Tampa Bay Coalition
Posts this Political Equality Update in Support and on Behalf of;

Since the last edition of HRC's Political Equality Update, the the Federal Marriage Amendment -- a measure seeking to permanently deny marriage to same-sex couples -- was introduced in the House of Representatives. This edition of HRC's Political Equality Update includes the latest information on the introduction of the federal marriage amendment, information on recent transgender hate crimes, the newest co-sponsors of key legislation and a summary of what is happening in the states. As always, your comments are welcomed at field@hrc.org.

The Human Rights Campaign on May 28 denounced the introduction of the Federal Marriage Amendment in the House of Representatives -- a measure seeking to permanently deny marriage to same-sex couples. The measure was introduced May 21, 2003, by Rep. Marilyn Musgrave, R-Colo., and proposes to amend the U.S. Constitution to define marriage as the union of a man and a woman. Joining Musgrave as co-sponsors are nine representatives, both Democrat and Republican. They are Reps.: Roscoe Bartlett, R-Md.; Jo Ann Davis, R-Va.; Virgil Goode, R-Va.; Ralph M. Hall, D-Texas; Mike McIntyre, R-N.C.; Joseph Pitts, R-Pa.; Collin C. Peterson, D-Minn.; David Vitter, R-La.; Dave Weldon, R-Fla.; and Joe Wilson, R-S.C.

Passing a federal constitutional amendment is, by design, a complicated and complex process. First, the amendment has to be introduced as a joint resolution in the House and Senate. It must then pass both houses by a two-thirds majority vote. Finally, the amendment must be ratified by three-quarters of the states. During the 107th Congress, a similar resolution was introduced in the House but never in the Senate. That resolution did not receive any legislative action and subsequently died.

Read HRC's release on the introduction of the amendment
If you have not yet done so, please log on to HRC's Online Action Center to urge your member of Congress to oppose this amendment. Then use the site's tell-a-friend feature to let your family and friends know about this critical issue.

Federal and state courts are poised to decide three important lawsuits that affect lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Americans. First, the Massachusetts high court is expected to rule on same-sex marriage in Goodridge v. Massachusetts Department of Health. That case was brought by Gay and Lesbian Advocates & Defenders on behalf of seven same-sex couples from Massachusetts who seek to marry. Then, perhaps in July, the U.S. Supreme Court is expected to rule on the constitutionality of state sodomy laws in Lawrence v. State. In that case, police broke into John Lawrence's apartment while responding to a false report of an armed intruder. They found Lawrence having sex with Tyron Garner and arrested both men under the Texas law that criminalizes only same-sex intimacy. Lambda Legal is representing Lawrence and Garner. Finally, within a few months after the Supreme Court rules, a federal appeals court is expected to rule on Florida's anti-gay adoption law in Lofton v. Kearney. In Lofton, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals is considering a case brought by the American Civil Liberties Union on behalf of three families headed by gay fathers, all of whom are being denied the opportunity to adopt children they have been parenting for many years.

Two recent murders and other apparent bias crimes in the news during the last two weeks have saddened the GLBT community. In reacting May 22 to the tragic murders of two GLBT community members, HRC expressed particular concern that people of color within the GLBT community may be particularly at risk for violence. Sakia Gunn, an African-American teen-ager in New Jersey, was stabbed to death May 11 after telling a man she was a lesbian. A week earlier, Jessica (Horatio) Mercado, a Latina transgender woman, was found stabbed to death in her Connecticut apartment.

These crimes have raised public awareness of the threat that hate crimes pose to GLBT people and demonstrate the need for expanding our nation's 34-year-old federal hate crime statute.

In another apparent anti-gay attack on May 22, a gay student in Houston was allegedly assaulted by a teacher's aide. HRC staff members are investigating the case and have contacted local activists and law enforcement about the incident.

Meanwhile, in Phoenix, Ariz., a Sikh truck driver seriously wounded in a shooting May 19 was apparently targeted because of his religious faith, police said. Avtar Singh, 52, an Indian immigrant, had parked his 18-wheeler and called his son, who was just a few blocks away, to pick him up. While he was waiting, at least two young white men pulled up in a small red pickup truck and started yelling, "Go back to where you belong to." "And at the same time I heard the shot," Singh said. The shooting is being investigated as a hate crime by local and federal authorities.

