Obama’s Quandary: Same-Sex Health Insurance
Note from the Author: Before I even begin addressing this interesting piece of news, I would like to add a disclaimer. I greatly respect that there are a variety of opinions and beliefs in this world, and I am sure that our reader base is about as diverse as diverse can get. I mean, everyone cares about health insurance right? I also respect that not everyone is going to agree with my opinion. I realize that the sensitive and largely disputed topic of same-sex marriage usually involves disturbing some sort of beehive. If you choose not to agree with what is to follow, then I encourage you to post your thoughts in the comments section.
Even if you aren’t a resident of the Golden State, you probably heard all of the controversy and buzz around California’s Prop 8 back in November of 2008. The proposition passed by voters denies the rights of same-sex couples to legally get married. For those of us who believe that marriage should be a right for all people, regardless of their sexual preference, this proposition’s passage was incredibly disappointing. Interestingly enough, however, a federal appeals court in California seems like it is trying to redeem the state’s liberal reputation.
The Federal Employees Health Benefits Program and Same-Sex Partners
FEHBP, or Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, is as straightforward as it sounds: It is the health benefits program for federal employees. Currently, the FEHBP “cannot provide coverage for domestic partners or legally married partners of the same sex.” The FEHBP plans are only supposed to cover a spouse of a federal employee, who according to the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act is only a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or wife.
What the appeals court in California is bringing to Obama is that same-sex partners of federal employees should be allowed health care right within FEHBP. The court is bringing this up to help address and rectify worker’s concerns and complaints.
What Will Obama Say About Same-Sex Health Insurance?
This scenario will be an interesting one to keep an eye on. I see President Obama’s view on same-sex rights a big, dizzy public relations attempt, which will balance trying to pacify those who lean toward the left while whispering in the ears of those on the right. See if this doesn’t sound conflicting — Ben LaBolt, a White House spokesperson said, “While the president opposes gay marriage, he supports legislative repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act. He believes this country must realize its founding promise of equality by treating all its citizens with dignity and respect.”
So Obama opposes gay marriage. Yet he supports repealing the Defense of Marriage Act? Here is what Wikipedia says about the Defense of Marriage Act:
- No state (or other political subdivision within the United States) need treat a relationship between persons of the same sex as a marriage, even if the relationship is considered a marriage in another state.
- The Federal Government may not treat same-sex relationships as marriages for any purpose, even if concluded or recognized by one of the states.
Obviously, ‘waffle’ is the word that comes to mind upon hearing Mr. LaBolt’s response. In the next installment, we’ll take a look at the hypothetical conclusions we can draw should same-sex health benefits be passed, and what effect this will have for same-sex couples who are seeking a family health insurance plan.
You can find part two of the this series on same-sex health insurance here.
photo credit: David Jackmanson
Tags: federal defense of marriage act, gay marriage, health insurance, health reform, obama, president, same-sex health coverage
October 21st, 2009 at 6:14 pm
[...] « Obama’s Quandary: Same-Sex Health Insurance [...]