"Now Levi Johnston does it with protection."
Blogwhoring, news links and all other somesuch are welcome.
The New York Times featured on Friday the results of a two month study on the extra lifetime costs of being gay. The reporters, Tara Bernard and Ron Lieber, tested the finances of hypothetical same sex couples in the three highest gay population: Florida, New York, and California. Their test couples paid from $40,000 to $470,000 more in their lives for being unable to marry.
These financial costs have social consequences. Andrew Sullivan, senior editor of the Atlantic Magazc Magazine, explains:
The effect of these policies is to encourage gay people not to form stable, lasting relationships (relationships that have been shown to increase people's health, happiness and productiveness). It is to exact a communal price on anyone who actually does embrace the responsibility of marriage.
Still, the article notes that "nearly all the extra costs that gay couples face would be erased if the federal government legalized same-sex marriage." Because it's unlikely that the federal government will soon legalize gay marriage, it may seem that gay couples have to put up with these costs for awhile.
But actually all the government has to do is get rid of Defense of Marriage Act. With DOMA gone, most of the costs of being gay would go too.
Take for example health insurance. When employers cover domestic partners, the extra costs from being gay stem from the tax consequences of domestic partner coverage. These tax consequences are because DOMA doesn't allow the IRS to recognize gay marriages.
In the Times article, health insurance posed the biggest cost unique to same sex couples. But the cost is only so large when one partner, not covered with his own job, must buy private insurance because his partner's job doesn't have domestic partnership coverage.
Or, look at the differences in social security benefits or IRA contribution limits. Gay couples pay more in these areas because of DOMA, not state laws. Other areas the article discusses--tax preparation, estate taxes (especially important for wealthy couples)--would similarly have little effect if DOMA were repealed.
While DOMA repeal may not happen soon, it will certainly come before the federal government even thinks about nationally legalizing gay marriage. As a result, gay couples may not have to put up with these extra costs for too long.
[Cross-posted at the Gay Couples Law Blog, which discusses same sex family law, estate planning, and taxes.]
Every day, LGBT people face inequalities that just don't make sense, from small acts of discrimination to ones with tragic consequences. The hard reality is that we find out what rights we don't have when we need them the most. For many of us, that means that we have to ask ourselves, am I protected?Unfortunately too many of us avoid that question estion and lapse into inaction, maybe hoping someone will act for us. And we're all well aware that too many of our straight friends and neighbors don't even know the question exists. These two groups, I presume, are the audience for this ad.
The answer to the question is "no", and the solution to the problem is taking personal action in making change for ourselves. Sometimes all it takes is having an informative chat with a friend to bring them up to speed. Believe it or not, a friend of mine just found that his hair stylist in Seattle did not know about Referendum 71. If this is not proof that we need to take every opportunity we have between now and Nov. 3rd to talk to everyone we know until they mark "approved" on R-71 and mail in that ballot, I don't know what is.
Many Washingtonians will know Charlene Stong's story, but here's it is in a nutshell:
Charlene Strong lost her partner Kate Fleming after a tragic flooding incident in Seattle in late 2006, and was nearly barred from seeing Fleming in her last moments of life. Strong's heart-wrenching testimony about the hospital ordeal helped prompt Washington State to pass domestic partnership protections for same-sex couples. The award-winning feature documentary for my wife chronicles Strong's journey through tragedy to activism.
According to ERWEF director Connie Watts via the SLOG, the ad is airing "though the end of the week in Seattle, Walla Walla, Yakima, Tri Cities, Vancouver, and Bellingham." After that, "we are giving opportunities on our website for people to buy more airtime anywhere they would like to." Looks like you can buy a spot in Yakima for only $17!
Note that this community service announcement is not a campaign commercial and therefore doesn't mention Referendum 71. This would be in-line with the mission of the ERWEF:
About the ERW Education Fund
The Equal Rights Washington Education Fund is a 501(c)(3) organization, and is the public education arm of the ERW family of organizations. Through the Education Fund, ERW can organize, educate, communicate, and recruit supporters to our ranks through broad-based issue education unrelated to current legislation. A significant portion of the work conducted through ERW is done through the Education Fund. In many ways, the Education Fund is the organization that allows us to work on "changing hearts and minds" throughout the state on a myriad of LGBT issues. The Education Fund has a separate board from the other organizations. All contributions to the Equal Rights Education Fund are tax deductible.
No comments:
Post a Comment