Democracy for New Mexico

URGENT: Action Needed on NM DOMA Bill NOW

Two so-called defense of marriage act bills introduced by Republicans have so far been tabled and stopped in the New Mexico legislature this year. Now a Democrat, Sen. Lidio Rainaldi of Gallup, has introduced another that will be heard today. Please use Equality New Mexico's easy to use tool to contact members of the NM Senate Public Affairs Committee NOW:

From Equality New Mexico:
We're sorry for the late notice, but at the last minute EQNM was informed that Senate Bill 816 the "Defense of Marriage Act" (DOMA) that was introduced by Senator Lidio Rainaldi (D-Gallup) has been scheduled to be heard in the Senate Public Affairs Committe TODAY at 2:30 PM!

We need your help! In order to defeat this anti-gay legislation we need as many people as possible in the committee room to show the members that a yes vote will harm our families.

With just a few clicks you can send a message to each committee member via email (or FAX if the member doesn't have a published email). Please help protect ALL New Mexico Families ... CLICK TO TAKE ACTION NOW

House Floor Vote Tuesday: Domestic Partner Rights and Responsibilities Act

From Equality New Mexico:
House Bill 603, the Domestic Partner Rights and Responsibilities Act, has a floor vote in the NM House scheduled for this Tuesday, February 27th at 11:00 AM. By a vote of 9-4, HB 603 passed out of the House Judiciary Committee on Friday, February 23rd.

This will be a very close vote and we will need to fill the gallery with our supporters. Between now and Tuesday’s hearing, we will also need to reach out to all of those legislators who are on the fence. Our current online campaign is designed to target those legislators from whom we still don’t have firm commitments. Your letters and phone calls can make a difference.

Click here to send a letter to the undecided representatives and ask them to support House Bill 603.

Along with our online campaign, we need you to make personal contact with the legislators and their staff. Below is a list of targeted legislators that need an additional push to support this important legislation. Please call their offices and visit them at the Roundhouse.

Rep. Janice Arnold-Jones (R, Bernalillo-24), 505.986.4451

Rep. Andrew Barreras (D, Valencia-7), 505.986.4243

Rep. Mary Helen Garcia (D, Dona Ana-34), 505.986.4435

Rep. Thomas Garcia (D, Colfax, Guad, Mora, S.M. & Taos-68), 505.986.4242

Rep. Roberto "Bobby" Gonzales (D, Taos-42), 505.986.4235

Rep. Manuel Herrera (D-Grants-39), 505.986.4233

Rep. Dona Irwin (D-Luna-32), 505.986.4249

Rep. Andy Nunez (D-Dona Ana-36), 505.986.4423

Rep. Jane E. Powdrell-Culbert (R-Sandoval-44), 505.986.4467

Rep. Debbie Rodella (D-Rio Arriba, Sandoval & Taos-41), 505.986.4329

Rep. Dan Silva (D-Bernalillo-13), 505.986.4425

Domestic Partnership Bill: Friday, NM House Judiciary

From Equality NM: House Bill 603 on the Move
HB 603: Domestic Partner Rights And Responsibilities Act, sponsored by Rep. Mimi Stewart, is scheduled for hearing by the NM House Judiciary Committee on Friday, February 23 at 1:30 PM in Room 309 at the Roundhouse. Once again, we will need people to attend the hearing.

Assuming HB 603 passes House Judiciary, it will likely be heard on the House Floor next Wednesday, February 28. (It is possible that the hearing on the House Floor could be scheduled for Tuesday, February 27th, but at this point Wednesday is our best estimate.) As soon as we receive confirmation on the hearing date, we will let you know. We will need to fill the Gallery with our supporters!

TELL THE LEGISLATORS TO SUPPORT NEW MEXICAN FAMILIES BY VOTING FOR HB603

HB 603 would create a process by which any two adults in a committed relationship, fitting specific criteria would be able to register as domestic partners. Registering as domestic partners would create a series of rights and protections currently available to unmarried couples.

