A look back on a year in the politics of equality in Tennessee: Photos from around the state

It's not over yet, but 2013 has been an incredible year in forward movement for equality in Tennessee.  We fought hard and even got some results.  Check out a few of the highlights.

Advancing Equality Day on the Hill brought advocates from East, West, and Middle TN to the Capitol to attempt to stop negative bills like Don't Say Gay and advance positive legislation like the Dignity for All Students Act.  Here we are preparing for a press conference in Legislative Plaza.

On July 22 the Knox County Commission passed an inclusive non-discrimination ordinance for Knox County employees.  Pictured are bill sponsor Commissioner Amy Broyles and supporters in Knoxville in Commission chambers after the victory.

When Rep. John Ragan, House sponsor of the Don't Say Gay bill received an award from Students First, 11-year-old Marcel Neergaard called foul.  As a student who has endured bullying for being gay, Marcel received national attention when he called on Students First to rescind the award, which they did.  Yes, a student really can teach the public about what's going on in our Legislature!  Marcel continues to inspire us all at TEP.  

In order to show the reality of discrimination, couples in Nashville and a couple in Wilson County...

as well as couples in Shelby County applied for marriage licenses.

 

 

 

 

Knoxville, Memphis, Cookeville, West TN, Chattanooga, and Nashville held rallies at the end of August to celebrate TN Marriage Equality Day to counter the Legislature's Traditional Marriage Day.  I think we had a better turnout than they did.

 

 

In September the push began for inclusive non-discrimination and anti-bullying policies in Rutherford County Schools after a teacher was told to take down a safe schools poster.  The fight continues today with advocates developing strategy to advance their proposal in the School Board. 

 

At Olympus TEP honored 8 Champions of Equality--7 from state media outlets and 1 Memphis City Councilman--for their work in advancing equality in Tennessee.  Nothing we do is possible without our allies!

The Memphis community gathered in October to celebrate the one-year anniversary of the non-discrimination ordinance.

Also in October attorney Abby Rubenfeld, other Tennessee attorneys, and the National Center for Lesbian Rights filed suit to have the marriage of couples who moved to Tennessee legally recognized.  TEP identified 2 of the 4 plaintiff couples.

Collegedale detective Kat Cooper (center) led her city to be the first in TN to offer partner benefits.  Knoxville soon followed by executive order of Mayor Madeline Rogero.  In November Chattanooga Councilman Chris Anderson passed his partner benefits and non-discrimination ordinance making it the third city in Tennessee to offer such benefits.  Also pictured is Kat's TEP Hamilton & Bradley Counties Committee co-chair Marcus Ellsworth (viewer's left) and TEP executive director Chris Sanders.

"Special Rights" argument comes from the Religious Right's attempts to divide minorities on ballot measures

Maybe everyone else knew this, but I didn't until I started reading Gay Rights at the Ballot Box by Amy L. Stone, an assistant professor of sociology at Trinity University.  Basically the argument we so

frequently hear about equality for gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender people being "special rights" came from the Religious Right's efforts to divide minority communities during the Right's earlier wave of anti-equality ballot measures.

Here's what Stone says:

Part of this secular argument about 'special rights' was a new image of the Religious Right as supportive of civil rights for 'deserving' minorities such as African Americans but opposed to 'undeserving' minorities such as LGBT activists. The anti-gay Right used special rights political messaging to divide potential allies by exacerbating existing tensions about race and class in LGBT politics. Through this messaging, the Right reaffirms gayness as whiteness, creating divisions between a presumed white LGBT movement and the presumed heterosexual African American community.

It does seem pretty consistent with the playbook, though the language of special rights is now also used to justify majority rejection of equality legislation.  Both the special rights language and the tactic of dividing minorities are items to watch as the ballot measure campaign to overturn the partner benefits and non-discrimination ordinance in Chattanooga gets underway.   

Tennesseans share the impact of partner benefits in their lives

We've been surveying our members about the importance of partner benefits.  Despite the fact that a Vanderbilt poll shows that 62% of Tennesseans support partner health insurance benefits, not every employer offers them and NO public employers in the state offer them.

Here are some of the responses we received.  They make it clear that if you do the same work, you deserve the same benefits:

J in Nashville:  “My partner is self employed, health insurance would be much more expensive if not available through my employer and would likely provide sub-standard benefits.”

