A new war on the home front

Two Christian organizations prepare to take up arms

By Tony Giampetruzzi

If Michael Heath and Paul Volle have their way, their Holy War against gays in Maine will carry-on with a new battle against domestic partnership benefits in the coming months. Respectively, the two direct the Maine Christian Civic League and the Christian Coalition of Maine, and together they have led a ragtag army of Christian soldiers to victory in the last few years, stomping out equal rights for Maine’s gay and lesbian community in two referenda in 1998 and 2000. Their spoils have given them a Napoleonic view of just what they can accomplish here and, lacking no hubris, they’re at it again.

At issue is domestic partnership benefits for Mainers and, specifically a new bill, LD 1703, An Act to Ensure Access to Health Insurance, that would make it easier for small businesses to offer such benefits to their employees if they so choose. And, while the bill would be a boon to unmarried heterosexual couples, gay couples would stand to gain as well, a fact that has Maine’s right-wing forces in a frenzy. But, this latest showdown began even before LD 1703 even made it to the House Banking and Insurance Committee in April.

Volle and Heath were none too happy in March when it was announced that a contract had been penned that will give state workers access to domestic partnership (DP) benefits beginning July 1. The State Employee Health Commission (SEHC) approved the measure that

was subsequently blessed by Governor King. “As in the private sector, state government needs to keep pace with the times to ensure that it is able to recruit and retain employees, and that includes insurance coverage for domestic partnership,” said King. “We’re doing the right thing and, I should add, with minimal financial impact.”

Not to be undone, Volle and Heath reached out to their minions and found an ally in Rep. Brian M. Duprey (R-Hampden), who submitted emergency legislation in March to “review” the SEHC’s decision, claiming that the Commission operated under secrecy and that the legislature has the right to know how state money is being spent. Not only did the legislature vote to ignore Durpey’s request, it began right away to take up three bills aimed at expanding DP benefits availability to those in the private sector. Only LD 1703 survived and it is receiving unprecedented support while on the brink of being released from Committee (where it passed muster with an 11-2 vote) and onto the House floor.

The bill, says Vanessa Duquette of Consumers for Affordable Health Care, is unique in that it is not a mandated bill. “This bill only gives employers in Maine an option, so I don’t understand what the fuss is about.”

Essentially, LD 1703, sponsored by Rep. Ben Dudley (D-Portland), would require insurance companies to include insurance for domestic partners in packages offered to employers with under 50 employees. “All this bill does is give employers the option to offer DP benefits,” explains Duquette. “Nowhere does it mandate that employers MUST offer domestic partnership benefits” But the “option” component of the bill has done nothing to placate Heath, who is leading the fight against this bill and DP benefits in general.

“We’ve been betrayed,” squawked Heath after the bill was introduced. “The legislative leadership and the governor told me that everything was going to be quiet on ‘gay’ rights issues after the vote last fall. They lied to me.” With that, Heath held a press conference at which he hinted at the fact that he would need 1500 volunteers to step-up and gather signatures for what could be another People’s Veto, this time to keep health care out of the hands of those deadbeat gays. According to the Christian Coalition of Maine’s web site, an “Ad Hoc Committee for Marriage and Family” has been formed, “Petition Circulator Commitment Forms” have been distributed for a People’s Veto of LD 1703, and a post card effort launched to let Legislators know that the CCL and CC of Maine oppose the bill.

“I wish we didn’t have to consider this,” said Heath. “There may be no other option. Augusta is controlled by political forces friendly to the goals of homosexual activists.” Those words and that flawed logic, says David Garrity, president of the Maine Lesbian and Gay Political Alliance, proves what people have been saying, and what Heath and Volle have been denying, for years – they just downright don’t like gays.

“Since when did domestic partnerships become an exclusively gay issue?” asks Garrity. “DP benefits are becoming the standard across the country and, when it comes to the potentially insured, [consumers] are more worried about benefits getting to someone who needs to pay for a pregnancy than for gays,” said Garrity. “If DP benefits are taken away from unmarried straight couples, I’ll tell you what, they’re gonna let it be known.”