Attacks against Sikhs have increased dramatically since Sept. 11. The FBI's 2001 Uniform Crime Reports - the most recent year for which we have statistics -- showed that as overall crime slightly increased nationally, by 2.1 percent, reported hate crimes increased 20.7 percent from 2000 to 2001. Unlike hate crimes based on sexual orientation and gender identity, federal authorities have been able to assist in the investigation of hate incidents based on race, religion and national origin since 1969.

A Federal Response: LLEEA
As reported in the last Equality Update, the Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act (LLEEA), re-introduced in the Senate last month, would add real or perceived sexual orientation, gender and disability to current law and allow greater flexibility for federal involvement in crimes based on race, religion and national origin. The bill is supported by more than 175 religious, law enforcement, civil rights and civic organizations including the Sikh Mediawatch and Resource Taskforce, or SMART. To read their news release supporting LLEEA.

The U.S. Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria Act of 2003 (H.R. 1298) became law last week with President Bush's signature. This important piece of legislation authorizes the expenditure of $15 billion over the next five years to fight the global pandemic of HIV/AIDS. While HRC applauds the president for focusing his attention on this important issue, enthusiasm is muted. Instead of focusing on science-based, comprehensive contraceptive distribution and sexuality education, Congress inserted language in the bill requiring one-third of the funds spent on HIV prevention be dedicated to abstinence-only-until-marriage programs. This ill-considered move will guarantee that people across the world will lack the information they need to make safe, educated decisions about HIV prevention.

Support among members of Congress is growing for a pledge asserting that they will not discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity or expression in employment decisions for staffing their congressional offices. Throughout the last several years, HRC has requested members of Congress to state, in writing, that their office does not discriminate based on employees' sexual orientation. At the same time, the Gender Public Advocacy Coalition has independently requested members of Congress to state, in writing, that their office does not discriminate based on employees' gender identity and expression. This year, GenderPAC and HRC have combined efforts to ask members of Congress to sign a single joint statement affirming that they do not discriminate in the employment practices of their offices based on employees' sexual orientation and gender identity and expression.

As of June 4, 112 bipartisan members of Congress have signed the statement of non-discrimination. This includes 97 representatives and 15 senators. The latest members to sign this pledge are:

As of June 4, 108 members of Congress have signed on in support of the Permanent Partners Immigration Act (PPIA, H.R.638) - more than ever before. This important piece of legislation would allow American citizens to sponsor their same-sex partners for U.S. immigration benefits in the same way opposite-sex couples can currently petition for such recognition. Additionally, the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF) formally endorsed PPIA on May 19, lending their important voice to the effort to gather further congressional support for the bill. HRC continues to work in coalition with the Lesbian Gay Immigration Rights Task Force, Loves Sees No Borders and other groups to educate members of the House on the inequity of current U.S. law. Our coalition is also seeking a sponsor for a Senate version of PPIA.

H.R. 1430 -- Family and Medical Leave Inclusion Act
This bill would extend the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 to cover employees taking leave to care for their domestic partners with a serious health condition. The Family and Medical Leave Act has helped 35 million Americans take up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave to care for their new children or sick family members, or to recover from their own serious illnesses. Many gay men and lesbians cannot take advantage of these benefits because their partners are not recognized under federal law.

Rep. Earl Blumenauer, D-Ore.-3 - May 22, 2003
Rep. Tom Lantos, D-Calif. - May 22, 2003

If you are putting money away in a 401(k) or individual retirement account to save for your family's future, you should know that when you or your partner dies, whomever survives will face significant tax penalties because of discrimination against same-sex couples in federal retirement laws. To learn more about this and what HRC is doing about it, visit the new resource on HRC FamilyNet.

The HRC legal department released the June 2003 edition of LAWbriefs, HRC Foundation's quarterly publication summarizing the latest GLBT legal developments.

