Hard-earned rights imperiled by bigotry

Wednesday, March 11, 1998

Hard-earned rights imperiled by bigotry

DISCRIMINATION: State legislature must respect regents’ policy
on benefits for domestic partners

It’s taken nearly 15 years of lobbying for gay and lesbian
employees of the University of California to be granted partner
benefits. Yet, merely 3 1/2 months after the benefits were approved
by the UC Regents, the employees’ efforts have hit a legislative
roadblock: a discriminatory bill designed to force the UCs to raise
their own money to fund domestic partner benefits.

If passed, a measure proposed by Sen. William Knight,
R-Palmdale, would eliminate state funding for the domestic partner
benefits package.

The UC Regents made their decision in November to extend health
benefits to domestic partner employees in the university, and the
state needs to respect that.

The state constitution provides that the UC Regents preside over
university matters including funding. As trustees of the
university, legislators should not intrude upon the regents’
jurisdiction. Under Article IX, Section 9 of the California
Constitution, the regents have "full powers of organization and
governance."

Knight claims that California taxpayers should not be forced to
pay for domestic partner benefits that they do not support. He says
the UC Regents went against the wishes of the public when they
approved the package, and the people should therefore not have to
pay for them. But public sentiment does not always yield equity or
legality. In 1954, the Supreme Court ruled in Brown v. Board of
Education of Topeka that separate is not equal in public schools.
Following the decision, there was massive public opposition. But
the public’s opinions against desegregation were not the "correct"
solution either.

The gay and lesbian community pays taxes for heterosexual
couples but is virtually being denied its own benefits.

Knight says his bill is simply a response to public sentiment.
But the act reeks of bigotry. This is not a new tactic for Knight –
several years ago, he wrote a bill that would have voided
out-of-state gay marriages in California.

When the regents discussed the benefits in November, one of
their chief concerns was making sure that gay and lesbian employees
felt welcome in the university. Denying them their rights would
have implied that the university did not want them, and regents
feared those employees would leave the UC for more competitive
institutions offering benefits. The state must not cause the
university to regress.

The UC proved that it was competitive among other top
institutions offering benefits, and showed that it welcomed all
employees regardless of their sexual orientation. Their progress is
now being threatened due to intolerant attitudes held by Knight and
others.

Knight’s proposal is a desperate attempt to deny rights to a
sector of the community often blacklisted by prejudiced
politicians.

The UC must not be forced to raise funds for itself. The
regents’ decision must stand, and California needs to fund domestic
partner benefits. The state must not allow hate and intolerance to
stand in the way of equality.