Q-Seattle Events: Tacky Tourist Clubs

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Labels: legislature, marriage equality, SB5336, Washington

Congrats to David Brewster's Crosscut for doing a second story on gay issues in a month. That's more than The Weekly would have done in a year while he was running the thing.

The latest story is by Austin Jenkins, "the Olympia-based political reporter for Northwest News Network, a consortium of public radio stations in Washington, Oregon, and Idaho. He covers Northwest politics and public policy as well as the Washington Legislature."

It's a good story about the influence of philanthropist/activist Tim Gill on Washington politics. But we're just slightly less than thrilled to see it because we saw the same story somewhere else several months ago. Where? Right here and here. That was February.

Unlike our story, Jenkins doesn't show the actual influence of the Gill group on Washington races, but he does add some quotations by folks who didn't comment for our story.

Washington state Sen. Ed Murray, an openly gay Seattle Democrat, says the gay lobby has traditionally focused on national races. But after the 2004 election, that started changing.

"In the last presidential election, the gay community had its clock cleaned," admits Murray, referring to the eleven states ? including Oregon ? that passed ballot measures banning gay marriage.

Murray and Guerriero say after that election, the gay community swung into action. Murray explains it this way: "What's going on is there's sort of a fairly low-grade, under-the-radar conversation that's going on in the gay community about investing at the state level."

...and...

The fact the Gill effort in Washington and Oregon is only now [???, ahem...] coming to light ? six months after the election ? concerns one defeated Republican. Former House member Toby Nixon says it's a sign the current campaign finance disclosure system may be inadequate.

"If there was some way in more real time during the campaign to find out that this kind of considered effort was going on, maybe a more effective response could be mounted," says Nixon.

But another defeated Republican, Luke Esser, a former state senator and now Washington State Republican Party Chair, refuses to bash the out-of-state money that came into his district. "I think it's incumbent upon Republicans and those who are not in favor of the gay marriage agenda to be ready to raise the money they need to win elections in the future," Esser says.

It's a story worth repeating and Jenkins tells it well, but really now... there's a thing out here sometimes called "the internets" and something on those "tubes" called, by some "the Google" or "the Technorati". Amazing things. You should try them out. We also understand that Brewster and his crowd of ex-Weekly-ites at Crosscut like to see themselves as arbiters of what is good and proper in journalism and much more, but really, now. Wouldn't you consider this kind of thing unseemly if it were done without attribution by someone else?

Labels: legislature, politics, tim gill, Washington

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

From an AP report:

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

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

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

Here are details of the law from the AP story:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

He urges his followers on with this exhortation:

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

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

It's all up to you.

Indeed.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Labels: legislature, marriage equality, politics, SB5336

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

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

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

The PI explains the debate process this way:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Washington Senate passed, SB 5297, the "Healthy Youth Act," last week. The bill would establish state minimum standards for the classes if the district chooses to offer sex education. It includes opt-out provisions that would allow parents to take their children out of the classes. Under provisions of the bill, districts that offer sex-ed classes would have to teach both abstinence and contraception, and would be required to use scientific evidence-based information in the classes.

A video summary of the Senate floor debate on the bill is available from TVW. (It's the first story in the review program, starting at 1:10.) Opponents argued that the bill would erode local control of school districts. Supporters argued that the state already sets minimum standards other subjects taught in Washington schools. You can watch, listen to, or download the full floor debate (March 7) from the links on this page.

A public hearing on the bill in the House was scheduled for Friday, but is not yet available from TVW.

Both Equal Rights Washington and Lifelong AIDS Alliance support the bill. Lifelong's summary:

The Healthy Youth Act ensures that sexuality education in public schools teaches both abstinence and medically accurate information about the effectiveness of condoms and other family planning options in a comprehensive manner. As estimates suggest that 25% of new HIV infections occur among young people 22 and under, a comprehensive approach is crucial to giving young people the tools they need to prevent HIV infection.

