executive summary of HRC?s soon-to-be-released report.

HRC's state legislative director, Carrie Evans, called Washington's passage last year of the long-delayed civil rights measure a highlight of the 2006 political landscape.

"For every step forward, there was a half-step back," said Carrie Evans, HRC's state legislative director.

There were 242 "favorable" bills that "furthered equality," she said and 34 of those passed, up from 24 last year. And 11 of 137 "unfavorable" bills were enacted in 2006, the same as 2005.

The highlight, said Evans, was Washington State's passage of an anti-discrimination law, the 17th to include sexual orientation in a state human rights statute and the ninth to also cover gender identity and expression. She also cited the November vote of Arizona voters rejecting a constitutional amendment against same-sex marriage, civil unions, and more broadly domestic partnerships for gays and straights alike-the first defeat for such a measure-and the narrower margins by which they were passed in seven other states.

Murray had sheparded that measure through the legislature for much of its long slog.

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

The Supremes have spoken with a split decision. Now it's time for the people to speak.

A "community gathering" will be held this afternoon at 2 pm in Cal Anderson Park on Capitol Hill [get directions]. The gathering is sponsored by Marriage Equality Now as "an opportunity to hear from LGBT organizations and elected officials (including State Rep and Senate candidate Ed Murray), and also to let your voice be heard."

Get out to the park on this pleasant Sunday to help send a message to the legislature that we expect them to listen to what Justice Madsen said in her plurality decision:

[G]iven the clear hardship faced by same sex couples evidenced in this lawsuit, the legislature may want to reexamine the impact of the marriage laws on all citizens of this state.

Technorati tags: Washington politics Equal rights Seattle gay groups gay marriage

Labels: equal rights, legislature, politics

This one must really make Tim Eyman crazy.

It looks like Eyman failed yet again, but this time on his real pet project, an anti-transit, anti-tax initiative. Too many fake signatures, eh? Could it be that folks are intentionally signing up with fake names just to, well... make him crazy.

And, yes, we really do think you should click again to view that great Gnarls Barkley video which is just so Tim Eyman.

Oh, but we can't resist... (Just in case you didn't want to click to the other version.)


Technorati tags: Star Wars Gnarls Barkley Eyman Washington politics

Labels: equal rights, initiative, politics, video, Washington

On this, the day when protection from discrimination for LGBT folk became law in the state, Equal Rights Washington [ERW] offers a petition of thanks to the legislators and the governor who passed and signed into law the anti-discrimination measure.

ERW and several other organizations held a celebration of that milestone earlier tonight at the Washington Won't Discriminate offices. If you'd like to share in a more virtual celebration, check out the podcast of last night's "Drinking Liberally" confab in which a number of local bloggers get together to drink and chat about the issues of the week. The first half of last night's program featured a lively discussion of Tim Eyman's spectacular failure.

[Warning: The podcast is a big file that isn't streamed, so you'll need a fast connection to get it.]

The event's host David Goldstein of Horse's Ass explains it this way:

We had a gay old time at Drinking Liberally last night, celebrating Referendum 65's demise by packing our panel with gay men. (Um... so to speak.) Helping us rub Tim Eyman's nose in his latest failure were two of the state's better known homosexuals, 43rd LD Rep. Ed Murray and The Stranger editor and nationally syndicated sex columnist Dan Savage... plus The Stranger's lesser known (and lady-dazzled) Eli Sanders.

The panel then turned to dissing buses and bus riders, pining for the monorail (after all, Savage was there), and reflecting on potential Democratic candidates in 2008.

Tags: Washington politics, equal rights, Seattle, gay groups, eyman, discrimination referendum

Labels: equal rights, Gay events, initiative, politics, Washington

Initiative huckster Tim Eyman and his fundamentalist-preacher allies failed to collect enough signatures to put a referendum on the November ballot that would have rolled back a civil rights measure passed by this year's legislature that added "sexual orientation" and "gender identity" to the state's anti-discrimination measures.

