President Barack Obama: Our Stand-Up-in-Chief (White House Correspondents' Dinner)

I love it.....he takes on everyone!

Columbus' Very Own Mary Jo Hudson in the New York Times: For Gay Couples, Obstacles to Health Insurance

Mary Jo Hudson, director of the
Ohio Department of Insurance,
is familiar with the difficulties in
getting health insurance for a gay
partner.


Patient Money
For Gay Couples, Obstacles to Health Insurance

By WALECIA KONRAD
Published: May 8, 2009

“IT’S not easy being gay,” said Mary Jo Hudson, director of the Ohio Department of Insurance. She wasn’t referring to political opposition and other obstacles, but the plight of same-sex couples who are trying to get and keep health insurance.

“You’ve got to go through a lot of hoops,” said Ms. Hudson, who is gay and has lived with her partner for eight years.

Same-sex couples have been making headlines; Maine followed the lead of Iowa and Vermont this week in legalizing same-sex marriage, and several other state legislatures are now considering it. But Ms. Hudson says that fairer and more comprehensive health care coverage for partners — whether they are legally married or not — is not necessarily part of the package.

“For the vast majority of gay couples,” she said, “getting health insurance for a domestic partner is still a challenge.”

Currently about one-third of companies with more than 500 employees offer domestic partner benefits. That’s up from about 12 percent in 2000, according to a study from Mercer, an employee benefits consulting firm. But the percentage drops off sharply when smaller employers are counted, Ms. Hudson said.

And there is no provision for domestic partner benefits for federal employees, although there are some legislative efforts to change that. Some states and municipalities offer their employees domestic partner coverage, depending on the state laws.

Even if the relationship is formalized with the state in a marriage or union, that does not always obligate the employer to cover a same-sex spouse. For one thing, self-insured employers are not regulated by the states.

And other benefit-providing employers that choose not to offer such coverage can sometimes use the Defense of Marriage Act — a law that forbids the federal government to recognize same-sex marriage — to trump state laws, said Ilse de Veer, a principal with Mercer.

On the flip side, self-insured employers are free to offer domestic partnership benefits, whether or not a state recognizes unmarried relationships. And some employers limit their domestic partner benefits only to homosexual couples, on the rationale that heterosexual couples can get married, while in most states gay couples still cannot.

If you’re part of a same-sex couple and you’re fortunate enough to work for an employer that will provide coverage for your partner, the process can still be cumbersome and costly. Here are some of the basics.

DOCUMENT YOUR RELATIONSHIP Many employers and insurance companies require proof of a domestic partnership before you can qualify for benefits. One of the most common documents is an affidavit signed by both partners, explaining the details of the relationship. For more information on what needs to be included in an affidavit, the Web site insure.com offers a check list.You may also need to provide copies of jointly signed leases, homeowners’ insurance policies, joint bank account statements and other legal documents that show the two of you live together and are financially intertwined.

Many states, counties and cities, including New York City, have domestic partnership registries where unmarried couples can legally register their relationships. Registration is not the same as a marriage certificate, but it is a good way to prove the legitimacy of your relationship to employers and insurers, Ms. Hudson said.

PREPARE TO PAY MORE TAXES Unlike married couples, domestic partners must pay federal and sometimes state taxes on health care benefits. That’s because the Internal Revenue Service counts the value of the domestic partner’s benefit as income for the employee. What’s more, pretax dollars from an employee’s flexible spending accounts or health savings accounts cannot be used to cover the domestic partner’s benefits.

Let’s say, hypothetically, that the cost for a partner benefit is $10,000 a year, and the employee is at the 40 percent marginal tax bracket. In addition to the share of premiums the employee pays, he or she would pay about $300 a month in taxes.

“That really adds to the cost of the benefit,” Ms. Hudson said. “It may be why so few couples take advantage of domestic partner benefits when they are available.”

She cited a Williams Institute study that shows unmarried partners are two to three times more likely to be uninsured than married people.

Ms. Hudson says that in rare cases, companies have been willing to increase employees’ paychecks to make up for the extra tax burden. So be sure to ask your human resources department about this.

A POSSIBLE TAX EXCEPTION For some people, there may be a way around the tax bind.