On its official page on the state's web site, the House Republican Caucus summarizes the bill as "Requiring graphic sex education to be taught to your fifth-grade child." (Sigh. And least resisted amping up the scare tactics by claiming that it would install monsters in all closets, and under each child's bed.)

The Washington Post yesterday took a broad look at sex-ed classes in districts across the country and found that most either avoid talking about homosexuality in the classes or present some sort of condemnation of it to their students.

Several organizations... have noted a sharp rise in recent years in the number of schools and systems whose sex-ed lessons stress abstinence. They point to the role of the federal government, which since the mid-1990s has required a strict abstinence-only approach as a condition for substantial federal funds. Such programs, the government says, should endorse sex only in the confines of marriage, one reason they tend to skirt homosexuality.

The Post singled out Seattle's schools as an example of a district that buck that trend.

In Seattle public schools, sexual orientation is taught in ninth-grade health class, a one-day session that uses vignettes about fictitious teens to illustrate same-sex and opposite-sex attraction. But the topic can arise as early as grade 5, in discussions on the many changes that accompany puberty....

Seattle teachers tell ninth-grade health classes, "There are probably some people here who are gay, lesbian and bisexual.... Some people here may believe that homosexual behavior is wrong." Students take a sexual-orientation quiz: When do people first realize they are gay? (Answer: usually by their teens.) If one of your parents is gay or lesbian, are the chances greater that you will be, too? (Answer: no.)

Although there are no clear statistics, the Post notes Seattle's approach seems to be echoed only in a few West Coast and Northeast districts.

Those who monitor sex-education trends say there's no telling how many school systems teach about sexual orientation, but the subject is largely absent from the curriculum across much of the South and in land-locked mountain states. SIECUS counts nine states that require "something negative" if sexual orientation is taught, such as characterizing homosexuality as unacceptable behavior.

The topic is more accepted, although not nearly pervasive, along the West Coast and in the Northeast. Health teachers in Los Angeles, Seattle, San Francisco and throughout Massachusetts consistently teach about homosexuality, according to Judy Chiasson, a Los Angeles educator...

The sex-ed bill being considered by the legislature would not require districts to offer sex-ed courses, but would require those that do offer the opt-out classes to use evidence-based rather than faith-based approaches in the health courses. If the classes are offered in a district, they would have to offer "medically and scientifically accurate sexual health education" which would include accurate information on both contraception and abstinence.

A January report issued by a coalitian of groups supporting SB 5297 found that nearly a third of the Washington's schools follow national trends by allowing only abstinence to be mentioned in sex ed classes. According to the report, teachers in those districts are not allowed to discuss condoms or any other form of contraception except for abstinence in their sex education classes.

Labels: health, legislature, SB5297

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

TVW is on channel 23 on Seattle Comcast systems.

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

[Update:]

The testimony

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

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

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

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

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

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

Labels: legislature, marriage equality, SB5336, TV

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

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

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

These are the senators who voted for passage:

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

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

Excused: Senators Pflug and Shin

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Here's part of Ed Murray's speech:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Supporters of equal rights for all citizens of the state will gather tomorrow in Olympia for the third annual Equality Day rally and lobbying workshops. The rally and citizen lobbying event is sponsored by the Religious Coalition of Equality and Equal Rights Washington.

Advocacy workshops begin at 9 am at various locations on the capitol campus. The rally starts at 11:45 on the capitol steps. It features performances by Seattle Men's and Women's Choruses and several speakers. Visits with legislators have been scheduled for the afternoon. The event closes with a showing of the Seattle-produced movie, Inlaws and Outlaws at 6:30 pm.

Pre-registration was requested, but if you can make it to the Capitol City at the last moment, expect them to try to make room for you. A charter bus (or two) will leave from St. Mark's Cathedral [get directions] at 7 am. (Again, pre-registration was requested, but there might be room.) A donation of $20 is requested for the trip on comfortable Grayline buses.

ERW has an example form of a support email to send to your legislators if you can't make it to Olympia.

