GLAA 2008 Policy Agenda: Marriage & Family

The DC Gay and Lesbian Activist Alliance has released their 2008 Policy Agenda which includes a comprehensive section on Marriage & Family reprinted below. The entire report is available on their website at: www.glaa.org.

Marriage and Family

The recent ruling by the California Supreme Court, granting same-sex marriage based on equal protection principles, confirmed what U.S. Chief Justice Earl Warren wrote in the 1967 case Loving v. Virginia:: “The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men.”¹⁷
GLAA seeks the fundamental right to marry as part of the full integration into American society that is our birthright.

A higher percentage of gay families live in D.C. than in most of the country. The District ranks first among the states in the percentage of coupled households that are gay or lesbian (5.14 percent). According to the Williams Institute’s analysis of data from the 2000 census, there are 3,678 same-sex partner households in the District of Columbia. Almost 33,000 gay, lesbian, and bisexual people lived in the District as of 2005, which is 8.1% of the total population.¹⁸
These families pay taxes, are contributing members of their communities, and deserve the same protections as their neighbors. Commitment and stability benefit not only the individuals involved, but society as a whole.

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the right to marriage is so fundamental that even condemned prisoners, denied the right to freedom, to vote, to free expression, and even to life itself, cannot be denied the right to marry.¹⁹
To deny same-sex couples the right to marry is at best perverse.

GLAA’s strong support for marriage equality does not blind us to strategic considerations. The U.S. Congress retains complete legislative control over the District. The Congress has been bipartisan in its opposition to full marriage rights. We have achieved remarkable success in changing public attitudes on the subject in recent years, but it may take years before we can prevent congressional demagogues from blocking same-sex marriages in the District. As we continue our advocacy and education efforts, we must remain alert for opportunities to press ahead.

Working together, not hastily filing lawsuits, is the best way to build on our victories in California and Massachusetts. As an alliance of leading marriage equality advocates states, “Pushing the federal government before we have a critical mass of states recognizing same-sex relationships or suing in states where the courts aren’t ready is likely to get us bad rulings. Bad rulings will make it much more difficult for us to win marriage, and will certainly make it take much longer.”²⁰
D.C. couples planning to ask the District to recognize their California marriages should keep in mind that D.C. courts have a history of hostility to marriage equality, and our judges are appointed by the White House, not the Mayor. The D.C. government is a far more favorable venue for the fight.

In the meantime, GLAA and our allies have been successful with an incremental strategy to expand D.C.’s domestic partnership law. The District now ranks among the top states in legal protections for same-sex couples, allowing them to protect each other and their children in times of crisis.

We wish to make it clear that, in GLAA’s candidate ratings, we will not regard agreement with our cautious strategy as sufficient without explicit endorsement of marriage equality. Notwithstanding the general consensus that the District should carefully judge the moment to move forward on a same-sex marriage bill, when we ask, “Do you support legal recognition of marriages between partners of the same sex?” we expect an answer of “Yes.” There are two crucial parts of the fight for equality: the goal itself and the strategy for reaching it. We need our elected officials to support us on both. Candidates unwilling to stand with us on this fundamental issue have no grounds to complain when we penalize them accordingly.

B. Domestic Partnership

For the sake of equity, D.C. needs to provide all of the applicable rights and responsibilities of marriage to domestic partners. However, domestic partnerships are not equivalent to marriage and should not be considered an acceptable substitute. Separate is inherently unequal.

GLAA was instrumental in codifying D.C.’s domestic partners law, the Health Care Benefits Expansion Act of 1992, which Congress finally allowed us to implement in 2002. GLAA’s incremental approach to the issue, crafted by former GLAA President Bob Summersgill, has been a complete success. With the unanimous passage of additional enhancing laws in the intervening years,²¹
registered domestic partners are now granted nearly all of the rights and responsibilities of marriage.²²
Only California and Massachusetts have more expansive laws than D.C.

We are encouraged by the widespread adoption of domestic partner benefits in private industry, including here in the Washington area. More than half of Fortune 500 companies have implemented such programs, including most of those headquartered in the District of Columbia. However, some businesses do not recognize domestic partnerships. The District government should refuse special privileges to companies that deny domestic partners the same benefits they offer to married couples. In addition, we believe that the Council should explore methods by which contractors seeking to do business with the District would be required to provide domestic partner benefits. This would help D.C. reach the goal of universal health coverage.

C. Recognition of Same-Sex Married Couples from Other Jurisdictions

D.C. is an international city and a tourist destination. People from all over the world live, work, and visit the District everyday. Opposite-sex married couples never need to worry if their marriages will be recognized in D.C. Same-sex couples from Vermont, New Hampshire, Connecticut, New Jersey, Oregon, and numerous countries can register their domestic partnership or civil union and be similarly recognized as domestic partners in the District. Same-sex married couples from Massachusetts, California, Canada, Norway, The Netherlands, Belgium, Spain, and South Africa do not know if their marriages will be recognized when they travel to D.C. It is unclear if they can make medical decisions for each other or even visit each other in hospitals should one fall ill or be in an accident. D.C. should recognize same-sex marriages from other jurisdictions and end this inequality.

