Jan 13, 2006  |  By: ELIZABETH WEILL-GREENBERG  | COMMENTS     

Maryland’s Medical Decision Making Act may be dead, but gay rights advocates aren’t giving up the fight.

The state’s General Assembly, which began its 2006 legislative session Jan. 11, is expected to address advance medical directives under a proposal coming from Republican Gov. Robert Ehrlich.

The Medical Decision Making Act was approved in 2005 by both houses of the General Assembly, but was vetoed by Ehrlich. A 31-16 vote in the Senate appeared to offer hope for an override. But Equality Maryland Executive Director Dan Furmansky said that Ehrlich convinced four GOP senators who voted in favor of the act to change their positions, virtually assuring a failed override.

Those senators — Alan Kittleman (R-Howard County), E.J. Pipkin (R-Caroline), Donald Munson (R-Washington County) and Sandy Schrader (R-Howard County) — were not available for comment.

The Medical Decision Making Act would have created a statewide registry of straight and gay unmarried domestic partners and provided them with several new rights, including hospital visitation and medical decision-making rights.

In place of the Medical Decision Making Act, the governor’s office has suggested several different pieces of legislation and a public education campaign on advance medical directives, Furmansky said.

But so far Ehrlich’s proposal doesn’t guarantee all 11 protections the medical bill would have given registered couples, such as hospital visitation rights or making decisions after death, Furmansky said.

“We’re not satisfied with the current proposal,” Furmansky told the Blade.

The governor suggests creating a statewide registry of advance directives and working with several agencies to make sure advance directives for same-sex couples are understood and followed, Furmansky said.

The governor’s office declined to provide a copy of the draft legislation to the Blade. Ehrlich’s spokesperson, Shareese DeLeaver, said the governor’s office was meeting with advocates to craft alternative legislation.

Furmansky confirmed that Equality Maryland met with Ehrlich’s staff in December.

Marriage fight to resume

Also during the General Assembly session, gay rights activists will be working to extend domestic partnership benefits to county employees in Prince George’s County and to support a bill that would allow people to take deductions for medical expenses on behalf of another adult in their household who is not a dependent, according to officials with Equality Maryland.

Activists also plan to focus on defeating a proposed constitutional amendment banning equal marriage rights in the state, which was filed by Del. Don Dwyer (R-Anne Arundel.)

Furmansky said the language in Dwyer’s bill is vague, and it’s unclear how it could affect several issues, including advanced directives and domestic partner benefits for public employees, which some jurisdictions provide.

“This language is so broad it almost borders on the ridiculous,” he said.

Dwyer’s amendment reads, in part: “certain unions or relationships between individuals of the same sex are not valid in this State…”

Last year, the amendment didn’t clear committee. But Rick Bowers, chair of Defend Maryland Marriage and a candidate for the delegate seat in District 13, expects the state’s election season to nudge the proposal forward.

“The presidential election’s just passed, and they send a clear message that traditional family values still carry weight in America,” Bowers said. “Politicians will be forced to make a decision, to come out for or against traditional values.”

Dan Furmansky, executive director of Equality Maryland, says his group is not pleased with Republican Gov. Robert Ehrlich’s plan to opt for advance medical directive education in lieu of a revived Medical Decision Making Act. Ehrlich vetoed the 2005 bill, and hopes for an override were dashed when four GOP senators changed their positions.

But those up for re-election, especially the governor, have little reason to raise controversial issues in a progressive state such as Maryland, according to University of Maryland professor James Gimpel, who specializes in local elections and politics.

“I wouldn’t call Maryland a hotbed of anti-gay sentiment,” he said. “The governor’s office wants to win. They don’t want to score ideological points.”

A convenient way to avoid some controversial gay rights issues, Gimpel said, is by bowing to a same-sex marriage lawsuit that is pending in Baltimore Circuit Court.

The marriage case “gives politicians an excuse to step aside,” Gimpel said.

Filed in July 2004 by the American Civil Liberties Union on behalf of nine same-sex couples and a gay man whose partner died, the lawsuit [Deane and Polyak vs. Conaway] challenges the constitutionality of a 1973 provision that limits marriage to a man and a woman. Judge M. Brooke Murdock of the Baltimore Circuit Court heard arguments in early October.

Bowers, of ...