If you're looking for additional inspiration, consider this speech given in Wyoming's legislature by a Republican House member, Rep. Dan Zwonitzer, who cast the deciding vote to kill a bill that would have declared out-of-state marriages or civil-unions between gay couples invalid in Wyoming. [via Pam's House Blend]

Thank you Mr. Speaker and Members of the Committee.

I am not going to speak of specifics regarding this bill, but rather talk about history and philosophy in regards to this issue.

It is an exciting time to be in the legislature while this issue is being debated. I believe this is the Civil Rights struggle of my generation.

Being a student of history, as many of you are, and going back through history, most of history has been driven by the struggle of man against government to endow him with more rights, privileges and liberties to be bestowed upon him.

In all of my high school courses, we only made it through history to World War 2. It wasn't until college that I really learned of the civil rights movement in the 60's. My American History professor was black, and we spent a week discussing civil rights. I watched video after video where people stood on the sidelines and yelled and threw things at black students walking into schools, I've read editorials and reports by both sides of the issue, and I would think, how could society feel this way, only 40 years ago.

Under a democracy the civil rights struggle continues today, where we have one segment of our society trying to restrict rights and privelges from another segment of our society. My parents raised me to know that this is wrong.

It is wrong for one segment of society to restrict rights and freedoms from another segment of society. I believe many of you have had this conversation with your children.

And children have listened, my generation, the twenty-somethings, and those younger than I understand this message of tolerance. And in 20 years, when they take the reigns of this government and all governments, society will see this issue overturned, and people will wonder why it took so long.

My kids and grandkids will ask me, why did it take so long? And I can say, hey, I was there, I discussed these issues, and I stood up for basic rights for all people.

I echo Representative Childers concerns, that testifying against this bill may cost me my seat. I have two of my precinct committee persons behind me today who are in favor of this bill, as I stand here opposed, and I understand that I may very well lose my election. It cost 4 moderate Republican Senators in Kansas their election last year for standing up on this same issue. But I tell myself that there are some issues that are greater than me, and I believe this is one of them. And if standing up for equal rights costs me my seat so be it. I will let history be my judge, and I can go back to my constituents and say I stood up for basic rights. I will tell my children that when this debate went on, I stood up for basic rights for people.

I can debate the specifics of this bill back and forth as everyone in this room can, but I won't because the overall theme is fairness, and you know it. I hope you will all let history be your judge with this vote. You all know in your hearts where this issue is going, that it will come to pass in the next 30 years. For that, I ask you to vote no today on the bill. Thank you.

And, thank you, Rep. Zwonitzer.

Labels: Gay events, gay organization, legislature, 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

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

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

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

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

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

A proposed amendment that would enshrine marriage discrimination in the state constituiton has been introduced in the Washington Senate by six Republican Senators and two Democrats. It's Senate Joint Resolution 8219 [pdf]. [via Slog]

This is the full text of the proposed amendment:

Article I, section . . .. Marriage in Washington state shall consist solely of two persons, a male and a female. The uniting of two persons other than a male and a female in any marital relationship is not valid in this state, and, although valid in another jurisdiction, is not recognized as valid in this state. The legislature may provide for such restrictions or sanctions on marriage related to age or degree of kinship as it deems necessary.

The resolution has been assigned to the Judiciary Committee which has not yet scheduled a hearing on the issue.

The resolution was introduced by Senator Dan Swecker (R-20, Centralia). Co-sponsors are Senators James Hargrove (R-24, Port Angeles/Hoquiam), Don Benton (R-17, Brush Prairie/Vancouver east) , Tim Sheldon (D-35, Shelton), Jenea Holmquist (R-13, Moses Lake/Cle Elum), Mike Carrell (R-28, Lakewood/Fort Lewis), Pam Roach (R-31, Auburn/Enumclaw), Joseph Zarelli (R-18, Castle Rock/Battle Ground), Jim Clements (R-14, Yakima), Jerome Delvin (R-8, Kennewick), Marilyn Rasmussen (D-2, Eatonville/Orting).

