Health care benefits... who already receives them in Alaska...

[electrolass]

Last week I had the opportunity to be a guest with Jesse (AK Together) on CC's Cutting Edge on KUDO 1080, the local liberal radio.  I had never done it before, and I was nervous.  CC was great.  She made it much easier. 

The interview went very well, and the 3 or 4 call-ins went pretty well, but there was one question we just didn't have any hard copy from which to answer.  Are benefits currently offered to straight domestic partners?

I did some research and discovered that, according to the City and Borough of Juneau, all domestic partners who fill out an Affidavit of Marriage/Domestic Partnership are eligible to enroll for health insurance through Premera.  To qualify, an applicant must swear an oath stating that are legally married or in a committed relationship.   

One woman who wrote a very thoughtful article in ADN suggested that if the state wanted to insure that unmarried couples didn't try to cheat the system, officials should come up with a document outlining requirements to prove that a couple is financing interconnected.  Well, from what I have seen thus far, Juneau has just such a document. 

The reason I am bringing up this point to ponder is that the "other side" who is asking voters to vote YES for marriage, has been trying to turn heterosexual domestic partners against their homosexual counterparts by implying that only gay couples will receive benefits.  This is not the case at least as far as  the City and Borough of Juneau is concerned.  Knowing this, it is no wonder that Juneau does not want to be to whom they provide benefits.  We need to get the message out to heterosexual straight people to help them understand that the far right will probably go after them next, possibly by wording the amendment to the constitution to read like House bill HJR 9 which states:

Section 1. Article 1, sec. 25, Constitution of the State of Alaska, is amended to read. 

Section 25.  Marriage and related limitations.  To be valid or recognized in this State, a marriagemay exist only between one man and one woman.  No other union is similarly situated  to a marriage between a man and a woman and, therefore, a marriage between a man and a woman is the only union that shall be valid or recognized in this State and to which the rights, benefits, obligations, qualities, or effects of marrae shall be extended or assigned. 

Although this bill was met with resistance, it is still in review, and I can see no reason why the legislature would not seek to use this language to amend the constitution should the yes vote go through on April 3rd. 

If anyone with whom you talk to has questions, please feel free to email me, and we can get together and discuss it. 

[ViewSonic]

I think there should be a universal health care. That would save on alot of this bicoring of who gets what.

Marrage should not give special benifits to anyone.

[Oni]

interesting view point. That would solve alot of complaining by everybody