E in Memphis:  “It has made life better. My partner has been uninsured for long periods of time, during which we have dealt with some expensive health issues and both gone without lots of routine and needed healthcare.  Pretty ironic to work in hospital and not be able to use their services.   I would look for another job if mine did not offer DP benefits, especially since many of our competitors offer them.”

A in Nashville:  “My employer does offer health insurance benefits for same sex domestic partners. However, my partner has top-notch health insurance coverage (he works for the state of TN), so his policy is significantly better than what my employer could offer. Thus, we have separate policies from each of our employers.

This situation has affected our family negatively. The state of TN does not offer domestic partner benefits so I am unfairly kept from choosing the better policy; unlike opposite sex couples, I'm forced to settle for the lesser of the two. My policy has a deductible of $4,000; my partner's has no deductible. To make matters worse, of the two, I'm the one with the most medical needs. My co-pays and deductibles and out of pocket expenses exceed over $8,000 a year. If I was covered under his policy, our household's expenses would be reduced to aproximately less than $1,000 a year (a difference of aprox. $7,000).

I would not work for an employeer that would not offer same sex partner benefits. Same-sex couples are not treated equally at the state of TN.This kind of inequality is actually encouraging us to move to a different state.”

P in Memphis:  “Both of us are HIV+ which means we have some medications that are very expensive. Even with insurance our medical costs are sometimes challenging but I don't know how people without medical insurance survive. If my employer wasn't able to include my partner under my health insurance I would have to seek a different job.”

T in Nashville:  “I am legally married in New York. I served in the military and one year in AmeriCorps. Because I cannot access her benefits at work, we are forced to pay hundreds of dollars a month for a private plan for me. This is money that is not going into our economy. I am lucky however. I am young and healthy enough to be able to purchase health insurance. I don't know what we would do if this were not the case obviously we knew this when we decided to make our partnership legal.wow it did not deter us from getting married, it is certainly a bitter pill to swallow when one thinks that a straight couple could meet and marry each other in a matter of hours or days and access these benefits which are denied to us for an educated person, this is very difficult to wrap my head around.”

D in Chattanooga:  “My company has offered DP benefits for as long as I have worked there (almost 4 years now). My partner recently lost his job and I was able to put him and our daughter on my insurance. Had my company not offered DP benefits they both would have lost their coverage.”

D in Cookeville:  “My wife is an adjunct professor at a University. Since it is considered a part-time job health insurance is not offered to her. She has a life-long illness that requires medication. Before working for _______ we had to try to manage to pay for her medication out of pocket and sometimes she went without often to the detriment of her health. I commute to Nashville from Cookeville to work and will continue to do so to make sure I can provide health coverage for my entire family. “

Former Metro Council candidate VanReece finds inclusive workplace at Nashville Symphony

We recently caught up with former Metro Nashville Council candidate Nancy VanReece to find out what she's been up to.  Quite a bit, as it turns out.

Grand Divisions:  You recently took a new position with the Nashville Symphony.  Tell us what you'll be doing.

  

Nancy VanReece:  I am working with a great Communications team as part of the External Affairs Department. Daily, you can bet that I am busy crafting and managing social media strategies for each event produced by the Nashville Symphony as well as for each department of the Nashville Symphony and Schermerhorn Symphony Center. In addition to doing our best to turn content into conversations in the social-sphere, I am managing the updates to to www.nashvillesymphony.org and www.schemerhorncenter.com.  I will also be chief curator for a new blog launching in 2012 that will help share the stories of Nashville's symphony on a daily basis.

Grand Divisions:  You've always indicated that equality in the workplace is an important value to you.  Tell us about what modifications to their employment policies that the Symphony has made since you started working there. 

Nancy VanReece:  Actually, there has been no modification of practice, just an update in the language to their nondiscrimination policy. Back when I was the Executive Director of the Nashville Shakespeare Festival I did a quick survey of nonprofit arts organizations receiving funding from Metro Davidson County that had inclusive non-discrimination polices.  Almost all did, including the Nashville Symphony.  I learned at that time that they also allowed domestic partners of employees to receive health benefit options. I tucked that information away back in 2007.  