Because the signature campaign was unsuccessful, the civil-rights measure will become law tomorrow. It would have been put on hold until after the November vote if discrimination activists had managed to put the referendum on the ballot.

After he failed to get the measure on the ballot Eyman was criticized by his erstwhile fundamentalist allies who are now blaming Eyman for the failure of their discrimination campaign which had been collecting signatures at many state churches.

Joseph Fuiten, chairman of the Faith and Freedom Network, which helped lead the signature drive, said the failure to get enough signatures does not indicate most people support the gay-rights law.

...The lack of signatures, Fuiten said, tells him that "Tim Eyman has a knack for messing stuff up. He's kind of an interloper on this whole thing in my opinion. Part of the deal is resistance to him." Fuiten said, "There are millions of people in the state of Washington who don't want to see that become law. It's not a question of lack of support. It's really a question of organization and getting the work done."

Former GOP chairman Chris Vance also blasted Eyman, who showed up yesterday to an Olympia press conference wearing a cheap Halloween costume:

"Now he's coming in and hijacking issues and shoving his way into an issue because it's become a business for him. It's how he gets paid," Vance said. "There will be no end to Tim Eyman as long as people are wiling to send him money ... I think it's hurting the legitimate perception of the initiative process. When you've got a clown out there in a Darth Vader suit lying to the press and things like that, it's not good for the initiative and referendum process."

All but one Republican in the state Senate voted against the civil-rights measure in the legislature.

Although the fundamentalists had earlier tried to distance themselves from the initiative huckster, neither Vance nor Fuiten was saying that kind of thing about Eyman yesterday when he was widely expected to turn in enough signatures to get the referendum on the ballot.

Leaders of several mainline Christian denominations, on the other hand, met the press yesterday to decry Eyman's fundamentalist-supported initiative.

"Discrimination against any human being on the basis of race, religion, color, national origin, sex, marital status, disability, or sexual orientation is a moral wrong," Rev. Jon M. Luopa, senior minister of University Unitarian Church, told a news conference Monday at Seattle's Episcopalian Diocesan House. "It is the duty of a democratic government to protect us from such wrong. It is our duty as citizens to hold the government accountable for such protection."

While she retained her lawyerly non-committal stance on gay marriage at a different press conference yesterday, even Governor Christine Gregoire told the press yesterday that she was distressed by the misrepresentations of discrimination activists who had been trying to tie their measure which was about housing, employment, and contracts into the equal-marriage rights debate.

Democratic Gov. Chris Gregoire admonished those who have connected the two issues, suggesting it's an effort to confuse voters.

"That's misleading the public," Gregoire said Monday. "It has nothing to do with gay marriage. It has everything to do with discrimination, and I believe that Washington state's values are fundamentally that we don't discriminate."

[Update] Leaders of a quiet, but ultimately successful anti-discrimination campaign insisted that the failure of referendum backers to gather necessary signatures was a good sign that voters in the state weren't ready to support discrimination.

John Vezina, the Washington Won't Discriminate [WWD] campaign director, is quoted in a Pride Foundation press release:

To not get enough signatures for a referendum -- only half as many are needed as for an initiative -- makes a strong statement that the proponents of the referendum do not represent the vast majority of Washingtonians.

WWD's executive director, Ann Levison, is quoted in the same release:

Our campaign was just getting started and already more than 5,000 people and hundreds of religious organizations, businesses and community groups from around the state had publicly taken a stand in support of keeping the law. I've been involved in many campaigns over the years, and I have never seen an outpouring of support as we have received for making sure the law against discrimination remains the law in our state.

Tags: Washington politics, equal rights, Seattle, gay groups, eyman, discrimination referendum

Labels: equal rights, initiative, politics, Washington

We mentioned the faith-based anti-discrimination petition in an earlier post today, but there's now another more general petition being circulted by Equal Rights Washington [ERW].

Sign the petition online at this address.

The petition states:

Today I join with other advocates from Equal Rights Washington, their friends, family neighbors and co-workers in proclaiming:

I support Washington's Anti-Discrimination law that prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.