The resolution has high-profile support among the GOP minority. Prime sponsor Sen. Swecker is the Republican Caucus Vice Chair. Co-sponsoring Sen. Delvin is the Republican Deputy Whip. Sen. Carrell is the GOP's Deputy Floor Leader. And Pam Roach? Well, she's probably packing.

Labels: gay news, legislature, marriage equality, politics, SJR8219, Washington

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The 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 good news is that over three-quarters of school districts in Washington let their teachers at least mention homosexuality in sex-ed courses. The bad news: In 23% of the state's districts, it can't even be mentioned. (The bright side: Given what they'd probably say if they mentioned us, we should be relieved that they aren't talking.)

This shouldn't be surprising in a state where even Al Gore's award-winning documentary on global warming proved too controversial for the Federal Way district.

According to a report released yesterday by a coalition of groups lobbying to require "medically accurate sex education" in the state, there's a ways to go in that regard:

Nearly a third of Washington's school districts do not allow teachers to discuss condoms or any other form of contraception except for abstinence in their sex education classes, according to a new report paid for by a coalition working to reduce pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases among teens.

A bill in the current legislative session aims to change that situation.

The new state guidelines outline medically and scientifically accurate sex education. Rep. Shay Schual-Berke, D-Normandy Park, introduced a bill Tuesday that would make medically accurate sex education mandatory in Washington schools that choose to teach sex education. HIV-AIDS education is mandatory in Washington, but general sex education is not.

The medical doctor turned legislator said she is optimistic about the bill's chances this legislative session, because leaders in both the House and Senate have said they would make its approval a priority.

Schual-Berke explained the importance of medically accurate sex education by talking about the impact when a teacher tells her students that condoms don't work, presumably because they want to discourage kids from being sexually active.

Instead, research has shown, the students are sexually active, but they don't use condoms because they think they don't work, Schual-Berke said.

Lifelong AIDS Alliance lists the "Healthy Youth Act" as one of its legislative priorities for this session.

Lifelong notes:

As estimates suggest that 25% of new HIV infections occur among young people 22 and under, a comprehensive approach is crucial to giving young people the tools they need to prevent HIV infection.

Labels: gay news, HB1297, HB1855, legislature, politics, SB5297, Seattle, 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

It's that time of year when publications and blogs turn reflective and cover for vacations by producing Top-X lists. We'll look at some of the other lists in a moment, but our own top 5 in 2006 would look something like this:

1. Supreme's marriage inequality decision. In a close split decision, the Washington Supreme Court decided that they just don't have the chops to enforce the state's constitution and that legislators should do it for them. The Supremes decided that it's OK for marriage to be a special right for heteros.
2. LGBT civil rights, finally. After 30-years, a state civil rights law that includes LGBT folk finally passed in January, 2006. It prohibits discrimination because of sexual orientation in hiring and contracts. An initiative to overturn the law failed to scare up enough signatures to qualify for the ballot.
3. Bars are dropping. Timberline closed in 2005. In October, 2006 Thumpers served its last drink. The Elite will close in January. Manray can keep its space only until November, 2007. It may not seem as important as the big political stories, but this kind of thing may affect even more folks. It changes the character of our real neighborhood.
4. Dueling parades. Seattle Pride moved its parade downtown. Another group tried to keep the tradition of a Broadway parade alive for one more year. Pride earned raves for its Seattle Center post-parade rally. Its 4th Avenue parade drew big crowds and produced huge boring gaps. But, at least, it looked good on TV with a great hosting turn by Mark "Moms" Finley.
5. Legislature gets a little more gay. Long-time 43rd District Representative Ed Murray sailed through to an easy victory when he decided to move the state senate. His former seat kept its "gay rep" credentials when openly gay lawyer Jamie Pedersen finally won in a crowded race to succeed Murray and former Rep. Cal Anderson.