You can bet that it came back up when I was interviewing for the position 4 years later.  I asked again about both.  I had pledged to not work for a company that didn't have an inclusive policy so it was imperative that what I learned in 2007 was still true.   After reading the policy, however, there was some antiquated language that I asked to be updated.  Jonathan Norris, VP of Human Resources didn't hesitate.  I simply suggested they use the same exact language that our Metro government uses. The policy was quickly updated.  I was proud to add it to the website the first week I was there.  

The domestic partner benefit option, although not inexpensive, was one the factors that encouraged me to leave my growing free-lance work for the opportunity to be part of the NSO team.  Joan, my partner of nearly 24 years, is still under employed part time (She is the food bank coordinator at Martha O'Bryan and fulfills customer orders for Cool People Care). We have been unable to afford 2 individual policies at the rate offered to us. It's still expensive this way and until federal changes are made, we have to pay taxes on her benefit, but it still costs less than buying it directly.

Grand Divisions:  As well as your work with non-profits and your engagement with artistic creativity, you're known as an advocate for the Madison area of Davidson County.  What neighborhood projects do you have in the works?

Nancy VanReece:  I'm an advocate for Nashville and for the development of the Northeast Corridor. The new District 8 is part of Madison, Maplewood, Gra-Mar, Inglewood, It's Dickerson Pike and Gallatin Pike and everything in-between. it's all Nashville. At the request of some folks I met during the campaign this past year, I help start a Facebook Group called the The Blue Star Group. It exist to provide information and facilitate conversation about the corridor that is part of  Districts 7,8 and 9.  Councilmen Pridemore and Davis have participated on occasion.  I'm still waiting to see how many of the 12 of us that started the page will facilitate.  I asked Council-lady Bennett to join and post updates but she told me, "I don't have time for Facebook.". I certainly hope that she will change her mind.

I went to a local coffee chat with Councilman Anthony Davis and there were people there from 7,6 and 8.  We are all in this together.  The success of Riverside Village in 7 will bring confidence to the development of the Madison Village in 8/9. The success of the East-West Connector mass transit line into 5-points in District 6 connects the Rivergate-Madison MTA 56 BRT-Lite directly in a way that can only be productive up the northeast corridor. I still envision a major Madison resurgence with landscaping, park and rides,  local shops and restaurants all coming… and it can't come soon enough.  Meanwhile, the people that live in this area continue to enjoy their escape to a suburban environment only 9 miles away from the Schermerhorn Symphony Center.

Grand Divisions:  Thank you, Nancy, and congratulations!

-Chris Sanders

Census shows significant increase in TN same-sex couples

The most recent round of data from the Census reveals a significant increase in the number of same-sex couples in Tennessee. This post is just a quick look. Number crunchers will dig deeper over the next few weeks, and we'll try to make any analysis available when we receive it.

The numbers: A Williams Institute "Census Snapshot" for Tennessee notes 16,322 same-sex couples in the state based on the 2010 data. Williams Institute analysis of the 2000 census showed 10,189 same-sex couples in 2000 and 13,570 in 2005. County-by-county information is not yet included in the 2010 snapshot, but we can compare a few numbers. 1659 same-sex couples lived in Davidson County in 2000, but the number had almost doubled to 3038 by 2010. The increase was also significant for Knox County with 857 in 2000 rising to 1420 in 2010. Rutherford County's numbers more than doubled from 305 in 2000 to 710 in 2010.

Reason for increase: It's hard to know precisely why the numbers increased. Part of the reason is clearly the rise in Tennessee's population in general. Another reason is, no doubt, the fact that couples feel more comfortable revealing their relationships to government data collectors.

Discrimination: It's interesting that the numbers increased at these levels considering the setbacks that the gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender community has faced in Tennessee over the last ten years. In 2003 Metro Nashville failed to pass a proposed non-discrimination ordinance, a deficit that wasn't remedied until 2009. Other cities such as Memphis have faced similar struggles in passing protective ordinances. In 2006 voters passed a state constitutional amendment defining marriage as only the union of one man and one woman with an 81% majority. But GLBT people are like everyone else in the sense that jobs, family ties, and networks of friends draw them to or keep them in certain areas regardless of the legal climate.

