My LGBT Letter Project

Bills and Rights

Thank You For Co-sponsoring S. 1510 (PPIA)

 Senator Barbara Boxer
U.S. Senate
112 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510-0001

Sep. 28, 2003

Dear Senator Boxer: 

As your constituent, I thank you for becoming a co-sponsor of S. 1510, the Permanent Partners Immigration Act. 

Currently, U.S. immigration law does not allow American citizens or permanent residents to petition for immigration benefits for their same-sex partners.  The Permanent Partners Immigration Act would amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to allow gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender Americans to sponsor their partners for U.S. residency.  These same-sex couples would face the same scrutiny and burden of proof currently faced by opposite-sex couples. 

Fifteen countries - Australia, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Israel, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, South Africa, Sweden, and the United Kingdom - recognize same-sex couples for the purpose of immigration.  It is time for the United States to do the same. 

Thank you for your commitment to equality for all Americans and for your leadership on this issue.

    
Sincerely,
Alice Lin
 

A Constituent Asks You To Co-sponsor PPIA

 Senator Dianne Feinstein
U.S. Senate
331 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510-0001

Sep. 17, 2003

Dear Senator Feinstein:

As your constituent, I write to ask you to become a co-sponsor of the Permanent Partners Immigration Act. 

Currently, U.S. immigration law does not allow American citizens or permanent residents to petition for immigration benefits for their same-sex partners.  The Permanent Partners Immigration Act would amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to allow gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender Americans to sponsor their partners for U.S. residency.  These same-sex couples would face the same scrutiny and burden of proof currently faced by opposite-sex couples. 

Fifteen countries - Australia, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Israel, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, South Africa, Sweden, and the United Kingdom - recognize same-sex couples for the purpose of immigration.  It is time for the United States to do the same. 

I look forward to your support of this important legislation.

    
Sincerely,
Alice Lin

Please Oppose Any Attempt To Amend The Constitution

 Senator Dianne Feinstein
U.S. Senate
331 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510-0001

Aug. 27, 2003

Dear Senator Feinstein:

As your constituent, I urge you to oppose any attempt to amend the Constitution or any attempt to pass legislation designed to discriminate against same-sex couples and prohibit federal, state and local governments from honoring and supporting those relationships.

The power to regulate civil marriage and the granting of civil marriage licenses is a power that historically has been reserved to the states. A constitutional amendment to prohibit governmental recognition of would take this power away from states who should be allowed to formulate their own policies in this area. 

If an amendment makes it through the difficult process necessary to amend the Constitution, this would be the first time in history that the Constitution was amended to restrict the rights of a whole class of people, in conflict with its guiding principle to provide equal protection for all. 

Civil marriage, other forms of relationship recognition, and basic civil rights protections are essential components that make all families, including families headed by same-sex couples, safer and more secure. Civil marriage and religious marriage are two separate things. Religious institutions will never be forced to bless relationships with which they disagree, just as today religious institutions can refuse to marry couples of different faiths or individuals who have been divorced. 

Please oppose any attempt to build discrimination into the very document that should protect everyone and please oppose any other legislation designed to prohibit civil, secular recognition of same-sex relationships.  I look forward to hearing from you on this extremely important issue.

    
Sincerely,
Alice Lin

Please Oppose the Nomination of Bill Pryor

Senator Dianne Feinstein
U.S. Senate
331 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510-0001

July 30, 2003

Dear Senator Feinstein:

As your constituent, I urge you to oppose the appointment of Bill Pryor to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.

Mr. Pryor has a record of demonstrated hostility to gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender rights, and he has abused his position as Attorney General to promote his sectarian religious and extreme political views.  As someone who cares deeply about issues involving the GLBT community, I am very concerned with Mr. Pryor's record of promoting discriminatory anti-GLBT organizations on his AG official government website and for working to preserve archaic sodomy laws that criminalize gay relationships.

In fact, Pryor has labeled civil rights laws that prevent discrimination against the GLBT community as "special privileges or rights for homosexuals."  This is particularly disturbing given the fact that in 37 states it is still perfectly legal in this country to fire someone simply for being gay or lesbian.

I am also very concerned with Mr. Pryor's efforts to preserve sodomy laws that label GLBT Americans as criminals.  In one legal brief, he compared same-sex relationships with incest, pedophilia and necrophilia.  His views on this subject run counter to professional and medical experts and do not reflect the views of a vast majority of Americans.

You and your colleagues in the Senate are the only ones who can ensure that we see fair-minded judges appointed to federal bench.

I urge you to oppose Mr. Pryor's nomination. I look forward to hearing your response.

Sincerely,
Alice Lin

 

AB205: Supporting Same-Sex Marriage
To: The Hon. Mark Ridley-Thomas
The California State Legislature
Sacramento, CA 95814

April 15, 2003

Dear Assembly member Ridley-Thomas:
 
I am writing to urge you to vote for AB 205 when it comes before you soon in the Assembly Appropriations Committee. As you may know, AB 205 would grant same-gender couples, who enter a domestic partnership, essentially the same rights and duties that are now available to married couples in California.
 