If your partner lives in your household for the entire tax year, receives 50 percent of his or her support from you and generally meets the criteria laid out in section 152 of the tax code, then you are legally entitled to receive domestic partnership health benefits tax-free. A lawyer or accountant well versed in domestic partnership law can help determine if you’re eligible for this break.

“This break is confusing and misunderstood because it is a special exemption for health care benefits only,” said Ms. de Veer. “Employers don’t always understand this part of the code themselves, so they often fail to tell employees about it. Lots of couples are paying taxes on health benefits that don’t have to.”

To determine if your partner receives 50 percent support from you, fill out the worksheet on page 33 of I.R.S. Publication 17, at www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p17.pdf

COVERAGE FOR CHILDREN Most employers that cover domestic partners also cover the children of that partner, considering it a parental relationship on the employee’s part, even if it has not been formalized legally.

With individual policies, though, depending on the insurer, you may have to prove you are a legal custodian of your partner’s child, said Ms. Hudson.

“Filing for custody rights is probably something you should do anyway,” advises Ms. Hudson. “You’ll need that document for everything from signing school permission slips to getting health benefits.”

WHAT ABOUT COBRA? If you are covered under your partner’s employer-sponsored insurance, and your partner is then laid off, many firms will offer you the opportunity to buy the same health care coverage for up to 18 months under the federal law known as Cobra. If the relationship ends, you may also be able to elect Cobra coverage, just as you would if you were divorcing.

Because Cobra is a federal law, employers are not obligated to offer this coverage to unmarried partners, but many do, says Ms. de Veer. As with all Cobra coverage, you must be sure to make the election within 60 days of the last day of coverage under the employer’s plan.

Link is here: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/09/health/09patient.html?_r=1 (You may have to register for free)

NPR Movie Review: White-Hot 'Outrage' Over The Capitol Hill Closet

Powerful movie review about a powerful subject..."outing."

Click on the link to read the full review. Well worth it!

clipped from www.npr.org NPR.org, May 8, 2009 · It's tempting to feel sympathy for the subjects of Outrage, a documentary about closeted politicians who lie or dissemble about their own homosexuality. The closet, after all, is a dreadful place to live for anyone — let alone someone faced with the intense social scrutiny that comes with being a public figure. So you can almost come to understand how difficult these politicos' lives must be. On the other hand: What is the right word, exactly, for a "family-values" champion who damns gays and lesbians while pursuing a little same-sex action on the side? One word offered up in this tendentious and provocative documentary: "hypocrite."   Watch Clips 'This Town Is Full Of Gay People' add 'They Made Their Own Choices' add 'Outing Is Fundamentally Wrong' add     Given the nature of this film's media critique and the NPR editorial policy described above, the writer has asked that his byline be removed from this review.

CNN Reports: Gay Issues Closing In On President Obama? Watch and Decide For Yourself.

The New York Times Article Mentioned is here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/07/us/politics/07obama.html

By SHERYL GAY STOLBERG
Published: May 6, 2009

WASHINGTON — President Obama was noticeably silent last month when the Iowa Supreme Court overturned the state’s ban on same-sex marriage.

But now Mr. Obama — who has said he opposes same-sex marriage as a Christian but describes himself as a “fierce advocate of equality” for gay men and lesbians — is under pressure to engage on a variety of gay issues that are coming to the fore amid a dizzying pace of social, political, legal and legislative change.

Two of Mr. Obama’s potential Supreme Court nominees are openly gay; some advocates, irked that there are no gay men or lesbians in his cabinet, are mounting a campaign to influence his choice to replace Justice David H. Souter, who is retiring. Same-sex marriage is advancing in states — the latest to allow it is Maine — and a new flare-up in the District of Columbia could ultimately put the controversy in the lap of the president.

Mr. Obama’s new global health initiative has infuriated activists who say he is not financing AIDS programs generously enough. And while the president has urged Congress to pass a hate crimes bill, a high priority for gay groups, he has delayed action on one of his key campaign promises, repealing the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” rule.

Social issues like same-sex marriage bring together deeply held principles and flashpoint politics, and many gay activists, aware that Mr. Obama is also dealing with enormous challenges at home and overseas, have counseled patience.