Labels: Gay events, gay news, Gay Seattle, legislature, LGBTQ, politics, Seattle, Seattle Pride

It's election day. Oh, sure, it's only a primary, but this election will decide several important races in both some Seattle-area districts and a couple of statewide races.

If you live in Seattle's 43rd District, you've no doubt heard and read a lot about the campaign to replace Ed Murray's seat in the state House. Murray is moving on to the Senate with only token opposition. In June, SEAMEC, the LGBTQ elections ratings group, gave a dual endorsement in the 43rd's legislative race to Jamie Pedersen and to Lynn Dodson. Since then, however, Ed Murray has thrown his support to Pedersen. Equal Rights Washinton [ERW], the statewide LGBTQ advocacy group, has also given Pedersen a strong endorsement.

In his endorsement statement given to The Stranger, Murray said

I've made an argument for 11 years that having a place at the table makes a difference... Jamie is smart, driven, hard-working, and while he is new to the world of politics, I think he's smart enough and he'll learn. And that's an opportunity that neither the gay and lesbian community nor this district should lose.

ERW has also endorsed two candidates in state supreme court races, incumbents Susan Owens and Tom Chambers.

Technorati tags: Seattle King County Seattle election election endorsements

Labels: legislature, politics

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

SEAMEC, the Seattle Metropolitan Elections Committee, has released early endorsements for three key primary races.

The group rates candidates on their support for a range LGBT issues. Ratings are based on interviews and/or responses to a questionairre. Endorsements are approved by a two-thirds super-majority of the group's Steering Committee.

(Quotations below are from a SEAMEC email announcement which is not yet available on their new and vastly improved [other than the rather stingy member-only areas] website.)

Two endorsed in 43rd legislative race

In the hotly contested 43rd District legislative race, the group has bestowed a dual endorsement on two of the five Democratic candidates. (The candidate who wins that primary is expected to face only token opposition in the general election.)

Both Jamie Pedersen, a Seattle lawyer, and Lynne Dodson, an educator and labor leader, are endorsed by the group. They both received a perfect SEAMEC rating of 5 bestowed by the Steering Committee "which takes into account not only the candidate's verbal support of LGBT issues but his or her actions and public history of support for or hostility to the LGBT community".

SEAMEC notes that two of the other 43rd District candidates, Jim Street and Bill Sherman "gave outstanding interviews, garnering perfect scores of AAAAA on topics relating to equality, marriage, families, health care, and awareness."

Rodney Tom endorsed in key Eastside race

Rodney Tom won SEAMEC's endorsement in his campaign for the 48th District Senate seat. The district encompasses parts of Bellevue, Kirkland, and Redmond, and all of Medina, Clyde Hill, Yarrow Point and Hunts Point.

Tom recently switched parties after several years in the legislature and will be running against incumbent Republican Senator Luke Esser.

SEAMEC notes,

In his interview, Tom said "[My race] could very well be the most important race for the LGBT community in Washington State this year." We agree. His opponent, Senator Luke Esser, holds a leadership role in Senate Republican Caucus and has actively campaigned against LGBT equality including a motion to adjourn the Senate in 2005 rather than address the Anderson-Murray anti-discrimination legislation, effectively killing the bill that year along with many other bills that had yet to be addressed.

Murray endorsed for seventh time

SEAMEC has endorsed Ed Murray in his campaign for the Senate seat from Seattle's 43rd District. Murray is expected to face only token opposition in his quest to move from the House to the Senate, where he would take the seat once occupied by his mentor, Cal Anderson. It's the seventh time Murray has received the endorsement.

SEAMEC notes

Murray's exhaustive campaign for the Anderson-Murray Anti-Discrimination act proved triumphant this year, passing both houses in the legislature and having been signed into law by Governor Gregoire. Murray has proven himself a well-rounded and effective leader on other important issues as well. His leadership on the House Transportation Committee has been praised by the governor, the press, and his fellow legislators, among others.

Technorati tags: Seattle King County Seattle election election ratings SEAMEC

Labels: legislature, politics

The PI yesterday called a tiff that arose between Stranger editor Dan Savage and 43rd District Legislative candidate Jamie Pedersen a "teapot tempest."

