(Updated-HB9 Fails) Domestic Partnership: The Facts

UPDATE: Much of this post is now moot, for now anyway, because the Domestic Partnership Act (HB9) failed to pass in the NM Senate Judiciary Committee this morning. It was tabled by a vote of 6-4. More than 200 supporters were in attendence. Sen. Lidio Rainaldi (D-Gallup) had a major hand in killing the bill, as he did last year. Rio Arriba County legislator Sen. Richard Martinez (D-Espanola) was the other Dem defector. Funny how the concepts of "sanctity" and "Catholic morality" are only in play when crushing measures that seek to correct civil liberty travesties, but not when you're greedily grabbing taxpayer money to fund the follies of your cronies. More to come on this.
*************
Yesterday's New Mexico In Focus on KNME included a discussion during The Line portion of the show on New Mexico's domestic partnership act (HB9). The bill is currently held up in the NM Senate Judiciary Committee after passing the House and the Senate Public Affairs Committee. The topic is covered during the first eight and a half minutes or so of the video clip above.

As a gay person in an 18-year relationship with my partner, I found much of the discussion to be accurate and on target, but I had trouble with a couple of the ideas suggested for a fix in lieu of domestic partnership legislation. Both James Scarantino and Pat Frisch advanced the notion that all the basic civil rights delineated in the domestic partnership act could be achieved merely by having partners sign contracts of various sorts. Pat Frisch even suggested this could be done by downloading simple documents available on the web. There are serious problems with this approach.

Can Contracts Replicate Legislation?
As Margaret Montoya states, it would be impossible to contractually achieve the 100 or more rights guaranteed by marriage under state law. Even if it could be done, it would cost thousands of dollars and many hours of time to obtain basic legal rights that the rest of the citizenry gets for free if they enter into what amounts to a legal civil union, apart from any church ceremony. Is that fair?

Moreover, there are myriad real-life examples posted all over the web of people who ran into trouble during medical emergencies and similar situations. For instance, many have encountered problems if they don't have copies on their person of all the legal contracts they executed to try and obtain at least some legal protections. Even if people keep copies of such documents with them at all times, there are many examples of authorities denying their validity for proving next of kin status or other legalities in an emergency.

Such problems often arise at times of great stress, adding to the pain caused by the event itself. Perhaps a partner is suddenly injured or becomes seriously ill while traveling and is unconcious -- and medical personnel refuse to allow the other partner to make medical decisions on behalf of the partner in distress. Sometimes a partner dies unexpectedly and authorities take charge of the body and refuse to release it to the surviving partner. Believe me, horror stories abound about situations like this.

Contracts Can't Replicate All Rights
While partners can execute certain legal documents that seek to protect their rights -- like wills and  powers of attorney -- there are many essential legal rights that are unobtainable through contracting. I'll use a situation from my own experience as an example. I'm lucky enough to be able to purchase health insurance via my partner's employer as a domestic partner, even though we have no explicit legal documentation supplied by the state of our partnership. Before my partner agreed to accept her current job, she requested such coverage be made available. Because her employer was enlightened enough to negotiate with their insurance provider, I was able to be added onto her health insurance coverage at the same cost spouses pay. All we had to do was sign an affidavit that attested to our relationship.

Of course the deductions from my partner's paycheck that pay for my coverage are taxable, unlike the tax-free deductions for insurance of spouses or dependents. But I do have medical insurance I couldn't get or afford on my own. All well and good -- as long as my partner stays at that employer. If she switched to a job at a smaller firm to better her career and/or compensation, there would be no way for me to obtain coverage under her policy. This is true even if the new employer wanted to offer it to me -- as some potential employers have.

Insurance companies won't offer domestic partner coverage in New Mexico via sworn affidavit unless the employer group is large. No current law requires them to do so. And bear in mind that most firms in New Mexico are small ones in the eyes of the insurance industry. However, if the domestic partnership law currently being considered by our Legislature were passed, they'd have to offer me coverage as long as my partner and I had obtained an official domestic partnership license for $25. There is no way this could be achieved with any kind of contract between my partner and I.

An Aside on Federal Law
Oh, and by the way, if my partner should be layed off, my coverage would be cut immediately regardless. My partner could extend her coverage under the federal government's COBRA law until she found another job with benefits. But because Bill Clinton signed the so-called Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), the federal government can offer COBA coverage only to heterosexual married couples. Even if gay couples have legalized their relationships using domestic partnership, civil union or gay marriage laws, the federal government is precluded by DOMA from recognizing such relationships. And if my partner took a job with the federal government, we'd be out of luck on all counts. The federal government is prohibited from offering any benefits at all to domestic partners or those united via civil union or gay marriage laws due to DOMA. Thanks, Bill.

Voting on Civil Rights
One last thing. Pat Frisch also suggested it might be a good idea to have New Mexicans vote on whether domestic partneship licenses should be made available. I wonder how many other minorities would like to have their basic civil rights dependent on a vote of the majority. Imagine how well that would have worked during the civil rights era in the 60s when African-Americans were empowered, or even now in some places. One of the most critical goals of a democracy is, by its very nature and definition, to protect the rights of minorities from the tyranny of majorities. Should GLBT people be left out of this equation because of certain narrow religious or moral beliefs held by segments of the populace? You tell me.