THE HILL
 

Senator Lieberman bill could cross a bridge in same-sex marriage debate

By J. Taylor Rushing - 10/11/09 01:43 PM ET

Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.) is ready to re-start a debate over domestic benefits to gay federal employees and their spouses.

Lieberman told The Hill he hopes to push a bill onto the Senate floor by the end of the year that would grant the same benefits to gay federal employees and their spouses as given any married federal employee and their spouse.

Benefits include federal health insurance, enhanced dental and vision care, retirement and disability provisions and life insurance and benefits in cases of death or disability. Members of the military would be excluded.

Lieberman said he expects to hold a hearing on the bill soon — an initial hearing was already held in the 110th Congress, but the senator said the Obama administration should be more welcoming.

“We have a whole new administration with a different attitude toward this, so I think I’d like to give people an opportunity to testify,” Lieberman said. “And then I’d like to bring the bill out sometime before the end of the year.”

In the House, the bill is being pushed by Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), and has already cleared a subcommittee tasked with overseeing the federal work force. The full Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, chaired by Rep. Edolphus Towns (D-N.Y.), has not yet scheduled it for a hearing.

“We’re hoping a full committee markup will be scheduled in the next couple of weeks and it will be on track for a floor vote this fall,” said Baldwin spokeswoman Jerilyn Goodman, when asked about the bill’s prospects.

Lieberman’s bill has only one GOP co-sponsor, Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine). All of the other 24 co-sponsors are Democrats.

Asked if the bill had at least 60 votes to overcome a Senate filibuster, Lieberman said he didn’t know but that the costs of the bill should be minimal.

Lieberman said he sees the bill as a pragmatic approach to federal hiring practices — not as a civil rights issue.

“I’m sure it will be controversial,” he said. “To me this is not a question of fairness. Our committee oversees the civil service, and to me this is a way to broaden the pool of people that we can recruit to work for the federal government. This is why Fortune 500 companies give benefits to domestic partners, because it both attracts and keeps the best employees.”

Source:
http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/62569-lieberman-bill-may-cross-a-bridge-in-same-sex-debate

Comments (8)

Thanks pal, can't wait to see how much this is going to cost the taxpayers. I would also like to ask, will this affect churches performing marriage? I thought so.BY kansasgirl on 10/11/2009 at 21:25
Kansasgirl, how could supplying benefits to same-sex partners lead to churches performing same-sex marriage?Most large companies provide such benefits without affecting churches. Also, even in states where same-sex marriage is legal, churches are not required to perform such marriages.BY Greg on 10/12/2009 at 10:32
@KANSASGIRL, why do you hate them so much that you cannot stand for that group of people to have equal rights?BY Chris on 10/12/2009 at 10:32
Kansasgirl,Are you as stupid as your comment suggests?BY Kevin on 10/12/2009 at 10:35
Oh, this is vintage Joe. Even when doing the absolutely right thing, he has to rush to shore up his jerk credentials by explaining that he's not doing it for reasons of fairness or equality. We get that you're not a Democrat, Joe. You don't have to keep assuring us.BY Meredith on 10/12/2009 at 11:09
When similar laws have been passed in various states there were those who swore the cost was going to bust the budget. The reality is that the costs are usually minimal.BY oddjob on 10/12/2009 at 11:13
Hey KansasGirl,I've worked in HR and Benefits with a company that offered same-sex benefits. In order to prove that you're actually together on a 'permanent' basis you have to show that you've been living together for six months—some companies want 12.Usually this means showing by means of bills or or bank accounts or something that shows you've been residing at the same residence.Church has nothing to do with it. So before you start complaining and making a fool of yourself, do your research.BY HRQueer on 10/13/2009 at 22:01
I pay 400 dollars a month as employee of the federal government for the family plan. Unfortunately this DOES NOT include my life partner, who has NO health insurance due to a recent job loss. We want basic civil rights, nothing more.BY Mary on 10/14/2009 at 15:48

Add Comment

Name (required)

E-Mail (will not be published) (required)

Your Comments

You need Flash Player 8 (or higher) and JavaScript enabled to view this content

Get latest news from The Hill direct to your inbox, RSS reader and mobile devices.