Today, I endorse the Washington Won't Discriminate Campaign and authorize the campaign to list my name as an endorser on their website.

I pledge to support Washington Won't Discriminate, the campaign leading the fight to save the law from repeal however I can.

I will vote in the November Election.

The petition doesn't have any particular legal standing, but in a pre-election battle of signatures, getting many names to counter-balance those put on the discrimination referendum may help in the long run.

In a public email decrying the church-based signature-gathering campaign for R-65, ERW states

While it was indeed disturbing to see signature collecting happening at fundamentalist churches, we should all take a moment to honor the churches and synagogues and other houses of worship that have led the movement for LGBT civil rights. Clergy, congregations and lay leaders have long been at the forefront of our human rights movement. Over 500 clergy and lay leaders have already signed a faith statement in support of Washington?s anti-discrimination law drafted by the Religious Coalition for Equality.

ERW has created a printable pdf fact sheet to help those who wish to discuss some of the many misrepresentations being made by R-65 signature gatherers.

Tags: washington politics, equal rights, seattle, gay groups, eyman, discrimination referendum

Labels: equal rights, initiative, politics, Washington

Initiative huckster Tim Eyman last week sent out press releases about what he called "Referendum Sunday" which encouraged ministers at some churches promote signature-gathering for the discrimination referendum, R-65, that he filed. But two non-profit groups that are now spearheading the effort claim they're doing it without Eyman's help, according to The Seattle Times.

"I don't know what Eyman is doing. We're not cooperating with Tim at all on what we're doing," said Gary Randall, president of the Faith and Freedom Network.

Randall said Eyman, who is best known for pushing anti-tax initiatives, was simply the first person to file a ballot measure with the secretary of state after lawmakers passed House Bill 2661 in January. The legislation adds sexual orientation to a state law that bans discrimination based on race, gender, religion and other categories.

Annie Levinson of Washington Won't Discriminate told the Times that she expects the measure to gather the required signatures because of the campaign help from some churches.

The Times story notes,

The religious groups and churches that oppose the gay-rights law have an enormous capacity to gather petition signatures on their own.

That was clear at the Northshore Baptist Church, where more than 2,600 people attended its regular services Sunday.

The church held three services in a large auditorium with balcony seating. Hundreds of people packed the 9:30 a.m. service as Senior Pastor Jan Hettinga urged them to sign petitions to get Referendum 65 on the ballot.

The congregation watched a campaign video prepared by Sound the Alarm, a pro-discrimination group that is campaigning for R-65 signatures.

A long table filled with Referendum 65 petitions in the church lobby was mobbed with people after the service.

The equal rights group Washington Won't Discriminate shows 16 churches and faith-based groups among its list of endorsers. The list includes the Washington Association of Churches and the Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle. Another of WWD's endorsers, the Religious Coalition for Equality, is urging people of faith to sign a statement in support of anti-discrimination.

Tags: washington politics, equal rights, seattle, gay groups, eyman, discrimination referendum

Labels: equal rights, initiative, politics, Washington

Initiative salesman Tim Eyman needs help to get his twin discrimination measures on the ballot this November. He hopes to find help tomorrow at fundamentalist churches that have agreed to host something the huckster is calling "Referendum Sunday".

"That means that this weekend nearly 500,000 voters are going to hear about and talk about our effort to get a public vote on House Bill 2661," Eyman wrote in an e-mail sent to the media and supporters. "They'll be asked to not only sign the petition, but to take petitions home and fill them up and return them next Sunday."

Liberal blogger David Goldstein at the superb horsesass.org has recognized a significant problem with this plan:

If tomorrow, on "Referendum Sunday," these churches distribute petitions and/or canvass for signatures, or parishioners are instructed to do so, I would say that this would constitute a very real violation of the prohibition on electioneering, and would thus provide clear grounds for suing to have their tax exempt status revoked.

Goldy recommends that those who can stomach it, head off to a fundy church tomorrow with recording devices -- just in case these tax-exempt and discrimination-rule-exempt establishment might, perhaps, engage in some kind of electioneering which is prohibited because of their generous tax status.

