Q-Seattle Events: Tacky Tourist Clubs

Monday, July 23, 2007

Over 100 register for domestic partnerships in first 4 hours

12:05 PM

Washington's official domestic partnership card
Seattle Times political reporter and blogger offers this picture of the wallet cards that turn a couple into card-carrying domestic partners.
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: , , ,

Tuesday, May 08, 2007

Crosscut repeats a story we did months ago

12:57 PM

photo: Tim Gill
Tim Gill via Citizen Craine
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: , , ,

Sunday, April 22, 2007

Signed and sealed: Domestic partnership registry opens July 22

8:02 AM

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: , , , ,

Thursday, April 19, 2007

Gregoire will sign domestic partnership bill in Saturday ceremony

6:46 PM

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: , , , ,

Wednesday, April 11, 2007

Conservative activist won't target partnerships with initiative

1:12 PM

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: , , ,

Domestic partnership bill now on governor's desk

9:02 AM

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: , , , , ,

Monday, March 19, 2007

Sex-ed bill passes Senate; Requires accurate information in classes.

10:03 AM

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: , ,

Friday, March 16, 2007

House hearing on domestic partnership bill live on TVW

7:10 AM

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: , , ,

Friday, March 02, 2007

Thank your senator; Write your representatives

4:52 PM

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: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: , , , ,

Thursday, March 01, 2007

DP bill passes in Senate; Headed for law

2:28 PM

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: , , , ,

Sunday, February 25, 2007

Monday is Equality Day in Olympia

11:53 AM

logo: Washington Religious Coalition for Equality
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: , , , ,

Saturday, February 10, 2007

Domestic partnership bills poised to pass

9:34 AM

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: , , , , , , ,

Friday, February 09, 2007

Alaska politicians continue bizarre crusade to deny state benefits to LGBT partners

12:32 PM

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: , , , ,

Tuesday, February 06, 2007

Right-wing group unleaches robo-calls opposing domestic partnership

7:37 PM

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: , , , , , , ,

Marriage as special right amendment introduced

7:17 AM

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: , , , , ,

Monday, February 05, 2007

Advocates of marriage equality meet to address legal measures

11:15 AM

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: , , , , , ,

Tuesday, January 30, 2007

ERW calls for help in lobbying for DP bill

2:00 PM

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: , , , ,