According to the last US Census there are now over 92,000 same-sex couples in California. (Some authorities estimate there may be as many as 400,000 same-sex couples in the state.) Those unions were formed without the support of state law and they will continue to be formed whether or not AB 205 is passed. However, by passing AB 205, the Legislature can improve the chance that the adults in these relationships--and the children they are for--can develop healthy, happy, and stable families. Everyone in California will benefit from that.
 
Some say AB 205 goes against the will of the people as expressed in their vote on Proposition 22. However, this proposition was approved in March 2000, six months after AB 26 legalized domestic partnerships in California. Proposition 22 added a provision to the California Family Code stating that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.
 
Proposition 22 did not even mention domestic partners or specify what rights they should or should not have. Surely, six months after the passage of AB 26, if Proposition 22 was meant to limit the rights available to domestic partners, it would have said so directly.
 
Domestic partnerships will increase in number whatever you do. The people in them will be just ordinary people trying to make a good life for themselves and the people they love. You have it in your power to help them do that. I urge you to help them. Please vote for AB 205.
 
Sincerely,
Alice Lin

Permanent Partners Immigration Act
To: The Hon. Henry Waxman
The U.S. House of Representatives
Washington DC 20515

Saturday, February 15, 2003

Dear Representative Waxman:
 
I am writing to urge you to become a cosponsor of the Permanent Partners Immigration Act. Please also allow me to thank you for cosponsoring last yearˇ¦s version of this bill.
This bill would amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to allow United States citizens and lawful permanent residents to sponsor their ˇ§permanent partnersˇ¨ for residency in the United States. Introduced as H.R. 690 in the 107th Congress, the Permanent Partners Immigration Act garnered bipartisan support from 106 members. This bill was introduced once again on February 14, 2003.
Seventy-five percent of the one million green cards and immigration visas granted each year go to family members of United States citizens and permanent residents. However, since our current immigration laws do not include gay and lesbian couples in the definition of family, these couples, who are committed to spending the rest of their lives together, are kept apart. The current immigration laws treat gay and lesbian couples as if they are second-class citizens.
Currently, fourteen countries already recognize gay and lesbian couples for immigration purposes: Australia, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Iceland, Israel, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, South Africa, Sweden, and the United Kingdom.
As with the current immigration laws for married couples, the Permanent Partners Immigration Act would impose harsh penalties for fraud, including up to five years in prison and up to $250,000 in fines. In addition, if the partnership is terminated in less than two years, the legal status of the partner will be revoked, the same as it is for married couples.
Help remedy our discriminatory immigration laws today. If you would like to be a cosponsor of this legislation please contact Representative Jerrold Nadler, or his staff person John Doty, at (202) 225-5635.
Sincerely,
Alice Lin

California bill upgrades gay partner rights
Source: Gay.com / PlanetOut.com Network
by Christopher Lisotta
Posted on January 28, 2003
A group of gay California legislators and influential state leaders announced Tuesday they were introducing a bill to grant the state's more than 400,000 same-sex couples nearly all the rights, benefits and obligations available to heterosexual spouses under state law.
AB 205, known as the Domestic Partner Rights and Responsibilities Act of 2003, gives California's registered domestic partners decision-making authority for funeral arrangements, deposition of remains and community property and also provides death benefits for surviving partners of firefighters and police officers. The bill also brings new responsibilities to domestic partners, requiring couple to disclose conflicts of interest and making them more responsible for mutual debts. In addition, it requires joint assessment of income for domestic partners seeking governmental assistance.
California first passed a law establishing a state domestic partnership registry in 1999. In 2001 and 2002, bills were passed giving domestic partners specific benefits, including the right to sue for wrongful death and allow for second-parent adoptions.
A number of gay rights organizations, including the National Center for Lesbian Rights, the California Alliance for Pride and Education (CAPE) and Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund, assisted lawmakers in putting together AB 205.
"The legal protections in this bill are not controversial individually, but their nonexistence spells tragedy for California families every day," said Jenny Pizer, Lambda Legal staff attorney. "No amount of private legal work can change the tax and community property laws, and most people who call us in distress can't afford private attorneys anyway. This law is simple and straightforward and will protect families."
"I think it's incredibly important to our state and community," openly gay state senator and AB 205 co-sponsor Sheila Kuehl told the Gay.Com/PlanetOut.com Network.
Although AB 205 adds some significant new benefits to strengthen California's current domestic partnership law, there would still be room for growth even if AB 205 passes without any changes. "Certainly domestic partnerships are not the same as civil unions," Kuehl noted. "All we've done is add a few benefits for our families. It doesn't cover all of the tax benefits (married) people get at all."
With a five-member GLBT caucus, large Democratic majorities in both the state Senate and the Legislature and a gay-friendly governor, California is expected to consider several other bills important to the GLBT community in 2003.
San Francisco's Mark Leno, who is a co-sponsor of AB 205, announced on Monday the introduction of AB 196, which would clarify existing laws to forbid housing and employment discrimination based on gender identity.