California - Assembly Passes Two Pro-GLBT Bills, HRC Activists Participate in Statewide Lobby Day
California is one step closer to recognizing domestic partners equally under state law, thanks to two successful votes June 4 in the Assembly. The Assembly passed A.B. 205, authored by Assemblywoman Jackie Goldberg, which would expand California's Domestic Partnership Law to grant registered domestic partners nearly all the rights, benefits and obligations available to spouses under state law, by a 41-29 vote. The Assembly also passed A.B. 17, which would prohibit the state from contracting with vendors who deny benefits to employees' domestic partners that are offered to employees' spouses, by a 42-32 vote. The measures, which now head to the Senate, could have a significant impact on the approximately 20,000 couples in California who had registered as domestic partners with the secretary of state office as of May 2003, as well as other couples associated with California through their employers.

HRC's field department has worked tirelessly to support the work of Equality California (EQCA, formerly California Alliance for Pride and Equality), the statewide gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender advocacy group that sponsored the bills and spearheaded the efforts for their passage. HRC mobilized activists throughout the state to take action on the bill through the HRC Online Action Center, mailings and phone calls; co-sponsored town hall meetings; and conducted phone banks to key districts. HRC sent a joint letter with Equality California in the spring to approximately 4,000 businesses asking for their support of A.B. 17. More than 100 of these letters were entered into the Assembly Judiciary Committee record during the April 1 hearing. In addition, HRC underwrote several joint EQCA-HRC projects, and the group has received $14,000 in Equality Fund grants from HRC over the last two years. HRC has also committed to substantial additional support this year.

HRC activists were well-represented May 19 at the Equality California lobby day in Sacramento. Lisa Bennett, deputy director for HRC FamilyNet, and six HRC board and steering committee members from the state took part in meetings with their legislators. HRC representatives joined a coalition of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender activists and allies who spoke out in favor of A.B. 205, A.B. 17 and A.B. 196, which would add gender identity to the state's non-discrimination policy for housing and employment decisions.

Georgia - Historic Testimony on Statewide Non-Discrimination Bill
For the first time in state history, testimony on an anti-discrimination bill that includes both sexual orientation and gender identity was heard in a Georgia legislative body. On May 27, 2003, the state Legislature heard House Bill 885, which would prohibit discrimination on sexual orientation (among other categories) in employment, public accommodations, credit and banking, education and insurance. The bill's language defines sexual orientation to include gender identity and expression. The statewide political advocacy organization, Georgia Equality, is part of a broad coalition of organizations that have been working on this bill for several years. HRC worked with Georgia Equality to alert members about the hearing and to encourage them to contact committee members to show their support.

New Hampshire - New Poll Results Show a Majority of N.H. Residents Support Marriage for Same-Sex Couples
According to a new statewide poll, 54 percent of New Hampshire residents support a law that would allow the state to issues marriage licenses to same-sex couples. The poll, which was conducted by the University of New Hampshire, also found that 42 percent of residents oppose the idea. Younger residents were much more likely than older residents to support such legislation. Among adults age 17 to 29, 70 percent support marriage for same-sex couples while 64 percent of adults over 70 are opposed. The poll found broad support for extending many of the specific benefits of marriage to same-sex couples, such as pension and Social Security, automatic inheritance rights without taxes, and making medical decisions for an incapacitated partner. The poll was commissioned by the New Hampshire Freedom to Marry Coalition (www.nhftm.org) and funded by a Human Rights Campaign Equality Fund grant.

Texas - Defense of Marriage Act Signed By Governor
The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA, S.B. 7), a divisive anti-gay bill was signed May 27 by Texas Gov. Rick Perry, a Republican. The blatantly discriminatory bill defines marriage as reserved for a man and a woman, and allows Texas to deny recognition of same-sex civil unions entered into in other states. Having previously passed the state Senate, the Texas House overwhelmingly passed the Texas DOMA on April 30 by a 118-9 vote. The bill was authored by Sen. Jeff Wentworth, R-San Antonio, and sponsored by Rep. Warren Chisum, R-Pampa. The law goes into effect Sept. 1, 2003. To get involved with state legislative advocacy, visit: http://www.lgrl.org