Maybe, but then the Slog where it all started last Sunday is -- at least by our limited local blog standards -- a pretty big teapot that was only made bigger by the PI's story.

The PI reporter, Chris McGann, called the tiff

a window into the complex world of gay politics in Seattle [that] reflects the power wielded by a man known as much for his explicit sex advice as for his iconoclastic punditry and journalism.

The whole contretemps is summarized briefly and adequately by the professional association of which Savage's paper is a part.

But, hey, if you have a moment on your holiday weekend while waiting for shower bands to pass by , why not take a look at the storm clouds in that odd teapot. (And, of course, it might help to have a few beers so that you'll be drunk enough to care about any of this -- like Savage, who might have been joking, claimed he was when he wrote the original post.)

In his original post, Savage [who might or might not have been drunk] complained that campaign workers wearing "Vote for Pedersen" t-shirts were offering sign-up clipboards at the U-District Street Fair last week that Savage mistook for initiative sign-up sheets.

The young volunteer, looking so very earnest, asked us if we supported marriage equality. Sure, we support marriage equality. Then we should sign, she said.

Savage was offended by what he took to be a critique of the other candidates in the race

Uh, Jamie? Don't you think that's dishonest? Don't all the candidates running to fill Murray's seat -- Stephanie Pure, Dick Kelley, Lynne Dodson, Bill Sherman, et all -- support marriage equality?

When I asked one of Pederson's volunteers if any of Jamie's opponents were against marriage equality, she said she didn't know for sure -- "but probably not," she added. When I asked why she was out there trying to create the impression that the other candidates in the race were opponents of marriage equality, she said, "To get your attention!" Well, it worked. You got my atttention, Jamie -- and lost my vote.

Way to be a weasel, Pederson.

A former Seattleite now blogging from DC offers this advice on the tiff:

I don't think that a volunteer stating that the gay candidate is a better advocate for our rights that the five straight candidates -- even if their stand on the issues is the same -- makes the candidate a weasel. Would you rather have someone that understands the issue on a personal level fighting for you, or someone that only understands it on a philosophical level? Dan, take a breath. This isn't an issue worth our time and, from my experience in Seattle's gay community, this is going to take up a lot of it.

A "centrist" blogger who tries to handicap hot races like this one in the 43rd is willing to call this whole thing a "mini-scandal":

[Pedersen's] recent clash with Dan Savage over campaign tactics forced the campaign to take a step back. I'm reasonably certain that Pedersen is still the race's favorite, but his lead is vulnerable in comparison to prior to this mini-scandal hiccup.

Although Savage wrote in the original post, "You got my attention, Jamie -- and lost my vote,", a later clarification by Savage in the Slog makes it clear that the issue is way more complicated than that. It's clear that there's a history here.

Savage's clarification suggests that Pedersen had lost his vote long ago -- probably as long ago as March, 2004 when The Seattle Times ran a story about the lawsuit that was then being filed to challenge the state ban on equal marriage rights.

According to that story by reporter Bob Young, Savage had played an unexpectedly key role in the timing of the suit that Pedersen had been working on with other marriage-rights advocates and King County Executive Ron Sims. Pedersen was lead attorney at the time for Lambda Legal which was preparing the suit. (The suit has been under Godot-like consideration by the state supreme court for over a year.)

According to the Times, Sims and others planning legal strategy for the suit became worried when Savage, his partner, and two other Stranger staffers showed up at a county office and asked for marriage licences.

Sims' spokeswoman Elaine Kraft confirmed that key people were worried about Savage.

"There was always that concern that a case would be brought," she said, "and Executive Sims' thinking was that the best possible case should be brought forward to question the law."

And soon.

"He said, 'Look, this is the optimum time to move forward. We could either wait for the perfect case or move with what we've got.' He urged them along," said Kraft.

That set off a scramble over the weekend, which led to Sims meeting Sunday with six gay Seattle couples who had been recommended by the Northwest Women's Law Center.