The Domestic Partner Rights and Responsibilities Act would allow couples registering as domestic partners to have access to many of the benefits and protections currently available to married couples on the state level. These include: access to basic health coverage, family leave, presumption of parentage, decision making upon incapacity, and issues related to assuring that the person with whom you live and love is protected should you die.

The pace is picking up, and EQNM needs you to take action. We need people to participate in our online campaigns, but we also need people to make phone calls and personal visits to the legislators!!!!

If you are willing to visit the Roundhouse to speak one on one with legislators, please contact our Executive Director, Alexis Blizman at 505-224-2766. She will be glad to meet you there (schedule permitting) or at least go over talking points and how to find the legislators that we need to put pressure on. 

Help Pass Domestic Partner Benfits By Donating Now To Equality New Mexico’s Lobbying Efforts!

Equality NM Legislative Update: The Good, The Bad, The Ugly

From Equality New Mexico: Busy Week at the Legislature

Scheduled for Hearing this Thursday, February 15
HB 603, The Domestic Partner Rights and Responsibilities Act has been scheduled for public hearing in the House Consumer and Public Affairs Committee meeting this Thursday, February 1, 2007, at 1:30 PM in Room 315 of the Roundhouse.

This Domestic Partnership legislation is the centerpiece of our legislative agenda this year.  If it passes, HB603 would allow any two non-familial adults in an intimate relationship to form a domestic partnership.  This domestic partnership would provide the couple with all of the rights, protections and responsibilities available to married couples on the state level.   

CONTACT THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS AND TELL THEM TO VOTE FOR PROTECTIONS FOR ALL NEW MEXICO FAMILIES BY SUPPORTING HB603! Click to TAKE ACTION

The House Consumer and Public Affairs Committee is the first stop for this legislation, but we need to make a good showing. Equality New Mexico needs your help.  We need people in the committee room who support this legislation to send a message to the legislators that our families deserve protection.
********

Senate Bill 502: Amending Retiree Health Care Act Defeated In Senate Judiciary: On Friday, February 9, Senator Grubesic’s Bill to amend the Retiree Health Care Act, thereby providing health insurance to domestic partners of retired public employees was indefinitely tabled in the Senate Judiciary Committee.

After a lengthy debate in which the Republicans in the Committee attempted to amend the Bill to remove the language defining domestic partner, the Committee finally voted.  The vote was tied 4-4, with Senators Grubesic, McSorley, Lopez, and Martinez voting in favor and Senators Rainaldi, Adair, Harden and Cravens voting against. Senators William Payne and Michael Sanchez were not present during the vote. When a tie vote occurs in a committee, the bill is automatically tabled until someone changes their vote. 

While this Bill is essentially dead in committee, there is still litigation pending to resolve this matter and Equality New Mexico is continuing its aggressive lobbying efforts to pass other pieces of legislation to benefit LGBT families.
********

Senate Bill 182: Health Insurance for Domestic Partners Passes Senate Judiciary with Bad Amendment: On February 12, 2007, the Senate Judiciary passed Senate Bill 182, the bill that would require insurance companies to provide health insurance to domestic partners if employer’s requested, by a 6-4 vote.  Don’t celebrate yet.  The Bill was passed with an absurd amendment.  After much debate, led by the Republicans in the Committee, the Bill was Amended to take out the term “Domestic Partner” and replace it with the term “Contractual Household Member.”  If your first reaction is “HUH?!?” that is the point.  The amendment makes the bill so vague that it is unlikely to pass on the Senate Floor, which is its next stop.

HELP EQUALITY NEW MEXICO COMBAT THESE DAMAGING AMENDMENTS BY DONATING TO OUR LOBBYING EFFORTS NOW!