[Double hat-tip again to Slog for these items.]

Meanwhile, Annie Levinson of the remarkably quiescent Washington Won't Discriminate group admitted to the PI that the group won't be doing anything to counter "Referendum Sunday":

"We've not spent any time or energy worrying about what they are doing," she said. "Instead we have been focusing on reaching out to progressive and respectful citizens."

Though the group is not attempting to directly counter "Referendum Sunday," Levinson said her group has already begun organizing.

"In the past, we know that people have waited until the signature gathering deadline to get organized and reach out to voters to inform them about what the impact of the measure would be," Levinson said. "We think it makes more sense to do that while the other side is gathering signatures."

Tags: washington politics, equal rights, seattle, gay groups, eyman, discrimination referendum

Labels: equal rights, initiative, politics, Washington

The debate on civil rights last week between Eastside preacher Ken Hutcherson and King County Executive Ron Sims, sponsored by The Stranger, is sure to be the first of many in the next few months. But the folks at The Stranger know how to put on an entertaining show, and this was that an more.

The primary focus of the discussion was supposed to be the discrimination initiative and referendum now being pushed by professional initiative salesman Tim Eyman. But it ended up focusing on more fundamental issues about the how religion should influence civil society.

If you missed the lively debate that was moderated by KING-5's Robert Mak, you can catch the whole thing via this SeattleChannel feed of the event. The Town Hall lighting makes the images a bit murky, but the sound comes through loud and clear.

Blatherwatch, a wonderful local-issues blog, covers the debate under the headline "Ron Sims kicks Hutcherson ass in Christian bowl."

Blatherwatch was part of the Sims entourage and offered this impression of the Hutcherson entourage:

His security help were thuggish in the way only fundamentalist Christian security can be -- pushy, white, dressed in Christian gangsta wear, and earpieces that might have been iPods filled with Antonius or direct links to the White House basement.

Not surprisingly, Hutcherson's loud followers and the preacher himself were unwilling to hear much that contradicted their narrow beliefs. Hutcherson, in his "'scuse me. 'scuse me!" Bill-O'Reilly-Ted-Baxter style, became irritated if anyone interrupted him, but frequently shouted down Sims, Mak, and the crowd if they attempted to wedge a discussion into his sermons. Despite the shout-downs, Sims presents a wonderful civics lesson on the separation of church and state.

Hutcherson: "In a democracy if we win, we get to impose our will on you and if you win, you can impose your will on us."
Sims: "And the wonderful thing about civil rights is that it was designed to stop just that."

Technorati tags: Washington politics Equal rights Seattle gay+groups House Bill 2661

Labels: equal rights, initiative, politics, Washington

On this extradinary day, we make an extraordinary third post. [Don't worry. It isn't the start of a trend.] Please indulge your usual webwrangler as he drops that persona for a moment to post this report on tonight's celebration of the equal rights law passage. Allow him (i.e. me) to momentarily post under the byline he used long ago to write a few stories on the bill and on folks like Charlie Brydon, Roger Winters, Russ Brubaker, Sue Docekal, and others when none of us guessed it would ever take this long to finally get it passed.

by Robin Evans
Hundreds gathered tonight at the Paramount Theater in downtown Seattle to celebrate passage of a law that was first introduced in the Washington legislature in 1977.

The group first gathered, waiting for the doors to open, under the house's huge marquee which bore the legend, "Now Playing: VICTORY FOR EQUALITY".

The crowd was jammed uncomfortably into the theater's small lobby where a slide show ran through dozens of names, pictures, and organizational logos. It was an honor roll of the hundreds who worked through three decades to finally achieve today's victory. There was Charlie Brydon on the cover of the Weekly. There was a button for the No on 13 campaign that saved Seattle's equal housing rights ordinance in 1978.

The names and pictures celebrated the bill's long history: The Stonewall Committee. Hands Off Washington. Riot Dykes. Harvey Muggy's face. Cal Anderson in several pictures. And the many names. Miggs Regan... Don Moreland... Dick Rolfs... Bob Rohan... Barb Flye... Russ Brubaker... and dozens more. The oft-repeated roll call ended with the simple phrase, "We did it!"

