2
GAY PEOPLE'S CHRONICLE
May 18, 2012
•
www.GayPeoplesChronicle.com
North Carolina voters pass marraige ban
by Anthony Glassman
Raleigh, N.C.-North Carolina voters passed a constitutional marriage ban on May 8, voting 61 percent to 39 percent in favor of barring recognition of same-sex marriages and similar institutions in the state. It was the last southern state to do so. The state already had a law restricting marriage to an opposite-sex institution, but a coalition consisting primarily of conservative Christians pushed for the constitutional amendment, drawing one of the largest primary turnouts in decades. It failed in the largest metropolitan areas in the state, but took the rest of the state by a large margin.
Opponents of the amendment warn that it could have unintended consequences, including stripping domestic violence protections from unmarried couples and jeop-
ardizing health benefits.
"The screaming, excruciating paradox of all this is that supporters wanted to take this out of the judges' hands," Duke University law professor Mike Munger told the Charlotte Observer. "Clearly it will have the opposite effect. There will be litigation, and judges will have to decide what the darn thing means."
Pres. Barack Obama urged voters in the state to defeat the amendment, and the NAACP also campaigned strongly against it. North Carolina will be the site of the Democratic National Convention this sum-
mer.
Jonathan Capehart of the Washington Post referred to the passage of the amendment as the LGBT community "losing forward." While the LGBT community lost,
Domestic Partnerships
Continued from page 1
fication before he could vote on the motion.
"It feels great," said Chris Seelbach, the city's first openly gay council member. I'm very happy and proud of my colleagues that they were willing to stand with me on this." Seelbach had promised to make this measure one of his first priorities in office. "In the end, we're doing this because it's the right thing to do," he added.
Phil Burress, the head of Citizens for Community Values, a virulently anti-gay organization that also crusades against obscenity, said that he would be watching the vote and might file suit against the benefits for violating the anti-marriage amendment. Were he to do so, however, he would have an uphill climb, since the courts have consistently narrowly defined the amendment and ruled that only marriage truly approximates marriage.
Cincinnati's vote came a day after Covington, Kentucky approved similar benefits. Covington officials said they acted quickly to beat Cincinnati to the punch. The city will model their benefits after Columbus. A number of other cities and counties in the state already offer benefits, including Lucas County, Cuyahoga County, Cleveland and Columbus.
Despite Lucas County's domestic partner benefits, Toledo City Council found itself in a contentious debate over the issue on May 1. Some council members who were critical of the idea of extending benefits pointed to recent labor negotiations which saw employees taking cuts to save money.
That was the point made by councilor Rob Ludeman. It was countered by acting human resources director Ellen Grachek, who said that it was designed to give some-
Cleveland International Piano Competition presents
Daniil Trifonov
Winner of the 2011
International Tchaikovsky Piano
Competition, performing
Mozart's breathtaking Piano
Concerto No. 23.
Kyu Yeon Kim
Laureate of the 2011 Cleveland International Piano Competition, performing Mozart's beloved "Jeunehomme" Piano Concerto No. 9.
Sergei Babayan
Winner of the 1989 Cleveland Competition, conducting the Competition Orchestra.
Friday, June 1 at 8:00 pm
CLASSICAL PIANO'S
HOTTEST
NEW SUPERSTAR!
CLEVELAND
LEGEND
Breen Center for the Performing Arts • 2008 West 30th Street, Cleveland
PIANO
INTERNATIONAL
И МОКТИСТА ПАР
Tickets are $25 and $35
Purchase by phone at 216.707.5397 or online at clevelandpiano.org
Grand Sponsor
artofbeauty
Cuyahoga
arts & culture
ZOYA
www.A.DOM
QTICA SMART SPA.
www.q.CA.COM
www.DECAMAROFA.COM
the results showed diminishing support for such amendments-six percent below the national average of passed anti-marriage amendments, and 14 percent below the average for southern states.
