LETTERS From CAMP Rehoboth |
Capital Letters |
by Hastings Wyman |
Setbacks Continue at State and Local Levels
Last year, 13 local governments passed laws banning job discrimination based on sexual orientation, bringing the nationwide total to 240. In November, in all five cities and towns with antigay referenda on their ballots, our side won. And at year's end, after some three decades of delay, the New York state legislature finally passed a gay rights measure. But while the overall trend of greater acceptance of gay people continues, there are still ongoing efforts on the part of homophobes, mainly in the religious right, to stop some pro-gay measures and repeal others previously enacted. There are several reasons for the renewed efforts of social conservatives to curb gay legislative successes. One is that the financial crises affecting most state governments have created pressure for budget cuts, which in turn make gay-related programs tempting targets for those who don't like us anyway. The second is that many legislative bodies are now under GOP control, or, in some cases, new Republican governors are in charge. This changes the political equation, and in those states where social conservatives have a lot of clout in the GOP, pro-gay policies and proposals face stronger opposition than before. Traditionally progressive Minnesota is a case in point. Newly inaugurated Gov. Tim Pawlenty (R), confronting serious revenue problems, initially made significant cuts in the state's HIV prevention programs. Subsequently, state health officials concerned about the cuts worked with state finance officials and the governor's office to find alternative funding to keep the programsincluding an AIDS hotlineup and running. In addition, Speaker of the House Steve Sviggum (R) has introduced a bill that would only approve Minnesota's contract with the state employees union if the domestic partner health benefits provision is removed. The union must acquiesce, or it will be forced to renegotiate its contract in tough economic times. Lesbian state Rep. Karen Clark (D) told the Minneapolis Star Tribune that the bill was sure to pass the GOP-controlled lower house. The bill is also likely to pass the Senate, where the Democratic majority has gotten slimmer and contains a few Democrats unsympathetic to gay concerns. Thus, it appears that the state's domestic partnership policies for state employees may be doomed for the time being. An estimated 70 to 85 gay and lesbian employees have registered for the benefits since they became available in 2001. Eliminating this provision is likely to save the cash-starved state only some $200,000, which suggests that homophobia, not fiscal responsibility, is behind the move. Potentially more serious is the effort by five Republican lawmakers to repeal the state's civil rights protections for gay people, enacted in 1993. Gov. Pawlenty has said he would not sign such a bill, but indicated he might favor eliminating the current protections for transgender people, on the grounds that people dressing as men one day, women the next, arehe sayscausing problems. This compromise would appease social conservatives, but save gay rights at the expense of transgender people, the most vulnerable segment of the larger LGBT community. Summing up the hostile events in usually liberal Minnesota, one longtime Minneapolis activist says, "We've got a real struggle on our hands." Gay rights are also facing rough treatment in a number of Southern jurisdictions. In Virginia, a legislative committee defeated a billintroduced by Republican Delegate James H. Dillard II, from more moderate Northern Virginiathat would have allowed private businesses to provide health insurance coverage for domestic partners, including those in same-sex relationships (currently prohibited by state law for all but self-insured companies). Another committee turned down a bill that would have added sexual orientation to the state's hate crimes law. And a subcommittee on local affairs voted down a measure that would have given the human rights commission of the Washington, D.C., suburb of Fairfax County the authority to investigate discrimination complaints based on sexual orientation. In Texas, the legislature is currently considering a bill that would bar gay, lesbian, and bisexual people from serving as foster parents. The legislature, now under GOP control for the first time in more than a century, is also considering a measure that would ban not only recognition of out-of-state same-sex marriages, but also civil unions from other states. In February, the Metropolitan Council of Nashville halted consideration of a measure that would have made it illegal to discriminate against gays in employment and housing. The measure was torpedoed by the Southern Baptists, who threatened to cancel their national convention in the city in 2005 if the measure passed. After the council voted 20 to 17 to postpone a vote on the measure, the sponsors withdrew the bill. Even under these negative circumstances, however, gay activists and their allies are pushing forward. In Virginia, proponents of domestic partnership legislation plan to reintroduce the measure at a later date. In Nashville, those favoring a gay-inclusive nondiscrimination policy plan to amend the measure to exclude religious organizations and reintroduce it at a later date. On an even brighter side, in trendsetting California, the state Assembly's newly formed Gay and Lesbian Caucusfive members strongannounced it will push a four-point program to improve the lives of gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and transgendered people in the Golden State. Their proposals would expand the state's domestic partner laws to incorporate more of the rights and benefits of married couples, extend domestic partner requirements to contractors doing business with the state, include transgender people in state discrimination laws, and ban sexual orientation discrimination in the state's foster children program.Hastings Wyman publishes Southern Political Report, a nonpartisan biweekly political newsletter. He may be reached in care of Letters from CAMP Rehoboth or at HWymanSPR@aol.com. |
LETTERS From CAMP Rehoboth, Vol. 13, No. 2, March 7, 2003. |