Garrity added that if Heath and Volle make good on their threat to oppose domestic partnership benefits with a referendum, their winning streak could come to an abrupt halt. “This time, people will see right through it. This will be viewed much more as a moralistic thing. People are not going to like it when they say that they want to deny other people heath care.”

Carl Leinonen, executive director of the Maine State Employees Association, agrees.

“Same-sex couples represent the absolute minority of people who domestic partnership benefits affect. There’s absolutely no question that the vast majority of people who will take advantage of it are heterosexual couples,” explains Leinonen who added that any attempt by the CCL or CC to overturn the legislation would be met with fierce opposition.

“This would be totally different (from the gay rights referendum). Recent referenda have dealt with gay rights and a lot of Mainers wouldn’t get involved because they felt one way or the other or just didn’t care,” said Leinonen. “This time, it would be much broader and it would affect a lot more people. More people will say, ‘Wait a minute. They’re attacking me now’ and, when that happens, they’ll face extraordinary opposition.

“Every single politician in this state, no matter what their political affiliation, has the critical goal of providing affordable health care to Mainers and that’s what this bill is about,” said Leinonen. “What the Christian Civic League is proposing is a very chilling image. It would be like going into a mall and randomly picking people out of the crowd to determine who lives and who dies. It’s horrible.”

Ken Morgan of the Maine AFL-CIO says that his group also supports the legislation. “Of course we support it,” said Morgan. “And if they try to repeal it, I think the opposition would resonate all over the place.”

Garrity and Leinonen are right. Domestic partnership benefits are about as mainstream as you can get these days, with straight couples signing-on at a ratio of two to one over gay couples. From Alaska Airlines to the Xerox Corporation, thousands of companies worldwide have realized that, to attract and, in more cases, to retain qualified, diverse and dynamic individuals, they must offer domestic partnership benefits to their employees. And, contrary to those who oppose such benefits, the cost has always proven to be trivial if not unfelt altogether.

In a recent study done by the Institute for Gay and Lesbian Strategic Studies (IGLSS), in the last ten years the number of Fortune 500 companies that offer domestic partnership benefits has jumped from zero in 1990 to over 100 in 2000. “Employers have recognized domestic partners for many reasons. In some cases, companies cover partners to create fairer compensation packages for gay and lesbian employees. In other cases, employers are acknowledging that employees in unmarried couples face the same work-family life concerns that make benefits important for married employees,” reads the report.

Anne Sowles, the director of Human Resources at L.L. Bean, makes it clear that her company adheres to a broad definition of “domestic partners.” “Our policies are not just about same-sex couples,” said Sowle, “But they are about recognizing that the definition of family has broadened.”

Sowles said that the decision by Bean to begin offering DP benefits last year had less to do with staying competitive than with doing what is best to support its employees. “We want to be a good corporate citizen,” said Sowles. “We also recognize that we must keep an eye on what is happening in the outside world because we absolutely don’t want to lose our employees to other companies.”

It’s just discriminatory not to offer DP benefits, said Linnea Olsen, director of corporate communications at Unum. “We just decided five years ago that we offer benefits to spouses and children so it only makes sense to offer them to partners.”

Although L.L. Bean and Unum haven’t measured the financial impact of offering DP benefits to their employees, in most other reported cases, both enrollment and cost have increased at the rate of only one percent, according to the IGLSS.

But those are all large companies, and what LD 1703 aims to do is make it easier for small companies to offer domestic partner benefits to their employees. So, why are the right-wing ‘Christian’ organizations so upset? After all, passage of the bill would cost nothing to tax payers. Quite simply, they ostensibly refuse to accept the notion that the family of today isn’t what it used to be.