In the March 11, 2004 Stranger issue which came out the week after Sims and the "key people" worked to put together the legal challenge, Savage wrote an article explaining that they'd been wrong about his intentions. He seemed to be particularly irked that the Times reporter had used the word "blame" in his story.

If Sims and Pedersen want to blame me for forcing them to actually do something, fine. I accept the blame. However, let the record show that it was never my intention to sue the county, as they told the Seattle Times. Yes, it's true I obtained a marriage license. But I wasn't planning to make myself the center of a lawsuit.

He explains that the Stranger crew who showed up near closing time at the licencing office were there "[t]o make a point about the absurdity of our state's marriage laws."

Savage says in one of last week's comments to his clarification post

I suppose that the slimy, untrue things Pedersen said to the Seattle Times about me and my family way, way, way back when would incline me to view him as a bit of a weasel. But it doesn't help his case when he acts like a weasel.

He doesn't specify what those "slimy untrue things" might have been, but maybe he's still peeved about this quotation from Pedersen in that long-ago story:

"No offense to Dan, he is a very important voice. But what lawyers look for are people who want to achieve the ends of the lawsuit but don't have a different agenda. Dan has a newspaper. He has an interest in publicity," said Pedersen.

Except, of course, that there's nothing untrue about any of that. His is "an important voice," and he does have a newspaper, and the frequently book-touring Savage certainly "has an interest in publicity."

Maybe there was a lot more going on here than what made it into Bob Smith's story in the Times because Savage was still getting worked up over the story and its quotations last week:

According to Pedersen, I was rushing to the courthouse because I had "an interest in publicity." Since I wasn't a good test case, my vanity lawsuit -- which existed only in Pedersen's imagination -- was likely to fail. But I was, according to Pedersen, willing to risk blowing gay marriage rights for all gay couples in Washington State just to quench my feverish thirst for publicity.

None of this was true -- hell, Pedersen's statements were borderline slanderous. Maybe if I had sued him then I wouldn't have to clarify this now.

"Borderline slanderous?" Come now.

Pedersen, Sims, and those unnamed "key people" involved in the marriage rights case clearly didn't understand the nature of the Stranger-sponsored stunt in days immediately after the paper's staffers showed up at the license office and days before the next issue of Savage's paper would hit the streets. They misinterpreted it.

But Smith's story in the Times doesn't quote anyone as telling him that Savage planned to sue. The story says that advocates and Sims worried that Savage and the Stranger might sue. And that's now called "slanderous"?

And yes, trying to unravel this is a bit like trying to explain a plot element in Desperate Housewives, and probably just as significant, but at least it gives a different slant on the candidate than what was presented a few months ago in a Stranger profile of Pedersen by Stranger writer Eli Sanders.

Sanders ends that profile with some whispered criticism of Pedersen:

The knock on Pedersen is that he's too well scrubbed for the 43rd. A self-described "Eagle Scout lawyer," Pedersen is an earnest man with a first-rate legal mind, a clear commitment to social justice, and a pure-as-the-driven-snow sincerity. But his detractors whisper that he comes across as too milquetoast and has a confidence in his own understanding of issues that can at times make him politically tone-deaf.

Sanders follows that paragraph with a quote from Ed Murray who has said he won't endorse any of those running for the seat he's leaving, but which makes it sound like Murray might be one of Pedersen's whispering detractors:

"If you look at the people who have won in the 43rd District over the years, you've got to have an edge," Murray says. "You're not going to do it if you're just soft and fuzzy."

That reads like a suggestion from Murray, who is anything but cute and boyish, thinks that Pedersen is just too darn cute and boyish to really represent the 43rd. (Unfortunately, the quoted comment pretty much ignores Cal Anderson's nice, cute, boyish charm which nonetheless helped him become a 43rd District legend.)

But this whole little tiff tells us that Pedersen might, at least, "have an edge."

