Federal Benefits For Gay Couples?

[+ Lucky]

Senator Barack Obama favored same sex partners receiving federal health benefits, but now as president he has to put his true beliefs on the line. A conservative federal judge, Alex Kosinski, has ordered that his gay staff members be allowed health benefits for their partners, and a liberal judge joined in. Now Obama has the chance to do the right thing, but will he? Gary Bauer, a leading conservative homophobe, is hoping that he doesn't:

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/13/us/politics/13benefits.html?hp

[+ deej]

That site requires a password.

 

But as presented so far, it's a pointless discussion. Doesn't DOMA forbid federal benefits for same-sex unions already?

[+ Lucky]

Bugmenot.com

 

poop123 works for a username and poop123 works for a password. bugmenot.com will supply you with passwords for many sites...try it!

[+ deej]

That ID and pwd didn't work when I tried just now, but that's beyond the point.

 

What's the issue? What is your analysis of it? And why shouldn't this thread be moved to the politics forum?

 

You haven't presented any content here at all.

[+ Lucky]

Contented

 

When a conservative federal judge tries to move the government in the direction of gay rights, that's news. When that action, among others, puts the issue right in the lap of the US president, that's news. Now I always thought news was content, but hey, you wrote the script for this dandy message center, and maybe the definition of content changed along with it.

 

Why shouldn't it be moved to the politics forum? One, it isn't politics. It's an issue of interest to gay men, involving the advance of their rights but not the subject of an election. This site consists of gay men viewing. And,for that matter, not enough gay men viewing. So, why take a topic that may well involve guys right here in Hooville and send it to the grave? Not my way of encouraging some well-needed posting here. Is there some kind of space crunch in the Lounge that we need to move threads out? I don't think so.

 

And, for what it's worth, the Huffington Post considers it front page news. So does The Daily beast. So do gay bloggers Andy Towle at towleroad.com and kennethinthe212.com's Kenneth Walsh. They seem to find content in this story.

[+ deej]

Here's the same article without needing a password: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29669739/

 

The salient quote (although it's well-buried) seems to be “Plans in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program may not provide coverage for domestic partners, or legally married partners of the same sex, even though recognized by state law.”

 

Even if stricken, there's still DOMA to contend with, and DOMA may actually make striking the clause illegal.

[uwsman2]

Death of DOMA

 

Well, Kozinski's order was based on his interpretation of the federal statute governing federal employee benefits, which he construed to allow federal employers to extend the benefits. It was his way of avoiding having to deal with DOMA.

But the other, liberal, judge, Stephen Reinhardt, called Kozinski on it. He said it was impossible to decide the issue without tackling the constitutionality of DOMA. And he said that DOMA is unconstitutional - at least as applied to this issue of federal employee benefits. He said that none of the reasons mentioned by Congress in a report accompanying the DOMA bill would hold water. None of them were sufficient to justify unequal benefits treatment for gay federal employees.

So the gauntlet is thrown to Obama, since his White House website says that he favors repealing DOMA and enacting partnership benefits for gay federal employees. Let's see him put his money where his mouth is!!!

[+ Lucky]

Follow-Up

 

At least there is forward action. I like that.