But some are unsettled by what they see as the president’s cautious approach. Many are still seething over his choice of the Rev. Rick Warren, the evangelical pastor who opposes same-sex marriage, to deliver the invocation at his inaugural, and remain suspicious of Mr. Obama’s commitment to their cause.

In the words of David Mixner, a writer, gay activists are beginning to wonder, “How much longer do we give him the benefit of the doubt?” Last weekend, Richard Socarides, who advised President Bill Clinton on gay issues, published an opinion piece in The Washington Post headlined, “Where’s our fierce advocate?”

The White House, aware of the discontent, invited leaders of some prominent gay rights organizations to meet Monday with top officials, including Jim Messina, Mr. Obama’s deputy chief of staff, to plot legislative strategy on the hate crimes bill as well as “don’t ask, don’t tell.” Among those attending was Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign, who said afterward that while the gay rights agenda might not be “unfolding exactly as we thought,” he was pleased.

“They have a vision,” Mr. Solmonese said. “They have a plan.”

While Mr. Obama has said he is “open to the possibility” that his views on same-sex marriage are misguided, he has offered no signal that he intends to change his position. And as he confronts that and other issues important to gay rights advocates, he faces an array of pressures and risks.

Anything substantive he might say on same-sex marriage — after the Iowa ruling, the White House put out a statement saying the president “respects the decision” — would be endlessly parsed. If Mr. Obama were to embrace same-sex marriage, he would be seen as reversing a campaign position and alienating some moderate and religious voters he has courted.

And if he appoints a gay person to the Supreme Court, he would be viewed by social conservatives — including many black ministers, another of his core constituency groups — as putting a vote for same-sex marriage on the highest court in the land. Two gay women, Kathleen M. Sullivan and Pamela S. Karlan, both of Stanford Law School, have been suggested as potential nominees.

“That would be tantamount to opening the gate for the other side,” said Bishop Harry J. Jackson Jr. of the Hope Christian Church in Beltsville, Md., who is organizing protests in Washington, where the City Council passed an ordinance this week recognizing same-sex marriages in other states. “If he meant what he said about marriage then I think he has got to stand up and be a president who acts on his beliefs.”

Some say change is inevitable, not only for Mr. Obama but also for other Democratic politicians who have embraced civil unions but rejected same-sex marriage. Now that the Iowa ruling has pushed the battle into the nation’s heartland, the issue will inevitably come up during the 2010 midterm elections and the 2012 presidential campaign.

“We’ve elected probably the most pro-gay president in history; he’s very good on the issues but he is not good on gay marriage,” said Steven Elmendorf, a gay Democratic lobbyist. “From the gay community’s perspective, he and a lot of other elected officials are wrong on this. My view is that over time, they’re going to realize they’re wrong and they’re going to change.”

Mr. Obama has chosen a number of openly gay people for prominent jobs, including Fred P. Hochberg as chairman of the Export-Import Bank and John Berry to run the Office of Personnel Management. And he is the first president to set aside tickets for gay families to attend the White House Easter Egg Roll.

But on legislation, allies of Mr. Obama’s are not surprised that he is charting a careful course. In addition to calling for the repeal of the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy in the military, Mr. Obama supports a legislative repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act, the 1996 law that said states need not recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states. Opponents of same-sex marriage say that is an inconsistency.

Tobias Wolff, a law professor at the University of Pennsylvania who was Mr. Obama’s top campaign adviser on gay rights, said the president needed time to build political consensus.

“I think he has a genuine sense,” Mr. Wolff said, “that in order to move these issues forward you need broader buy-in than you are going to get if you poke a stick in too many people’s eyes.”

Data Shows Ohio's LGBT Community Made A Huge Impact in the 2008 Election.

From the Ohio Democratic Party:

In 2008, the LGBT community’s participation among key races were staggering compared to years past. In 2008 alone with coalitions built between key stakeholders such as the Stonewall Democrats, Human Rights Campaign, Equality Ohio and many other politically active groups we were able to complete the following in Ohio:

· Increase the number of newly registered self identified LGBT voters by 10,933;

· Track 133,061 self identified LGBT voters early vote patterns;

1. 47,014 voted before November 4^th either by mail or early vote location,

2. 85,277 voted Election Day,

3. 770 did not vote for unknown reasons.