Important bills signed by Governor Davis this year 2002
Several bills passed in 2002 give new rights to lesbians, gays, bisexuals, transgenders, and intersexed people. Except where stated otherwise, these rights will become effective on January 1, 2003. Here is a summary of them.
AB 2216  adds domestic partners to California's Law of Intestate Succession. This law lists who gets the property of a deceased person, and in what order, if the person dies without writing a will. Spouse is high on the list, followed by children, parents, etc., in descending order of priority. Under AB 2216, domestic partner is placed at the highest priority on the list at the same level as spouse.
Thus. if a person dies without a will, a surviving registered domestic partner would get at least a third, or maybe all, of the deceased's property. If other relatives, listed in the law of intestate succession, are living they get part of the property.
The decision about who gets the property is decided by Probate Court. The surviving domestic partner would be asked to provide evidence that he or she was the registered domestic partner of the deceased. Upon submission of that proof, the court would award all, or at least one third, of the property, to the domestic partner.
Please note: dying without a will is always the least desirable alternative. People should always write a will. Domestic partners should also consult an attorney about holding their property in joint tenancy with right of survivorship. That may allow the surviving partner to avoid the lengthy probate process.
AB 2777  allows the counties of Los Angeles, Santa Barbara, and Marin to offer death benefits, optional retirement allowances, and survivors allowances to the domestic partners of their employees. In order for the domestic partners of an employee to receive the benefits, an affidavit of domestic partnership must have been on file with the county for one year before the death of the employee. Each County Board of Supervisors must pass resolutions before the benefits actually become available. However, all three counties have indicated they want to do this.
Death benefits are like life insurance. If the county employee dies, his or her registered domestic partner would receive a flat amount from the county.
Optional retirement allowances allow employees to provide continuing income to their domestic partners if the employee retires but then dies before his or her partner. When a county employee retires he or she is usually eligible to receive a monthly retirement check for the rest of his or her life. Usually the payments end when the retiree dies. However, the employee could agree to take a smaller monthly retirement check (called an optional retirement allowance) with the promise that his or her spouse would continue to get that monthly check until the spouse dies. That continuing payment to the spouse is called a survivor's allowance. AB 2777 allows the three counties to offer that option to employees and their registered domestic partners. There may be other options that would vary the amount of monthly pay to the county retiree and his or her domestic partner.
By the way, the Governor signed a law last year providing the same benefits to the employees of San Mateo County. Employees of Los Angeles, Marin, San Mateo, and Santa Barbara counties should check with their employers for details on how to obtain these benefits.
SB 1661  allows people to take up to six weeks paid time off from work to care for seriously ill family members, including domestic partners, or to care for a newborn child. Employers could require that the employee take up to two weeks of accrued, but unused, vacation time before receiving the benefits provided by SB 1661. The employee must be in a domestic partnership registered with the state to qualify for payments, while caring for a domestic partner.
Most workers would receive about 55% of their usual pay during their time off. The maximum amount payable would be $728 per week. However, people may not start taking paid leave under the program until July, 2004. The benefits will be provided by California's Disability Income Fund. This fund is supported by contributions from employers and their employees. However, this new benefit will be supported entirely by deductions from the pay checks of employees. The amount of the deduction would vary depending on the income of the employee.
The program will be administered by the California Employment Development Department. For further information, call them at: (800) 480-3287 or visit their web page at:www.edd.ca.gov/fleclaimdi.html
To receive the benefits available under AB 2216, AB 2777, and SB 1661 you must be registered as a domestic partner with the state of California. This requires that you complete form DP-1 and submit it to the Secretary of State's office along with a $10 registration fee. The address to which it must be sent is on the form. You can obtain a copy of the form at your County Registrar's office or by finding it on the web at: http://www.ss.ca.gov/business/sf/forms/sf-dp1.pdf
SB 1945 gives the victims of hate crimes more time to submit complaints of hate crimes to the Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH). Under old law the complaint had to be submitted to the Department WITHIN ONE YEAR OF THE HATE CRIME. SB 1945 allows the victim to submit the complaint up to one year following the date ON WHICH THE VICTIM FINDS OUT WHO COMMITTED THE ACT. However the complaint must be submitted no later than 3 years after the event occurred. When a complaint is submitted to DFEH it investigates the matter. If it finds the complaint to be valid, it attempts to resolve the situation by conference, conciliation, or persuasion. If the DFEH fails to resolve the complaint in these ways it can issue an accusation and also issue a right to sue letter..
The issuance of an accusation could ultimately lead to the DFEH seeking court action requiring the accused to comply with the law. The right to sue letter gives the complainant the right to sue the accused.
The complaint submitted to the Department of Fair Employment and Housing must state the name and address of the person, employer, labor organization, or employment agency alleged to have committed the unlawful practice complained of, together with particulars of the violation. Obviously it takes time to get this type of information. The new, longer, time limits provided by SB 1945 might make it more possible. People who have been victims of hate crimes should report them to their local police or sheriff's department. However, they may also submit complaints to the Department of Fair Employment and Housing. To get an appointment with your nearest DFEH office, call (800) 884-1684.

Feedbacks & Suggestions