Jan 05, 2007  |  By: JOSHUA LYNSEN  | COMMENTS     

Proposals to extend health benefits to same-sex partners of state employees and protect trans people from discrimination are among the proposed legislation gay activists in Maryland are hoping will pass this year in the state’s General Assembly, which reconvenes Jan. 10.

“I think that this really has to be the year that we provide anti-discrimination protection for the transgender community,” said Equality Maryland Executive Director Dan Furmanksy.

Gay activists and lawmakers also indicated they’ll work to counter a conservative state delegate’s efforts to constitutionally limit marriage as the union of one man and one woman.

Del. Don Dwyer (R-Anne Arundel County) has pledged to push the constitutional amendment as the state’s highest court weighs a gay marriage case. A ruling could come at any time.

Maryland’s first openly gay state Sen. Rich Madaleno (D-Montgomery County) said there’s little chance the Democratic-controlled General Assembly will seriously entertain Dwyer’s proposal.

“I think everyone’s going to say ‘Let’s wait and see what happens at the Court of Appeals,’” he said. “All that will be put aside until after the court of appeals decision, which probably will not be until after the session concludes.”

The flip side of that, Madaleno said, is that lawmakers are unlikely to pass any bills granting “relationship recognition” for same-sex couples.

He said lawmakers instead will consider specific protections and benefits for gay Marylanders.

To that end, Furmansky said Equality Maryland is entering this year’s session with a list of specific requests. Among the top priorities are expanded state employee benefits.

“We’re already working on figuring out the best way to obtain domestic partner benefits for public sector employees,” he said. “There are so many ways one could possibly do it that we’re looking at all the ways.”

Although opponents have criticized the measure for its added costs, Madaleno said the proposal would have a negligible impact on the state’s budget.

“When Montgomery County did this, I think they said 0.8 percent of the county work force used the benefit,” he said. “It’s going to be a relatively small number.”

Madaleno said another of Equality Maryland’s top initiatives, new transgender protections, should be well received.

“I think in Maryland, there’s been quite a bit of dialogue over the past few months on this issue,” he said, “led in no small part by Dana Beyer’s candidacy for the House of Delegates.”

Beyer, who last year lost her bid for a House seat representing Montgomery County, would have been the first transgender woman elected to a state legislative post.

Madaleno said he expects incoming Gov. Martin O’Malley (D) to back the anti-discrimination initiative.

“The new governor signed similar legislation as the mayor of Baltimore,” he said. “I think we’ve gotten to the point where we can have an adult conversation about this issue.”

Furmansky said the initiative, which would make discrimination illegal in cases of employment, housing, public accommodations and lending, should receive broad support.

“This proposal is about blatant, mean-spirited discrimination,” he said, “something that everyone can understand and oppose.”

Furmansky said Equality Maryland also will pursue a state mandate requiring insurance companies to write policies that are inclusive of domestic partners and their children.

“A lot of times, an employer will say ‘We’d give you the benefits, but our insurance company won’t write that policy,’” he said. “Quite simply, this is about giving businesses the flexibility to provide their employees with appropriate compensation.”

Madaleno said the initiative isn’t one that insurance companies should fear or oppose.

“It’s not necessarily going to cost them any more,” he said. “There’s going to be a lengthy debate about health care and getting more access to it. This will be one component of that.”

Furmansky said a related request from Equality Maryland seeks to make tax deductible the medical expenses incurred on behalf of non-spouse, non-dependent adults living in the same household.

The proposal, which would benefit gay and straight couples, could provide new relief for the costs incurred by uninsured domestic partners.