Wisconsin Assembly Passes Domestic Partnerships

[ccharles000]

The Wisconsin Assembly pulled an all-nighter overnight to finally pass a budget in the early hours of Saturday morning. That 50-48 party line vote by the Democrat-controlled Assembly for the $62.2 billion budget also included important policy changes, including the establishment of a Domestic Partnership registry for same-sex couples. Among the very limited benefits of Domestic Partnerships include provisions for jointly owning property, hospital visitation rights and inheritance. Domestic partners of state employees would also be eligible to receive the same state retirement and health insurance benefits as spouses.

The budget will now go to the Senate, which is expected to vote on it sometime next week.

If domestic partnerships become law, Wisconsin would be the first state with an existing constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage and civil unions to provide domestic partnership protections for same-sex couples.

http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/06/13/12095#comments

[Indydem]

1. I'm torn on this...

It provides homosexual couples the protections and rights that they so desperately deserve and want, BUT its not the same, at least in name.

Seperate but equal?

[ccharles000]

2. baby steps

[jberryhill]

4. "Separate but equal" was a term applied to public facilities - i.e. physical things that differed

No two water fountains, schools, train cars, etc. could be "equal". That principle was repudiated with respect to public facilities, because when you are talking about something like a school, then in practice and principle "black" schools and "white" schools were inherently not equal.

If one is talking about a tax exemption valued at $X then, yes, it is of the same value of any other tax exemption valued at $X.

If you are talking about being permitted to visit a sick spouse or partner in a hospital, and presuming that the civil partnership provides all of the same rights, then it is the same hospital to which spouses or partners are permitted to visit.

[ThomCat]

3. Maybe this will help us build momentum towards full equality.

It's a step in the right direction. It's an improvement, and in that regard it's a very good thing.

But at this point I think we all agree that we're not settling for separate but equal, so Wisconsinites knows this isn't stopping here. :)

[ShadowLiberal]

5. It's probably about as well as we can do without overturning the gay marriage ban

It's definitely a step in the right direction, that's for sure. But the real battle for equality is going to be overturning the state's gay marriage ban amendment.

[WillParkinson]

6. This will be interesting...

This could be tied up in court for years, as the Right-Wing-Fright-Fest clamors about their precious amendment that stripped me of my rights.

[DarkTirade]

7. A step in the right direction.

A small step, but a step nonetheless.

[Rowdyboy]

8. I've spent my life in Mississippi...this is a BOLD step by our standards....

Any step forward however small should be celebrated as a fucking MILESTONE! We get so few victories we need to learn to celebrate the ones we have...

[LeftHander]

9. This will bump against the 2006 Constitutional Ban...

It seems to me this is designed to immediately force review of the constitutionality of the 2006 marriage constitutional amendment. The amendment has wording the specifically prohibits recognition of any union that substantively similar to "marriage".

Also the amendment may be tossed out altogether because it is before the Supreme Court in that is appeared to ask two questions of the voters rather than the required one question.