Wednesday, July 24, 2002

A story published today by the Indianapolis Star reports that the city of Indianapolis, Indiana has decline to provide health care benefits to the domestic partners of city workers.

"You may have lost a battle, but your war still remains," Democratic Councilwoman Karen Celestino Horseman told a room that at its peak was crowded with about 200 observers.

The two-hour meeting was filled with passionate speeches from both sides. A small group of opponents showed up to urge council members not to use taxpayer dollars to extend health care benefits to unmarried couples. But supporters filled the vast majority of the room's seats.

Horseman proposed the measure two months ago but could not overcome the social opposition her plan inspired. She stressed the minimal impact on the city's taxpayers, estimating that fewer than a dozen workers would have claimed the benefit at a cost of $44,000 annually.

Still, it was clear from the meeting's first moment that more than money was on the minds of those in attendance. Critics said the plan would undermine the institution of marriage; supporters said it was simply about equal rights.

In the end, the Republican members of the Rules and Public Policy Committee used their majority position to kill the measure by tabling the proposal on a voice vote.

About 60 miles to the south in Bloomington, where a domestic partners health care benefit has been in place for more than six years, city officials said Indianapolis was making a mistake.

"We see this as a family-friendly employee benefit," said Daniel Grundmann, Bloomington's director of employee services. "As far as costs, it's been negligible."

According to the Human Rights Campaign, a homosexual advocacy group in Washington, D.C., nearly 4,500 employers nationwide provide a domestic partners health care benefit. That, the group says, includes nine states, 133 cities and counties, and 168 of the Fortune 500 companies.