Paul Volle, in a recent statement, said that, “On the one hand, LD 1703 broadens health care coverage, on the other hand, it redefines the role of traditional marriage in society through the granting of special status to those in what is termed ‘Domestic Partnerships.’ ” Volle’s group even labels the legislation as “The Trojan Horse for Gay Rights in Maine” and warns, yet again, that Maine is on a slippery slope to recognizing gay marriage.

“We don’t see this as anything close to a gay bill,” said Duquette. “Right now, there are 160,000 uninsured people in Maine and we see this bill as an opportunity to extend health insurance to more Maine citizens.”

Clark Dumont, director of regional corporate communications for Anthem/Blue Cross Blue Shield, who will start offering DP benefits to state workers on July 1, offers a matter-of-fact explanation that underscores Duquette’s statement. “We offer domestic partnership benefits to companies with 50 employees or more who desire them at this time because that’s what is considered large group coverage in Maine,” he says. “If the law was to change and we are asked to begin offering the domestic partnership option to smaller groups, then we would. It just isn’t a big deal.”

Duquette added that if Volle, Heath, and co. do go ahead with a referendum to overturn the legislation, they will be met with opposition the likes of which they haven’t seen so far. “If they did launch a referendum, things would be very different this time. They won’t be able to use their ‘special rights’ slogan because that would really anger a lot of people. This deals with health care,” said Duquette. “Our organization would certainly be against it.”

Garrity suggests that Volle and Heath have other motivations.

“They raise money by scaring people about the sissies and the dykes and that’s what they’ve been doing for 15 years. Again, they are on the verge of bankruptcy, so this is what they do. But their heads are in the clouds this time,” said Garrity. “For one thing, they just don’t seem to understand that this is a mainstream issue and they certainly don’t understand what this bill does.”

And while the financial status of the CCL of Maine is unknown, a recent electronic letter to supporters reported that program cuts were imminent. The CCL even announced that their Straight Talk Tour 2001, an evangelistic bus tour slated for May, is at risk. If it is not cancelled, that would be identical to their Straight Talk Tour 2000, during which they trotted out Michael Johnson, a so-called ex-gay with AIDS who spoke ad-nauseum at locations throughout Maine about the evils of being gay – a telling clue that they might just have a bone to pick with the gay community.

No one seems to know what’s happening behind closed doors at the Christian Civic League, the group leading the effort to squash domestic partnership benefits, and Heath refuses to return several calls made by the Phoenix. Rumor has it that potential referendum language has leaked to gay activists, but they won’t share the information either.

“Basically, what they will attempt to do is force a referendum that will make it illegal to recognize any kind of relationship in Maine other than marriage between a man and a woman,” said Garrity. “That would include any kind of benefits, registries, what have you.” Garrity added that DP benefits in towns such as Portland would be repealed if the measure were successful.

According to Olsen, nothing that Heath or Volle could do would affect her company’s policies. “They have no control of what a public company can do. It would be obscene for them to think that they could,” said Olsen.

To date, the Secretary of State’s Election Office hasn’t heard from Heath either, so it’s unlikely that anything would be placed on the ballot this year. According to Melissa Packard, the Assistant Director of Elections, a People’s Veto of a law that passes this legislative session would require an application signed by six voters to be submitted within 10 days of the legislature’s adjournment. Then, the voters would have 90 days to collect 42,101 signatures.

“It’s unlikely you’d see anything this year,” said Packard. “After all the signatures are collected and audited, then we’d have to prepare the ballots. It’s very time-consuming.”

But Garrity points to the CC and CCL’s web sites and the fact that they are aggressively raising money as evidence that something’s up.

“They say they are threatening a referendum, and they mention all these other things about needing money,” said Garrity. “I’d say this happens to be a serious threat. But, at this point, what is there to repeal? It’s nutty. They can’t just go in and waive the contract that has already been executed by a state commission,” said Garrity. “My guess is that they are going for a prospective initiative like they did in 1995. It wouldn’t be a repeal, it would nullify anything that recognizes domestic partnerships.”

Tony Giampetruzzi can be reached at groovejet4@aol.com.