· Created thirty-four (34) volunteer LGBT Youth to Youth leaders at college campuses across the State;

1. Registered 4,993 new college voters

2. LGBT volunteer youth base increased by 302

· Increased LGBT Volunteer base in 2008;

1. 27,301 existing or new self identified volunteers who contributed 2 hours or more volunteering to the Presidential or down ballot democratic candidates.

· Increased LGBT volunteer presence in key Ohio House races;

1. LGBT Volunteers devoted more than 87,000 hours of volunteer time to the 7 house races that helped regain control of the Ohio House.

· Staggering numbers of volunteers for GOTV (get out the vote) efforts;

1. Sunday November 1^st through Monday November 3^rd 2008 LGBT volunteers contributed 17,240 hours to the coordinated campaign,

2. November 4^th 2008 LGBT volunteers were located in 87 of the 88 counties in Ohio numbering 5,147 contributing 19043 hours in one day to the Coordinated Campaign

Cleveland launches domestic-partner registry

clipped from www.dispatch.com Thursday,  May 7, 2009 9:51 AM ASSOCIATED PRESS CLEVELAND -- Gay and other unmarried couples in Cleveland may now begin registering their relationships at City Hall. Today is opening day for the city's domestic partner registry, which supporters have said will provide a form of proof for unwed partners to obtain health insurance, hospital visitation rights and other privileges typically reserved for married couples. To register, partners sign a form acknowledging that they share a home and responsibility for one another. There's also a $55 fee. Despite objections from some local religious leaders, Cleveland's city council voted in December to make the city the third in Ohio with a domestic partner registry, along with Cleveland Heights and Toledo.

Maine To Recognize Marriage for Same-Sex Couples

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: May 6, 2009
Rachel Balick | Phone: 202/216.1516 | Cell: 202/246.1226
Trevor Thomas | Phone: 202/216.1547 | Cell: 202/250.9758

Maine To Recognize Marriage for Same-Sex Couples

Gov. Baldacci signs legislation passed by state Senate and House of Representatives

WASHINGTON – The Human Rights Campaign, the nation’s largest lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) civil rights organization, issued the following statement after Gov. John Baldacci signed legislation recognizing marriage equality for same-sex couples under state law. The state Senate voted 21-14 and the state House of Representatives voted 89-57 to pass the legislation and send it to Gov. Baldacci for signature.

“Just one year ago, a single state allowed same-sex couples to marry. Now, with the historic step taken by Gov. Baldacci and the Maine legislature, five states will provide equal dignity, equal respect, and equal rights under state law for same-sex couples by recognizing their freedom to marry, and we hope more will follow soon,” said Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese. “Congratulations to Gov. John Baldacci, Senator Dennis Damon, and Speaker of the House Hannah Pingree for making sure all loving, committed couples in Maine, and their families, will have equal rights and responsibilities under state law, and congratulations to Equality Maine for the hard work it has done over the years to make today a reality.”

Solmonese continued: “No religious institution will have to recognize any marriage under this law. This law is simply about making sure that loving, committed couples, and their families, receive equal rights and responsibilities. This is a step that will strengthen Maine families.”

The Human Rights Campaign has had a field organizer on the ground in Maine for the past four months working with Equality Maine to build support for the marriage legislation.

In addition to Maine, four states have recognized marriage for same-sex couples under state law: Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, and Vermont (effective September 1, 2009).

New York recognizes marriages by same-sex couples legally entered into in another jurisdiction. California recognized marriage by same-sex couples between June and November of 2008, before voters approved Proposition 8, which purports to amend the state constitution to prohibit marriage equality. The Proposition 8 vote has been challenged in court; a decision by the state supreme court is expected by June.

Legislatures in New Hampshire and New York are also considering legislation that would permit same-sex couples to marry under state law.

Same-sex couples do not receive federal rights and benefits in any state. To learn more about state by state legislation visit: www.hrc.org/state_laws

The Human Rights Campaign is America’s largest civil rights organization working to achieve lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender equality. By inspiring and engaging all Americans, HRC strives to end discrimination against LGBT citizens and realize a nation that achieves fundamental fairness and equality for all.

-30-