Proposal would expand domestic partner benefits

By Rick Schneider
Publisher
Published on Sunday, April 13, 2008 3:45 PM MST

The Governor’s Regulatory Review Council has voted to extend domestic partner benefits to employees of the state and university. Unmarried straight couples, not just gays and lesbians, would be covered.

Howard Fischer of Capital Media Services quoted Department of Administration Director Bill Bell as saying, “The cost to taxpayers, perhaps $6 million a year, is outweighed by what the state and universities will save in attracting and retaining qualified employees.”

This is a very lame argument, but it gets worse.

Matthew Benson wrote in the Arizona Republic, “The Arizona Department of Administration expects to make up those cost increases with savings in other areas of the employee benefits plan.”

Arizona is facing a $3 billion deficit the next two years, and legislators are struggling to find ways to cut spending and balance the budget. This will be difficult because more than two-thirds of our state budget cannot be tampered with because it’s protected by various mandates and voter-approved initiatives.

Most government agencies demand more funding every year and argue that they cannot function if their budgets are cut; when asked to cut spending, we’re told there’s not a penny to spare.

It’s amazing how easily a Department of Administration bureaucrat could find an extra $6 million to undermine marriage and appease the gay rights lobby.

Print this story Email this story Post A Comment

Comments

8 comment(s)

Supporter wrote on Aug 6, 2008 11:53 AM:

" The cities of Phoenix, Scottsdale, Tempe and Tucson as well as a number of private employers offer domestic partner benefits. "

Wayne wrote on Jul 21, 2008 7:28 AM:

" Treating people fairly should never be left to the whims of the voters. Thank you Gov for doing what's right. There are many ways to prove a domestic partner or similar relationship. Those who are against this are just looking for excuses to shoot it down. "

I pay taxes too wrote on Jul 8, 2008 3:41 PM:

" There are certain restrictions that apply such as:
Cannot be blood related.
Must be at least 18 years of age.
Must share a permanent residence and have been living together for at least one year.
Must be financially interdependant.
etc.
What if you were living with your significant other (gay or straight) and one day they lose their job and in that one week of unemployment they go through, they just so happen to get in a horrible car accident? Good luck with the medical bills seeing as they just lost their benefits. "

Jason wrote on Apr 14, 2008 8:39 PM:

" You see as a state employee the family rate is about $150 for medical. As a single rate its about $50. So if I was working for the state and claim 10 workers as my partners and they all kick in the cost in equall amount. Does the state save money on the insurance claims that way. Or will the benefits only go up? The tax payers pay the rest of the premiums. So who wins here. A minority of people or the majority of Arizona. Whats considered a partner and by who? Just some thoughts. "

Jason wrote on Apr 14, 2008 8:35 PM:

" So here is one problem. How do people prove they are couples. If I claim my neighbor and his 7 kids as my partners does that count. Is there a limit on how many partners I can have. Why not my dog? Why not my cousin? Where does the line get drawn? With a marriage between a man and a woman we get at least a piece of paper saying we are a couple. What if 1 state worker claims the entire office as their partner. Does this cover as a family rate. Or single rate.
"

Know who he is wrote on Apr 14, 2008 7:59 AM:

" The governor's budget that is breaking Arizona's piggy bank could not have been enacted WITHOUT the votes of key individuals in the statehouse, individuals you voted into office. One of those responsible for this budget and one of those responsible for aiding the governor in her actions you voted for.

He's running for office again and he hopes you'll forget that he voted for this budget that our governor presented to the legislature.

There's no golden arches to this governor's budget. "

Weary Reader wrote on Apr 14, 2008 7:55 AM:

" Lets see, the State of Arizona has money troubles in the billions and all this governor can think of is benefits for gay couples.

I challenge Bill Bell's comment that a lack of domestic benefits for gay couples has any impact on the ability of the state to attract and recruit qualified employees. Maybe just not the kind of employees the governor wants?

No citizen voted on this. Those you elected didn't vote on this. The governor, acting as the Supreme Dictator of Arizona decided her partner needed health care benefits... "

Pima2 wrote on Apr 14, 2008 7:21 AM:

" It's very simple. Since none of the politicians will touch this, simply put it on the ballot for the voters to decide. How novel an idea hugh! Oh the govenor will never stand for that. It's only 6 mil. Should be easy even though it is totally unsupported by the majority.
They always try to tie the domestic partners in with the can't get this passed group. They should try to pass each groups agenda one at a time to see how that goes. Together they never seem to fly. "

WRITE A COMMENT

READER COMMENTS
* Be respectful of others, the writer and the subjects in the story.

* Be relevant. Keep your comments pertinent to the story that is being discussed.

Comment posters are responsible for the opinions they express and the accuracy of the information they provide. We urge comment writers to treat this as a public forum where manners matter. We encourage a collegial, non-insulting tone. All reader comments must be approved by our staff before posting to the Web site. Be aware, in accordance with the Communications Decency Act and provisions upheld in judicial appeal, that you are responsible for comments posted on this Web site. The Eastern Arizona Courier is not liable for messages from third parties. IP addresses can be subpoenaed and your identity established by individuals who have been hurt by your comments.

DO NOT POST:
* Potentially libelous statements or damaging innuendo.
* Obscene, explicit, or racist language.
* Personal attacks, insults or threats.
* The use of another person's real name to disguise your identity: You can be prosecuted for identity theft.
* Comments unrelated to the story.

Opinions, advice and all other information expressed in www.eacourier.com reader comments represent the individual's own views and not those of the Eastern Arizona Courier. The Courier does not endorse and is not responsible for statements, advice or opinions offered by anyone other than Eastern Arizona Courier spokespersons.

Thank you for your comments!