House Bill 15, the mirror Bill that was brought in the House, remains intact.  It has already passed the entire House and is now in the Senate and currently assigned to Senate Public Affairs Committee and Senate Corporations and Transportation Committee.  It does not have to go through Senate Judiciary.
********

Marriage Bill Introduced: On Friday, Senator Cisco McSorley (D-Albuquerque), introduced Senate Bill 1003: A Bill to Change the Marriage Form. This Bill would alter the marriage form to replace the terms “bride” and “groom” with “Applicant 1” and “Applicant 2.”  Currently, New Mexico’s marriage statute is gender neutral.  However, County Clerks still cannot issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.*

*The denial of same-sex couples right to marry is based on a non-binding letter, issued by the Attorney General in 2004, stating her opinion that the statutory form which lists "bride" and "groom" prohibited marriage between same sex couples.  Senate Bill 1003 amends that section of the statutes to make the application form gender neutral.   

Equality New Mexico is committed to the pursuit of full equality for ALL New Mexicans.  We applaud Senator McSorley and all of the legislators who are committed to equality and support this legislation.  We will continue to update you as hearings are scheduled.

Hearing on Domestic Partner Retirement Insurance Set for Today

From Equality New Mexico:
Senate Bill 502, Senator Grubesic’s Bill to amend the Retiree Health Care Act in order to provide health insurance benefits to domestic partner’s of state employees after the employee retires, is now scheduled for public hearing on Friday, February 9th at 1:30 PM in the Senate Judiciary Committee. It is the first Bill on the agenda.

The hearing was originally scheduled for Wednesday, but the Senate had to reschedule the committee hearing, due to a long floor battle over cock fighting. Equality New Mexico has extended our online campaign to contact members of the committee to ask them to support SB 502. You can contact them by clicking on the link below.

Contact the Members of the Senate Judiciary Committee and Tell Them to Support Senate Bill 502!

We still need people in the committee room who support this legislation to send a message to the legislators that our families deserve protection. If you are able to attend, try to arrive a little bit early as parking is often difficult.

Editor's Note: See our previous post on this issue.

NM Dem Senate Caucus Leader Introduces Another DOMA

Two so-called Defense of Marriage Acts (DOMA) have already been stopped in the NM Legislature this year on the House side. Now we have to contend with another version on the Senate side, introduced by Sen. Lideo Rainaldi (D-Gallup), pictured right, who calls himself a Democrat. In fact, he holds the leadership position of Majority Caucus Chair. I find it especially galling that a Democratic leader would introduce such an unfair, anti-democratic bill. How about you? Here's what Equality NM had to say:

From Equality NM: DOMA NUMBER THREE
On Friday, Senator Lidio Rainaldi (D-Gallup-4), pictured left, introduced the third DOMA of the Legislative Session, Senate Bill 816. This legislation mirrors the previously introduced House Bill 395 and seeks to define marriage as solely between a man and a woman and deny recognition of valid marriages performed between same-sex couples in other jurisdictions.

The Senate DOMA will be much harder to kill. The Bill must go through Senate Judiciary, which is the Committee on which Senator Rainaldi currently sits. We are once again facing a vicious and hate filled public hearing on the Senate Floor. EQNM will continue to provide updates as this legislation is scheduled for public hearing.

The Attacks Continue! Help Us Stop Them By Donating Now To Equality New Mexico's Lobbying Efforts! Also, EQNM has a new Legistration Tracker that makes it much easier to follow bills of interest to the civil liberties and GLBT community and everyone who cares about equality under the law for all Americans. (End of EQNM alert.)

Note that our Democratic Senate Leadership assigned Rainaldi's DOMA bill to only two committees, unlike Sen. Ortiz y Pino's NM impeachment bill, for instance, that was assigned to be heard in three committee, which generally means the bill will have a hard time. What are NM Senate Democrats like Michael Sanchez, who has much to say about committee assignments, thinking?

Sadly, Sen. Rainaldi has consistently supported discriminatory legislation that would prevent all of our citizens from being treated equally under civil law and has voted with conservative Republicans against bills that would help minorities achieve equality here. See this post from the 2005 legislative session.