Before the election, polling stood with 55 percent in favor of the amendment, 40 percent opposed, with five percent undecided. With all the undecided going to support the amendment, it would have put the results at 60-40, so it was only one percent off based on the "Bradley effect," the fact that polls on gay issues are more positive than the votes on them. Part of this is because people do not want to seem antigay when talking to pollsters; another factor is that younger people, who more often support LGBT civil rights, are less likely to vote than older people, who are more generally opposed to LGBT advances.
Chris Seelbach
Ed Mullen, the executive director of Equality Ohio, analyzed the election, relating it to the efforts to pass same-sex marriage in Ohio.
"Amendment One is deceptively simple, saying: 'Marriage between one man and one woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized in this State.'... By saying that marriage between one man and one woman is the only valid 'domestic union,' it prohibits civil unions, domestic partnerships, and any other form of relationship recognition for same-sex couples," he wrote. "Legal experts also say that the unintended consequences include limitations on domestic violence protections for cohabiting couples, straight or gay, as well as limitations on insurance benefits for children and partners in unmarried families."
thing back to the employees in a way the city could afford, unlike three or four percent pay increases.
Councilman D. Michael Collins suggested putting the issue before voters in November, and also noted that Mayor Mike Bell could have simply ordered the changes himself, instead of bringing the issue to city council.
Councilman Steven Steel and council president Joe McNamara opined that those arguments were covering the real issue, which was opposition to same-sex couples getting benefits.
The two sides' arguments became quite contentious, and further action on the benefits was put off until the May 30 meeting. ✓
Senate approves federal domestic partner benefits
By Lisa Keen
KEEN NEWS SERVICE
Washington, D.C.-In a mostly symbolic move, a U.S. Senate committee advanced a bill Wednesday (May 16) to provide domestic benefits to federal employees.
Senator Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.), chairman of the Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee and a co-sponsor of the bill, said it was merely coincidence that he was bringing the bill to a committee vote just one week after President Obama announced his support for same-sex marriage.
The committee approved the bill by a voice vote on a "block" of legislation and nominations, with just a bare minimum of members present to form a quorum. The only Republicans at the table were co-sponsor Susan Collins of Maine and Scott Brown of Massachusetts. However, following the en bloc approval, Senator Mark Pryor (D-Ark.) asked to be recorded as a "No" vote, and Senator Collins noted that several Republicans gave her their proxy to vote "No" on S. 1910. Those included Republican Senators Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, and Jerry Moran of Kansas. Senator Lieberman indicated that Democratic Senators Mary Landrieu of Louisiana and Claire McCaskill of Missouri would have voted "Yes."
In addition to Lieberman and Collins, the bill (S. 1910) is co-sponsored by 22 other senators (all Democrats), including both senators from California, Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), John Kerry (D-Mass.), and Carl Levin (D-Mich.). Neither of Ohio's senators has yet to sign on as cosponsors, although Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) co-sponsored an earlier version of this bill and remains a strong LGBT ally.
The bill was first introduced in 2006 and advanced out of committee last year.
It is entitled the Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligations Act. The House version (H.R. 3485) has been introduced by Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisc.).
"It's about equal pay and equal benefits for work," said Lieberman of the legislation. He promised that any additional costs incurred by providing equal benefits can be more than offset by authorizing the federal government to recover from federal employees money paid to them through the Federal Employee Health Benefits for services already reimbursed by a third party.
Lieberman said the Congressional Budget Office calculated the average annual cost of the Domestic Partners bill is estimated to be less than $70 million. Lieberman said that cost is "a very small percentage of one percent" of the average annual cost of compensating all federal employees: $400 billion.
Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese called on the Senate to pass the bill, saying it was a matter of "fairness in the workplace" and noting that 60 percent of Fortune 500 companies provide similar benefits to their employees.
+
The Republican-dominated House is not expected to take any action on the bill there. And given that leadership in both chambers have been posturing for another fight over raising the government's debt ceiling, there seems little likelihood that the bill will get a vote even on the Senate floor this year. V