|
Governor Jan Brewer hates Gays???
Yes, I am an anarchist that wants to eliminate as much government as possible. But if we are going to have government then that government should treat everybody equally including gays. So I certainly disagree with Governor Jan Brewers desire to have the state of Arizona treat gay folks as 4th class citizens. Same-sex health benefits appeal may hurt tourism Brewer move risks gays' ire, some say by Yvonne Wingett Sanchez - Jul. 10, 2012 10:02 PM The Republic | azcentral.com Gov. Jan Brewer's latest fight for states' rights may impact Arizona's tourism economy, some say, pitting state officials against gay and lesbian tourists who pour millions of dollars into state coffers. The push back came in the wake of Tuesday's resignation of a member of the Arizona Tourism Advisory Council. Edwin Leslie, a Brewer appointee, stepped down over Brewer's decision to ask the U.S. Supreme Court to eliminate health-care benefits for state employees' same-sex partners. A lower court had declared the state law cutting the service unconstitutional. Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne asked the high court to weigh in, saying eliminating the benefits "furthers the state's interest in promoting marriage." The state has 230 active state and university employees and three retirees who receive same-sex domestic medical coverage, according to figures from the state Department of Administration. Currently, they cost the state $1.8 million yearly for their claims and dependents' claims. In a two-page letterto the governor, Leslie, who lives in Phoenix with his partner and their son and owns a hospitality-management company, said Brewer's actions are "in direct conflict with your reiteration that all Americans are entitled to the same 'inalienable rights.'" Leslie suggested Brewer is jeopardizing tourism efforts and urged her to "act responsibly" in favor of the economy. Leslie wrote it was his responsibility as a board member to "remind you that your actions are contrary to those needed to ensure the success of the tourism industry in Arizona." "Your actions discriminate against one part of the state's residents to appease a small fraction of the population," he wrote. "Arizona residents by and large are supportive of LGBT equality." Michael McFall is the publisher of "Arizona Pride Guide," a tourism guide read by more than 380,000 coast to coast. According to his figures, Arizona is the seventh-most-popular destination among gay tourists in the U.S. and third among gay international travelers. Nationally, those tourists spend more than $80 billion a year, and in Arizona, they bring in about $122 million, he said. McFall said about 30 percent of the people who relocate to Arizona are gay. His figures are gleaned from marketing companies and company research. "We're seeing states like New York and Hawaii that are saying, 'We think you should have equal rights,' and we hear from states like ours -- and our governor, saying, 'No, you shouldn't have equal rights,'" he said. "This community supports people and states that support them." McFall said states welcoming to gays and lesbians are seeing green. After same-sex civil unions became law in Hawaii, he said, state officials saw a $50 million-plus tourism impact over three years. Matthew Benson, a Brewer spokesman, said that Brewer appreciates Leslie's service but that his resignation is regrettable. He said the governor views this as a states' rights issue. "And it's even more regrettable that he has opted to politicize that decision in this manner," Benson said. "The governor doesn't believe in ceding to a federal court the authority of Arizona's duly elected officials (to make budget decisions)." The court case centers on whether the state can eliminate health coverage for same-sex domestic partners of state and university employees. The Legislature passed a measure in 2009 to do just that. Impacted employees sued the state, alleging discrimination. The U.S. District Court in Arizona and the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals have said the state must continue providing benefits to the partners of gay and lesbian workers. State officials now want the U.S. Supreme Court to review the lower courts' decisions. Some members of the gay community said the decision to petition the high court underscores the small-mindedness of some state officials. They pointed out that local cities are working hard to pitch the area as chic and tolerant. Ben Bethel, owner and manager of central Phoenix's Clarendon Hotel, said state officials have pounded "one more nail in the state's tourism coffin." "It's pretty insane," he said. "But to me, it was just one more thing to make me roll my eyes and go, 'I'm not surprised that something like this comes along from our crazy state government.' You should be loving and open and welcoming to people from all backgrounds and walks of life, and that's what tourism is. And we keep shutting out people to go to the state of Arizona." Phoenix Councilman Tom Simplot, who is openly gay, said city and convention officials over the past eight years have tried to strengthen his city's gay-tourism plan, partly by reaching out to mainstream and gay publications. "Politics aside, this is business," Simplot said.
Brewer's opposition is misguided Jul. 11, 2012 12:00 AM The Republic | azcentral.com Gov. Jan Brewer believes in states' rights. It's the reason she cited in asking the U.S. Supreme Court to allow Arizona to eliminate health-care benefits for state employees' same-sex partners. But, in this case, her instincts are misguided. Arizona is better served by hiring the best employees possible. That doesn't happen by telling any segment of the population it is unwelcome. A 2009 law eliminated health coverage for heterosexual domestic partners, same-sex partners and adult children. While that may advance the moral beliefs of legislators, it makes the state less competitive for labor. Phoenix, other cities and large employers grant benefits to unmarried heterosexual and same-sex partners. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Arizona is not obligated to provide health-care benefits, but once it does it cannot pick and choose who gets them without running afoul of equal-protection provisions of the Constitution. States' rights can never override individual rights. But pragmatically, Arizona should have never gone here. Services are delivered by people. The state should open its arms to the best and brightest, and not turn a cold shoulder to any. |