As most thoughtful people realize, religious beliefs are one thing, and are protected by our Constitution. Expecting civil laws to enforce particular religious beliefs, however, is misguided at best and mean-spirited and unconstitutional at worst. Let's hope that potential Democratic supporters of Rainaldi's bill can be respectfully persuaded with logic and real-life stories to see the difference.

And with Gov. Richardson running for president, let's hope he steps up and clearly denounces legislation like Rainaldi's aimed solely at stirring the pot and making headlines for the sponsors in areas where GLBT rights are often misunderstood or outright mocked.

ACLU Seeks Retirement Health Insurance for Same-Sex Partners of NM State Employees

From the ACLU:
ALBUQUERQUE – The American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit today against the state of New Mexico on behalf of three lesbian couples seeking retirement health insurance for the domestic partners of lesbian and gay state employees. 

“After serving the state for 25 years, I hoped to retire with the same peace of mind as my straight colleagues,” said Ellen Novak. “But retirement has meant that my partner has had to switch to costly private health insurance with inferior coverage at the point in our lives when we are most likely to face health problems. I worked just as hard as my colleagues, so it doesn’t seem fair that my family has been saddled with this burden.”

Novak, who has been with her partner Linda McCreary for 15 years, was forced to retire in 2004 after being diagnosed with a chronic lung condition. When she was still working for the state, she was able to provide McCreary health insurance as her domestic partner, but because of the state’s unfair policy of denying retirees domestic partner coverage, McCreary’s domestic partner coverage was terminated when Novak was forced to retire. Married couples in the same situation are permitted to continue to provide health insurance to their spouses after retirement.

The lawsuit filed today charges that the state’s policy of denying lesbian and gay state retirees equal health insurance for their partners violates the state constitution’s equality guarantees.  Unlike their straight colleagues, lesbian and gay employees are barred from marrying in the state and therefore, in the absence of domestic partner benefits, are denied equal compensation. 

Proposed legislation, SB 502, which was introduced by Senator John Grubesic and will be the subject of a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing this Wednesday Friday would close the loophole and provide benefits to the domestic partners of retired employees. 

(Editor's note: EQNM has a tool that makes it very easy to send a message to all the members of the NM Senate Judiciary Committee in support of this bill: click here.)

“Lesbian and gay employees make commitments and form families just like straight employees, and their families have the same needs,” said Peter Simonson, Executive Director of the ACLU of New Mexico.  “Health insurance is an important portion of how employees are compensated.  It’s not right for the state to take care of straight families, but to force gay and lesbian families to bear the significant expense and suffer the inferior coverage of private health insurance at the point in their lives when they need health care most.”

In 2003, Governor Bill Richardson issued an executive order providing state employees, both gay and straight, with the option of providing their partners health insurance through domestic partner coverage.  Under the order, domestic partner coverage is not available to employees after they retire, while spousal coverage is provided. 

“The state legislature has the opportunity to spare taxpayers the needless expense of defending this lawsuit by passing this bill,” said Simonson. “The cost of providing the domestic partners of state employees with access to retirement health insurance would only result in less than a one percent increase in claims dollars paid out by the authority. And this nominal cost would likely be offset by the savings to the state on account of having more people insured.”   

The other two couples involved in the lawsuit are:

Havens Levitt and Rebecca Dakota -- This Albuquerque couple has been together for 11 years, but have know each other for 25.  Levitt, 54, has been a teacher for more than 23 years with the Albuquerque public school system. Dakota, 52, works for an anti-smoking campaign and as the part-time director of the Albuquerque Independent Business Alliance. Because her jobs are both part-time, she relies on Levitt to provide her health insurance. When Levitt retires, Dakota will no longer have access to health insurance and will be forced to pay for private insurance, which is especially expensive for someone of her age. 

Mary Meyer and Hope Miner  -- This Sandoval County couple has been together for 13 years and is raising two children together. Meyer, who manages the WIC Nutrition Program for Bernalillo and Sandoval Counties, has worked for the New Mexico Department of Health for 22 years. Miner retired from the Albuquerque school system in 2003 after serving as an elementary teacher for 25 years. When domestic partner benefits became available, the couple decided to have Meyer cover Miner as a domestic partner in order to avoid the double fees the couple had to pay towards their separate health plans. After Miner retired, the couple learned that the domestic partner coverage would no longer be available once Meyer retired. When Meyer retires, the couple’s monthly expenses will increase because they will both be required to contribute to their own health plans.