Tags: Washington politics, Seattle, Seattle politics, Dan Savage, Jamie Pedersen

Labels: legislature, marriage equality, politics

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

Congrats to Microsoft for recognizing that the company made a mistake in failing to support the anti-discrimination measure in this year's Washington legislature.

CEO Steve Ballmer explained in an email to employees:

"Obviously, the Washington state legislative session has concluded for this year, but if legislation similar to HB 1515 is introduced in future sessions, we will support it,'' he said.

Ballmer said the company will also continue supporting efforts to pass similar national legislation.

It's better late than never for the Redmond company to recognize that its long-time and sometimes cutting-edge support for diversity should not have been ignored in this situation.

Ballmer's mail acknowledged that today's decision was influenced by input from employees concerned about Microsoft's commitment to diversity issues. He also said the company will improve the way it communicates its legislative positions in the future.

"After looking at the question from all sides, I've concluded that diversity in the workplace is such an important issue for our business that it should be included in our legislative agenda," Ballmer said.

In a AP story on the issue, Human Rights Campaign president Joe Solmonese reiterated the business importance of diversity.

"We are proud that Microsoft did the right thing and has come down squarely on the side of fairness for all employees," Solmonese said in a statement. "It is clear from Mr. Ballmer's statement that it is a business imperative to value a diverse work force and support public policy that reinforces that principle."

Technorati tags: Microsoft Diversity Gay

Labels: ken hutcherson, legislature

Seattle Pride has now opened up online registration for both march contingents and Pride Festival vendor booths.

The theme for 2005 is Pride Explosion, which strikes us as just a bit odd. (And yes, we realize that we used "Tourist Alert" as a theme for the Cruise a two years ago, but still...). Looking on the bright side, it may be a sign that we might be moving to a place where the word can once again be used for something other than its primary meaning. Maybe.

We don't have any inside information on this, but we suspect that Microsoft's queer employee group, GLEAM, might be even more visible than usual in this year's march after Microsoft decided to drop the company's support for a state anti-discrimination bill just when it actually seemed to have a chance to pass for the first time in decades.

After The Stranger reported Microsoft's withdrawal of its long-time support for the bill, Los Angeles Gay & Lesbian Center asked the Redmond-based company to return an award it had bestowed on the software giant in 2001 for "corporate vision".

The LA center explained in a press-release

At the L.A. Gay & Lesbian Center's 30th Anniversary Gala in 2001, Microsoft was honored because the company had been a leader in opposing anti-gay initiatives, was one of the first companies to offer domestic partnership benefits and include sexual orientation in its corporate non-discrimination policy, and has supported AIDS and GLBT organizations across the country. Center leaders are concerned about the company's apparent shift in its support of civil rights legislation for the GLBT community.

Although it was unwilliing to join other Northwest companies like Nike, Boeing, Coors, Qwest, Washington Mutual and many others in active support for a statewide ban on discrimination, Microsoft continues to maintain internal antidiscrimination and diversity policies that are "comprehensive and progressive."

One of the GLEAM members who talked to The Stranger said,

"Microsoft is a good place to work for gay and lesbian employees. This is the worst thing that has happened. It was shocking that they wouldn't support this bill," the employee says. "This is the case of an otherwise progressive employer getting caught short by the changing political climate."

[9:20] AmericaBlog, always a wonderful source for gay-centered political commentary has been fiercely covering this issue for days. They comment on a leaked letter to all employees from Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer, in which he tries to justify the company's change in position just when it actually mattered. Ballmer's odd justifications are now echoed on several message boards by other Microsoft employees.

But really, if the company was trying "to focus on a limited number of issues that are more directly related to our business such as computer privacy, education, and competitiveness," as Ballmer asserts, then they underestimated the reaction to this significant change in public position.

Here is the full text of Ballmer's email.

Update: Our webWrangler has a bit more to say about this, but felt it would be more appropriate to continue in his rarely-updated personal blog.

Technorati tags: Microsoft Diversity Gay Richard Florida

Labels: ken hutcherson, legislature