A podium was set up to the left side of the lobby, but the speeches were slow to start as the crowd hummed with quiet, but sometimes growing excitement. When Seattle City Council member Tom Rasmussen entered through a side door with his colleague Jan Drago, Rasmussun -- whose name was included on the roll call of honor -- was beaming. He was hugged by many. Deputy mayor Tim Ceis entered through the same door a few minutes later but seemed to be searching for a hand to shake. Someone... Anyone?

After the slow start, the speeches started with a parade of executive directors. Fran Dunaway of Equal Rights Washington was host for the night but her soft voice was often drowned out by conversations (and the occasional crying infant for some odd reason). She spoke of the importance of coalitions to the bill's final passage.

Audrey Haberman of the Pride Foundation thanked the companies, including Microsoft, RealNetworks, HP, Boeing, and others that had been important to the bill's passage, but asked the crowd to "clap for yourselves." She assured the crowd which responded loudly that today's vote had been a community victory.

Lifelong's director and former city council member Tina Podlodowski traced the long and sometimes frustrating history of the bill.

Podlodowski called Charlie Brydon "the father of the gay rights movements in Washington" and said that he was disappointed to be out of town and unable to attend the celebration. One of the loudest ovations of the evening erupted as she mentioned the late Cal Anderson whose name remained on the bill passed today and who sheparded it through the House for several years -- a task ably taken on by his successor Rep. Ed Murray.

Murray got a huge cheer when Podlodowski brought him to the podium. He too was beaming as he told the crowd. "We have debated this for so long and so often... We won!" he said to the loudest applause of the night.

"They will never be able to take this away from us. Tonight we celebrate," Murray said, but warned that challenges to the law are sure to come. "Tomorrow, we go back to work."

Another huge cheer was given to the new council member Sally Clark who was introduced by current council member Tom Rasmusson.

"This is fantastic," Clark told the cheering crowd. "I'm excited to work for you all on the city council." She drew chuckles in the crowd as she marveled at the number of emails she had already received about city issues.

Clark's quick and to-the-point remarks were the easier to hear than any others in the evening. It was easy to understand why she had so impressed her future colleagues on the council.

The evening's last two speakers were Sue Docekal of Radical Women and Roger Winters who now works with Legal Marriage Alliance but once worked with Charlie Brydon's Dorian Group. Both of them had spoken in favor of the bill when it received its first hearing in 1977. "It was just me and a handful of other people including Dave Kopay," Docekal said. Winters had a copy of his testimony in his pocket as he arrived at the celebration. He didn't repeat it, but asked that everyone in the lobby continue to talk to family and friends about the importance of equality legislation.

"This is a great day," Winters said.

Technorati tags: Washington politics Equal rights Olympia gay+groups House Bill 2661

Labels: equal rights, legislature, politics

After 30 years of considering the measure and after a long debate today, the Washington legislature in Olympia just passed the equal rights amendment that adds sexual orientatin to the list of categories.

The bill passed in the Senate by 25 to 23 at 11:35.

Immediately following that vote, the senators rejected a parliamentary rule that would have given impetus to a constitutional amendment to ban equal marriage rights.

The jobs/housing bill was then reconsidered by the House because of a Senate amendment. The House -- which has voted in favor of the bill several times during its decades-long history -- passed it by a vote of 61 to 37.

The 43rd District's Representative Ed Murray, sponsor of the bill, called its final passage "a new dawn, a new day." The House vote was followed by an extended round of applause in the chamber.

You may be able to find a replay of the votes later today on TVW which is available on most cable systems or on the web.

Equal Rights Washington and many other groups will celebrate the passage of HB 2661 statewide.

