News Rep. Jamie Pedersen on Domestic Partnerships 2.0
posted by on December 3 at 15:02 PM
After passing legislation last year that allows gays and lesbians to get domestic partnership licenses—that come with only a handful of the nearly 500 rights straight married couples can get (like inherit property, hospital visitation, make medical decisions for your partner, and file wrongful death suits)—gay leaders in Olympia have decided to come back this year with the same bite-size approach, adding to the list of DP rights rather than going for full equality.
They had considered going for marriage this year or going for full DP rights—which would amount to civil unions. And actually, they had also considered doing nothing this year—”which amounted to the same thing [as going for marriage this year]” quips gay Rep. Jamie Pedersen (D-43, Capitol Hill).
Pedersen said this year’s strategy echoes last year’s approach of using the laborious bite-size quest for rights to educate lawmakers about how many rights straight couples actually have—that gays don’t.
Pedersen mentioned a few of the married couple rights that gays and lesbians might go after this year for their next “chunk”: Giving domestic partners the right to share a nursing home room; allowing one partner to continue living in the other partner’s house when the property owning partner is in a medicaid-funded facility; and the ability to transfer property between partners without paying real estate excise taxes.
Straight rights are so pervasive that one straight privilege actually came up during this week’s special session. The deferral property tax bill the legislature passed on Thursday allows low-income home owners to defer property tax payments until they sell the property. Well, the law specifies that spouses can continue to defer the payments after the property owner—perhaps just the husband—has died. Pedersen said he raised the idea of giving domestic partners that same right. The nerve.
Ah yes, the passive-aggressive approach to equality.
Still, this is by far the best strategy I've heard of to get something close to marriage for the gays. Just keep it going, year after year. It's brilliant.
Hey...whatever works. Equal rights is what matters, not the name, and short steps forward a year at a time is better than a big marriage equality campaign year after year that never passes.
1. the right to share a nursing home room
2. allowing one partner to continue living in the other partner’s house when the property owning partner is in a medicaid-funded facility
3. the ability to transfer property between partners without paying real estate excise taxes.
THESE are my three new commandments for kink in this new hyper-world we're living in. Love it. #1 is sooooooooooooooooo my new main fetish. Josh, you need to column this stuff - Savage Dick, c'mon you got in ya, big boy.
Sounds as appealing as upgrading to Vista... Let's go for the real thing already!
They should try this on the national level...
Slow, steady change might not be exciting, but it's still more equitable than what we had before.
"perhaps just the husband" ? are people really considering making it limited to widows. jesus, this just shows how many obstacles we face in the search for equality when even basic first wave feminism isn't being adopted without question.
I'm going to go out on a limb and predict the Dem leadership will quash this for a 2008 vote, due to excessive paranoia.
However, that means an early 2009 vote for it, along with the reauthorization for each county to vote on roads/bridge repairs and replacement.
On the plus side, 2009 will be a long session, so that will be good. Harder to kill it then, especially when the Blue Wave of 2008 washes our state clean of Red Bushies.
@9: You realize that our Democrat supermajority just group-fellated Tim Eyman, right? Why do you think 2009 is going to be sunshine and rainbows?
Because there won't be many Republicants left, Greg.
I don't understand what Josh Feit means. I think the strategy outlined is about full equality.
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to recognize that the legislature isn't going to pass marriage equality legislation this year. And hell if they did, does anyone believe it wouldn't be undone before it was enacted by a referendum? So it seems to me that the fastest path to full equality is via the strategy suggested by Rep. Jamie Pedersen.
And just as important, the strategy that is being taken does seem to give gay families the possibility of greater immediate protections. I'm all for marriage equality, and i think this strategy advainces the cause, but i see nothing wrong in helping people in need as soon as possible. Who can argue with that.
OH MY GAWD #3 Mittens Schrodinger I can't belive you said something SO stupid, cuz you're so dam cute! Yeah IT IS THE NAME that matters. A state hospital nurse for example can say to a DP license holder that happens to be out of the state where the DP was issued is, "What the fuck is a DP? We won't let you see your dying friend because you are NOT next of kin." With a "marriage" license (the name) the spouses are granted that right. Should the wronged spouse still be given the run around because of being of the same gender as the dying spouse, there is LEGAL recourse. A DP does not allow that in states with DOMA amendments to their constitutions. I see many people need to be educated about this issue.
@12,
I didn't "mean" anything.
I was quoting Rep. Pedersen's explanation of this year's strategy. He told me they weren't going for full marriage equality this year or full DP rights. Pedersen explained that gay leaders were going to try to get a second serving of rights this year.
@14
Thanks for clarifying. I was referring to your statement, “adding to the list of DP rights rather than going for full equality." I just don't think it's a "rather" situation.
It just seems to me all to often the gay community attacks itself by creating false conflicts. One example of this is that that any time one supports DP legislation one is not seeking full equality. Given this past history of division around the country on this question, I think we need to be very careful with our language. I believe this strategy of expanding the domestic partnership law, as you outline it, is all about achieving equality as quickly as possible.
loiu fdxcyebph mjqvpzsha bnsikr ivnzrsdc ymhuxo evgadis
mrpbnej zrwtomfg pueh kthunxq qakysgv ulewpskih pscwlio http://www.zauipq.inlmqfbeo.com
Comments Closed
In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).