Policy implications: I've said it before, but Tennessee's demographics and lack of inclusive laws are on a collision course. Tennessee is increasingly home to many same-sex couples who live in every county despite the fact that state government and no local government in the state recognizes their relationships. Some couples are fortunate that both partners are afforded health insurance by their jobs or that one partner works for a private employer such as Vanderbilt University or AT&T providing partner benefits. Marriage equality, the real, lasting solution for couples who would like to take advantage of it, is probably a long way off in Tennessee and dependent upon future court challenges. In the mean time, measures that may have a chance of advancing in some local governments and public universities include partner health insurance benefits for their own employees. Currently no public entity in Tennessee provides partner health insurances benefits for its employees. And that is to say nothing of the hundreds of other benefits and responsibilities that come automatically with marriage.

The years ahead will be rough as this tension plays out. Our hope is that the numbers will help generate more movement on relationship recognition in Tennessee.

-Chris Sanders

Partner Benefits for TN companies? Yes, you can!

I got a call today from a company that wanted to explore providing partner benefits (health insurance) for partners of its employees. They had heard that they couldn't do so from their insurance broker. Interestingly I had heard something similar from the leader of a business organization. He was under the impression that companies can't provide partner benefits in Tennessee unless they are self-insured.

I called Blue Cross Blue Shield of Tennessee to find out more. They offer insurance products with partner benefits if a company or organization has 26 or more employees. That's great news.

The wrong information may be all that is holding your employer back from providing this important benefit for your family.

Obviously partner benefits are not the same as marriage and all the obligations and benefits that come with it. Justice demands marriage equality, but until that day comes, partner benefits offer a way to protect those we love.

-Chris Sanders

Obama throws us a bone; hate crimes bill delayed; complaint about bill tracking

Thankfully John Aravosis is carefully watching federal policy. In one blog post, he reveals a lot. President Obama is going to announce partner benefits for gay federal employees on Wednesday evening. I agree with him that this is a step forward, but he's also right that it has nothing to do with the president's promises. As Aravosis notes, it looks to be related to the heat that the DNC is taking over the administration's brief defending DOMA right before a big fundraiser with the GLBT community.

He also lets us in on this tidbit:

(And guess what? After the DOMA brief controversy exploded, they suddenly announced plans to do hate crimes in the Senate this week. And now, poof, the bill is dead again until at least August. And remember folks, this is the easy one - it already passed the House and Senate, and survived a Senate filibuster, in the last Congress.)

Gone until August? Why isn't anyone else telling me this? Anyone who tracks legislation and lobbies lawmakers knows that just about anything can happen to a bill. But where is the information? State legislation that TEP is monitoring, though not necessarily lobbying, is updated every week here during session. If there is a major development on a bill, we're sending out an email blast, blogging it, Tweeting, Facebooking, and MySpacing it as quickly as possible. It would be great if someone were doing the same for every major piece of federal equality legislation. Maybe someone is, but I haven't found the spot.

And it's not as if the media--national or regional--covers anything but marriage. It's no wonder none of these bills are crossing the finish line. The community kind of knows WHAT they are, but almost no one knows WHERE they are in the process. When the community doesn't know where the bills are, then we can't be counted on to contact lawmakers in a timely manner to drive votes.

FedEx called out for domestic partner benefits claims

National GLBT blogs are calling out Memphis-based FedEx on the issue of domestic partner benefits in light of the company being named to Fortune's "100 Best Companies to Work For" issue.

The Human Rights Campaign notes that although the company includes sexual orientation in its nondiscrimination policy, it doesn't include gender identity. They also point out that although FedEx says they offer domestic partner benefits, they only offer them to FedEx Office (used to be Kinko's) employees. The post goes on to add that FedEx does not offer partner benefits even in states where the law provides for marriage equality, referencing this communication, which cites the federal Defense of Marriage Act.

Good As You includes a heartbreaking story from a FedEx employee who was denied bereavement leave for a partner who died. The blog also adds the detail that FedEx employees in California have partner benefits because it is mandated by state law.

At this point, the pressure campaign seems to be building. There is a great deal of anger about the gaps in benefits, but even more anger about the public recognition for benefits that are not available to all employees.

It is not clear whether any national organizations have been actively negotiating with FedEx to bring about changes to their human resources policies. I do know that the Tennessee Transgender Political Coalition has had discussions about policy changes with FedEx. I hope that the effort to bring attention to this story results in policy change for the benefit of FedEx employees around the country.