These are some of the planned celebrations:
Bellingham: 5 pm at Taco Lobo, 117 W Magnolia Street
Kitsap County: 6:30 pm at St. Paul's Episcopal Church, Bremerton
Olympia: 5 pm at Plenty's Restaurant, Downtown Olympia
Seattle: 6 pm at Paramount Theatre, 911 Pine Street
Spokane: 6 pm at Rainbow Regional Community Center, 508 West 2nd Avenue
Tacoma: 5:30 pm at Tempest, 913 MLK
Tri-Cities: 6 pm at Center for Positive Living, 210 East 3rd Avenue, Kennewick
Vancouver: 5 pm at The NorthBank, 106 W 6th Street Vancouver
Wenatchee: 7:30 pm Saturday at Cellar Cafe (SHINE Event), 246 N Mission Street
Yakima: 6 pm at Rainbow Cathedral MCC, 225 North 2nd; 7 PM at First Street Conference Center, 223 North 1st Street

The celebration in Seattle is being sponsored by Equal Rights Washington, The Pride Foundation, Lifelong AIDS Alliance, Greater Seattle Business Association, The Task Force, The Human Rights Campaign, Rep. Ed Murray, Rep. Joe McDermott, and others.

Other groups can add their name to the sponsorship list by calling 206-324-2570.

A few more cities are expected to hold celebrations. We'll add information to this post as it's available or check the Equal Rights Washington web site.

Technorati tags: Washington politics Equal rights Olympia gay+groups House Bill 2661

Labels: equal rights, Gay events, legislature, politics

A measure that would bar discrimination in housing and employment because of an applicant's sexual orientation is a step closer to passage, the Seattle Times reports in its web edition.

Republican Sen. Bill Finkbeiner today said he'd support gay rights legislation, potentially giving Democrats the votes they need to get past a decades-long blockade of the legislation by Senate Republicans.

The commitment represents an enormous boon for Democrats who've been trying to pass legislation banning discrimination based on sexual orientation for more than 20 years.

The bill, which has been passed by the House several times during its long legislative history, last year came within one vote of passing in the Senate where Finkbeiner voted against it.

Finkbeiner, R-Kirkland, ended weeks of speculation with his statement of support today.

"I've had a number of conversations over the past year that have led me to more fully understand the level of discrimination against gays and lesbians, and I now find it is both appropriate and necessary for the state to make it clear that this is not acceptable," Finkbeiner said in a phone interview, reading from a prepared statement.

Finkbeiner represents a district that includes Microsoft headquarters campus and is home to many of its employees. In what became a controversial stance, Microsoft last year declined to support the bill during the legislative session, but later reversed course and now supports the bill and even became a corporate sponsor of last year's LGBT Pride events.

Equal Rights Washington will host a day of advocacy workshops, a rally, and lobbying visits on Monday, January 23 in Olympia. The events are co-sponsored by the Religious Coalition for Equality. They are geared to "demonstrate to legislators that there are substantial numbers of people from all parts of the state who support marriage equality and who support passage of legislation which will prohibit discrimination based upon sexual orientation. Organizations and individuals alike will combine to deliver this message."

An online registration form is available for those who plan to participate in the event.

The advocacy workshops start at 9:30am. The rally will be held at noon on the Capitol steps. Members of the Seattle Men's and Women's Choruses will sing. Religious leaders and elected officials will speak.

In its summary of last year's rally, the Coalition's site notes

Dr. Stephen Jones, coordinating pastor of Seattle First Baptist Church and co-chair of the Religious Coalition for Equality, described how the Bible's teaching on homosexuality has been distorted in modern religious discourse.

In December, religious leaders from several congregations held a rally near the public school where an Eastside pastor notorious for his anti-gay activism holds Sunday services.

About 30 people of various faiths gathered at the entrance of Lake Washington High School to support long-stymied legislation that would outlaw discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

The group also met "to counter the very loud voices by a very few fundamentalist religious leaders" who oppose the bill, which was narrowly defeated in the 2005 Legislature and is expected to be reintroduced in the upcoming session, said Robert Jacobs, Northwest regional director of the Anti-Defamation League.

Technorati tags: Gay Gay politics Washington legislature House Bill 2661

Labels: equal rights, legislature, politics