The legal team for the ACLU in Novak and McCreary v. New Mexico is George Bach, staff attorney with the ACLU of New Mexico, Ken Choe, a senior staff attorney with the Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender Project of the ACLU, and cooperating attorney Maureen Sanders of Sanders & Westbrook, P.C.

Biographical information for all of the couples, a Q&A about the lawsuit and the legal papers filed today are available at www.aclu.org/caseprofiles.

Read the complaint

Q & A

Memo: Cost of domestic partnerships for retirees in New Mexico

Senate Bill 503: Relating to Retirement; Amending the Retiree Health Care Act

Whitney Potter, Communications Manager
American Civil Liberties Union of New Mexico
PO BOX 566, Albuquerque, NM 87103
Tel: (505) 266-5915 ext 1003
Cell: (505) 507-9898
Fax: (505) 266-5916
Email: wpotter@aclu-nm.org

Learn more about the ACLU of New Mexico https://aclu-nm.org/

Both NM House DOMA Bills Stopped in Committee

You know I'm celebrating this one! As reported by Steve Terrell in the Santa Fe New Mexican:

Same-sex marriage isn’t legal in New Mexico, but a House Committee on Thursday halted attempts to carve in stone a state ban on gay marriages. On party-line votes, the House Consumer and Public Affairs Committee voted to table two measures that targeted gay marriage. The actions effectively killed the bills for this session of the Legislature.

House Joint Resolution 2, sponsored by Rep. Gloria Vaughn, R-Alamogordo, would have let state voters decide whether to amend the state constitution to define marriage as a union between a man and a woman.

House Bill 395, sponsored by Rep. Nora Espinoza, R-Roswell, would have put that definition of marriage in state statute.

I suggest we thank the Democratic members of the House Consumer and Public Affairs Committee for voting to keep discrimination of this type out of NM law and our Constitution!

A big shout-out goes to Dem Reps. Gail Chasey, Irvin Harrison, Antonio "Moe" Maestas and Al Park!

ACTION ALERT: Help Stop Damaging NM "Terrorism" Measure

Guest Blog from Anne Kass:
Everyone who is protective of civil liberties should be very concerned about the implications of HB 653, Prohibit Terrorism. Please contact NM Rep. Jeff Steinborn (D-Las Cruces), who is sponsoring this "bill opposing terrorism" (Office 986-4248, Home 532-1145, email jeff.steinborn@nmlegis.gov), as well as Attorney General Gary King and FAIR BlogGov. Bill Richardson, both of whom are also supporting it according to an Albuquerque Journal article, and express your opposition to the bill's misguided focus.

According to the Journal, the bill makes it a felony to commit an act of terrorism. No problem there. However, the bill goes on to define terrorism to include any act or threat of violence intended to, "intimidate or coerce a civilian population" or government and causing more than $20,000 in property damage. We must convince Rep. Steinborn to remove all references to property damage, in general, and any specific dollar figure, in particular. Including property damage in the definition of terrorism is an arrow at the heart of civil protest. It is a corporate sponsored undertaking which corporations already got through the Federal Congress.

The executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of New Mexico has announced plans to oppose the bill:

"This is an unfortunate attempt to re-create the Patriot Act in New Mexico," said Peter Simonson, referring to federal law passed after the 9/11 terrorist attacks. "What this law would do is create an overly broad definition of terrorism that could easily be used to criminalize acts of civil disobedience and even non-violent protests."

He specifically pointed to language that would allow prosecution for a "threat of violence" that reasonably could be considered dangerous. That threshold could prevent protests similar to anti-World Trade Organization protests that occurred in Seattle in 1999, when protesters tore down barricades.

Let me tell you how the federal law works.