D. Anti-Marriage Efforts in D.C.

A bill in Congress was reintroduced by the late Rep. Jo Ann Davis (R-VA) last year to prohibit the District of Columbia from legalizing same-sex marriage. H.R. 107 states, “In the District of Columbia, for all legal purposes, ‘marriage’ means the union of one man and one woman.” GLAA opposes this and any other attempt by Congress to impose a ban on same-sex marriage. This is an attack not only on gay people but on home rule and democracy in the District.

A ballot initiative to ban same-sex marriage was twice proposed by Lisa L. Greene of northeast Washington. The initiative was withdrawn when the Board of Elections notified Ms. Greene that it was not in proper legislative format. The initiative is likely to be brought back, and we must be prepared for it. GLAA supported the establishment of the non-profit Foundation for All D.C. Families to conduct voter education and research on this issue. We expect all elected officials in D.C. to oppose such an initiative, whether or not they support same-sex civil marriage.

E. Right to Name Children

Parents should be free to choose any name for their child. Current law—D.C. Official Code § 7-205(e)(5)—only allows the mother’s name, the father’s name, some combination of both, or a family name to be chosen when it is accompanied by an affidavit. Unfortunately, this creates a discriminatory situation for same-sex couples that don’t share the same name.

Only D.C. and seven other states have this restriction. Former D.C. Council member Kathy Patterson introduced legislation in November 2002 to grant parents complete freedom in choosing names, but it was defeated in a close vote. Parents must be provided wide latitude in the naming of their children, one of the most intimate decisions parents can make.

Mayor Fenty Requests Attorney General for Legal Opinion on Marriage Equality

Mayor Adrian Fenty said he has directed his interim attorney general, Peter Nickles, to conduct a thorough review on what the city’s legal options might be if same-sex couples in D.C. go to California to marry and ask the District government to recognize their marriages.

continue reading this story in the Blade

Adam Clampitt: I Would Make Marriage Equality a Top Priority

IT IS TIME to change the rhetoric in D.C. from “I am not opposed to same-sex marriage” to “I support marriage equality, unequivocally.” When I join the D.C. Council in January 2009 that is what I will do. Bringing about meaningful change in the District’s complex legislative environment is tough and will require a Council member who is not sympathetic, but steadfast.

The District is fortunate to have groups like Gay & Lesbian Activists Alliance and the Gertrude Stein Democratic Club, and a mayor and many Council members who have worked to make steady progress for the LGBT community. I am fortunate to have the support of many of the leaders who have worked on those issues and look forward to joining forces with them to advance fully the cause for equality.

Because of their work, registered domestic partners in the District have more rights than ever before, but the District’s new domestic partnership laws still fall short of ensuring full equality for the LGBT community. We can do better.

Some have said achieving full equality in the District, given its unique setting, is simply out of reach. Indeed, some give comfort and aid to those who work against it. Yet it is altogether too easy to rely on this rhetoric as a crutch, denying voters’ intent. I was taught that leaders should do what is right, not what is easy. Indeed, what better symbol of America’s promise and commitment to human rights could there be than to have full equality right here in our nation’s capital?

THERE ARE TWO meaningful ways that I will act immediately when I take office in January. First, like our friends in New York, the District must move to recognize same-sex marriage licenses issued from outside jurisdictions. As Council member At-Large, this will be one of my first legislative priorities. To help with this effort, I will call on Mayor Adrian Fenty to issue a mayoral order, much like New York Gov. David Paterson’s recent directive, to recognize the licenses granted in other states. As an acclaimed supporter of marriage equality, I am confident that Mayor Fenty will support this option if he can do so legally. If it is not legal, then recognition must be included in legislation I will draft for full marriage equality in January. 

I will always be a leading voice on the Council to ensure the passage of a bill creating full marriage equality. California’s State Supreme Court ruled for full marriage equality and now joins Massachusetts in recognizing same-sex marriages. Their rulings ensure this basic human right to the many same-sex couples seeking marriage in those two states. They have wisely concluded that it is not whether we allow two same-sex individuals to marry, but whether we allow the government to systematically discriminate against a class of individuals. D.C. has experienced too much discrimination in its past, and there is little room for leaders who are unwilling to see the progress and continue to move it forward.

AS WE PREPARE to introduce this marriage equality bill in the Council we must also work to elect a Congress and president who will respect the will of the people and D.C.’s progress. As I run as an independent for Council member At-Large, I will also be working with many other progressive D.C. activists this season to ensure that we increase the Democratic majority in Congress and elect a Democratic president. It is not in Congress’ interest to overreach or to disrespect America’s proud history of Federalism, and I believe that a more Democratic Congress will respect D.C.’s budget and legislative autonomy.

We all know that these efforts will not be easy and that there will be challenges by some in the District and some in Congress. We already know that in states like California and Michigan there are fights ahead. But that is not a reason to give up. It is a reason to call on our leaders to work harder. It is not in the nature of District residents to shy away from a challenge. Washington’s history is of continued progress, not of stifled measures.

We can and must do better than the same stale options of the past, and I look forward to being that leader for equality for every resident of this city.

Adam Clampitt
originally published in The Washington Blade