Posted on 10/21/2002 11:42:07 AM PDT by Incorrigible
Sunday, October 20, 2002
By KATHY BARRETT CARTER Star-Ledger Staff
[Newark, NJ] -- The battle over legal benefits for same-sex relationships is about to hit New Jersey.
A bill expected to be introduced this month would make New Jersey the third state in the nation to allow the benefits of marriage to partners living together.
The bill stops short of recognizing gay marriages, but it would sanction virtually all of the legal benefits that marriage allows.
Similar to the proposed federal Domestic Partners Benefits and Obligation Act, the state bill would allow unmarried persons to sign a certificate affirming they are in a committed, intimate relationship with a domestic partner.
That would provide the same benefits available to legal spouses when it comes to inheritance, health and life insurance, pensions and medical decision-making, according to Assemblywoman Loretta Weinberg (D-Bergen), the bill's sponsor.
"I think this is another case where the law has to catch up with reality," Weinberg said. "Folks are living together in committed relationships with the opposite or same sex. They should not be left bereft when something happens to one of the couple."
Gov. James E. McGreevey is expected to back the bill.
"Gov. McGreevey supports legislation that would provide domestic partner benefits and protections," said Jo Glading, a spokeswoman for the Governor.
But the idea of same-sex partnerships has not gained much traction in the legislative world. In fact, it has often caused backlash. In 1996, President Bill Clinton signed the Defense of Marriage Act prohibiting gay marriages. Courts in Hawaii and Alaska issued decisions recognizing gay marriages, but in both states constitutional amendments were passed undoing the court rulings.
Only Vermont has enacted domestic partnership legislation that allows homosexual couples to enter into civil unions with all the rights and responsibilities of married couples, said Seth Kilbourn, national field director for the Human Right Campaign, the nation's largest gay and lesbian political organization.
California has passed several pieces of legislation that gives same-sex couples various benefits, but together the measures are not as strong as the Vermont legislation, Kilbourn said.
Introduction of the same-sex benefit legislation in New Jersey is likely to make the state a key battleground for gay rights because it is also where seven same-sex couples have filed suit -- in Hudson County Superior Court -- seeking recognition of gay marriages.
McGreevey's likely support of the benefits legislation comes after he angered gay rights advocates by speaking out against the Hudson County lawsuit.
"New Jersey state statute has significant meaning not only rooted in common law but in application. Any attempt to change this would have a detrimental impact," he said at the time.
Gay rights advocates were surprised, they say, because they had launched an aggressive behind-the-scenes campaign to help him [McGreevey] win the governorship.
"As a Democrat I cannot understand for the life of me the political calculation the Governor made in speaking out against the lawsuit," said Steven Goldstein, former co-campaign manager for Sen. Jon Corzine and currently a legal consultant to Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund.
Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund is the group that filed the lawsuit on behalf of the same-sex couples, seeking to compel the state to give them marriages licenses.
"I like the Governor. I don't understand where this is coming from," said Goldstein.
"We were outraged he would speak against something so important to us, knowing we are an important constituency to the Democratic Party," said Laquetta Nelson, president of the Stonewall Democrats, a gay and lesbian organization. "He let us down."
Lately, however, Nelson and others have had "closed-door discussions" with administration officials to repair the rift and to get the legislation on track, she said. Introduction of the domestic partnership legislation and a strong push from McGreevey to get the bill passed would go a long way in repairing any damage.
Weinberg said other Democratic lawmakers are interested in co-sponsoring her bill, including Assemblywoman Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-Mercer).
"This legislation recognizes there are a number of committed relationships outside traditional marriage," said Coleman. "I believe they should have health benefits and be able to participate in making medical decision. There is a fairness issue."
While the measure is primarily to help same-sex couples, Coleman said it would be extended to other relationships as well.
It has yet to be seen how much resistance it will meet from Republicans.
Sen. Diane Allen (R-Burlington) said she was approached about this sort of legislation, in part because it would apply to all unmarried couples, not just gays.
"A group of retirees asked if I would look into this kind of thing. They could greatly win with this kind of legislation," said Allen.
She said she has started looking at the issue but does not know whether she would support such legislation.
"I have to determine whether it fits into the values of the people of the state," Allen said.
Other Republicans are unequivocal in their opposition. "It is bad public policy to have public recognition of homosexual or lesbian relationships," said Sen. Gerald Cardinale (R-Bergen), who introduced legislation in February banning same-sex marriages. "What people do privately without sticking it in the public is of much less interest, but once you begin to ask government to sanction it, I think, you are in a different ballpark."
Kathy Barrett Carter covers state government. She may be reached at kcarter@starledger.com or (609) 989-0254.
Not for commercial use. For educational and discussion purposes only.
I thought the libs used to say that marriage was an outdated institution.
Well, at least that's true in their socialist utopias. But not where I live.
Marriage is marriage.
The "legal benefits of marriage" are something else.
I believe they meant hetero marriage.
"Long live DU and the left wing!"
LOL! I give you credit, however. Most disruptors come to subvert. You came to entertain. O.K., I laughed enough. Time to take out the trash!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.