A few months ago I watched a news report about a group of animal rights activists who had seen actual video footage of horrible animal abuse being inflicted upon laboratory dogs by the employees of an animal research laboratory. The lab technicians shook beagles until their necks snapped and threw them to the floor for resisting whatever experimental protocol was being inflicted on them. It motivated people to organize to picket the accounting firm that did the laboratory's books. Apparently research had shown that the accounting firm might be sympathetic to abused animals.

It was a peaceful protest, and it worked. The accounting firm quit doing the laboratory's books. The laboratory then persuaded a Republican U.S. Attorney to charge the protestors with terrorism because they had intimidated or coerced (picketed) a civilian population (the accounting firm) and caused more than $10,000 worth of INTELLECTUAL property damage. (The laboratory claimed it cost them more than $10,000 to find and educate a replacement accounting firm, and $10,000 is the specific figure in the federal law.)

The protestors were convicted. I watched one young man interviewed just as he was about to begin his three year federal prison sentence.

I'm not making this up.

What Needs to be Done
Not only must Representative Steinborn remove the property damage language from his bill, but he should insert language that expressly excludes at least "intellectual property damage," expressly states that the bill isn't aimed at the economic damage that may result from peaceful protest (for example boycotting a product) and that further expressly protects peaceful protest in all its forms.

This is important. Please contact your own Representative and Senator as well, and stay on top of them until you get a commitment that in New Mexico corporations do not control ALL of our legislature. The bill will be heard first by the House Consumer and Public Affairs Committee, followed by the House Judiciary Committee.

Clearly, under current state law, acts of violence are already criminal offenses, as is vandalism. This bill may in fact need to be defeated, not just modified. Its intent is to impose far greater penalties on political activists than it would impose on others guilty of similar offenses.

Editor's Note: This is a Guest Blog by Anne Kass. If you'd like to submit a post for consideration as a Guest Blog, contact me by clicking on the Email Me link on the upper left-hand corner of this page.

Joint Memorial to Oppose the Federal Real ID Act Unanimously Passes NM House Judiciary Committee

From the Democratic Leadership of the NM House of Representatives:
A surprising unanimous vote Monday by the NM House Judiciary Committee forwards House Joint Memorial 13 to the House floor. Committee Republicans joined Democrats to oppose the implementation of the Federal Real ID Act of 2005.

House Majority Leader, Rep. Ken Martinez, who sits on the Judiciary Committee, opposes the Real ID Act because it infringes on civil liberties, imposes undue hardships on record keeping in the Department of Motor Vehicles, and could cost New Mexico as much as $37 million dollars over five years.

During the committee hearing Rep. Ken Martinez (D-Grants), the memorial sponsor, said, “There are three things as a state that we can do with this national ID mandate from the federal government. We can do nothing. We can implement it. Or we can send it back. This memorial proposes that we send it back to Washington. My only regret is that New Mexico will not be the first state to say no to this mandate because the state of Maine has already passed a joint memorial that is very similar.”

The Real ID Act of 2005 requires that states adopt uniform federal standards and documentation verification procedures for issuing driver’s licenses. These licenses could then be used as the equivalent of a national identification card to enter federal buildings and board airplanes within the United States. Documents that were used by state motor vehicle departments to verify citizenship would be scanned into an electronic data base that would be required to be shared with all other states.

HB 13 calls on the New Mexico legislature to not authorize funding to comply with this federal mandate. The memorial also calls upon the United States Congress to repeal the Real ID Act and urges the New Mexico congressional delegation to support that repeal.

Fro more information contact: Kathleen MacRae 505-681-3920, or Victoria Chávez 646-241-5335.

To follow the progress of all pending legislation, go to the legislative website at https://legis.state.nm.us/lcs. To contact Rep. Martinez call 505-986-4777.

Ben Lujan, Speaker of the House
Ken Martinez, House Majority Leader
Sheryl Williams Stapleton, House Majority Whip

Editor's Note: Maine was the first state to reject the Real ID card.