GovernmentExecutive.com

A bipartisan group of lawmakers is hoping to put the federal government on par with many private sector companies by extending domestic partner benefits to federal employees.

Under new legislation introduced in both houses of Congress on Dec. 19, 2007, a government employee and same-sex domestic partner would be eligible to participate in federal health benefits, family medical and emergency leave, group life insurance, long-term care, and retirement benefits.

The Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligations Act was introduced in the Senate (S. 2521) by Sens. Joseph Lieberman, I-Conn., and Gordon Smith, R-Ore. In the House, the legislation (H.R. 4838) was introduced by Reps. Tammy Baldwin, D-Wis.; Chris Shays, R-Conn.; Henry Waxman, D-Calif.; and Tom Davis, R-Va.

"It's time for the federal government to catch up to the private sector, not just to set an example, so it can compete for the most qualified employees and ensure that all our public servants receive fair and equitable treatment," Lieberman said. "It makes good economic and policy sense, and it is the right thing to do."

To qualify for benefits, federal employees would have to prove they share a home and financial responsibilities with their same-sex partner. Employees and their partners also would assume the same obligations that apply to married employees and their spouses, such as anti-nepotism rules and financial disclosure requirements.

Currently, more than half of Fortune 500 companies and nearly 10,000 other companies provide benefits to domestic partners of employees. Hundreds of state and local governments and several colleges and universities also have modified rules to include same-sex partners.

Lawmakers have tried before to open federal benefits to domestic partners. Lieberman and Smith introduced similar legislation in the last session of Congress, but it never made it out of committee. In 2003, Sen. Mark Dayton, D-Minn., introduced a bill that would have extended many benefits to both same-sex and opposite-sex domestic partners, but that bill also died in subcommittee.

Twenty co-sponsors have signed on to the Senate legislation and 38 have signed on to the House bill. The increased bipartisan support could put the bill in better standing for passage this Congress.

Additionally, coverage of domestic partners would add very little to the total cost of providing benefits, Lieberman said. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that offering benefits to domestic partners of federal employees would increase the cost of benefits programs by less than one half of 1 percent.

Colleen Kelley, president of the National Treasury Employees Union, expressed support for the bill, noting that the benefits granted by the legislation are long overdue. "The bill underscores the importance of providing strong workplace benefits to all federal employees," she said. "It is a critical first step toward resolving a long-standing, meaningful issue."

Electronic Retirement Rules

The move toward electronic retirement records for federal employees is fast approaching.

The Office of Personnel Management issued final rules last week that will authorize alternative methods for processing retirement, health and life insurance applications, notices, elections and other records under the agency's Retirement Systems Modernization Project.

The project is intended to improve the quality and timeliness of services to federal retirees and the more than 3 million active employees in the Civil Service Retirement System and the Federal Employees Retirement System. Under the current paper-based record-keeping system, it often takes months for retired federal employees to receive the correct annuity payment.

Once phased in to the new system, employees, annuitants and survivors will have access to important retirement information on a pay-period or daily basis rather than an annual basis. Additionally, Web-based tools will be available on demand for federal employees to plan early for retirement.

OPM outlined plans to verify employees' identities using electronic signatures, but indicated it was still deciding which security method to use. Acceptable methods of creating an electronic signature could include personal identification numbers, smart cards or biometrics, such as fingerprints, retinal patterns or voice recognition, OPM said.

Still, not-so-tech-savvy employees or those who have limited access to the Internet should not feel completely threatened by the new changes. OPM said it plans to continue operating "for some time" the current paper-based system for some individuals.

The personnel agency expects to bring General Services Administration employees into the electronic records system by February as part of its first wave of conversion. Four additional migration waves will follow the launch, gradually bringing information for all active federal employees into the retirement system by February 2009.

COMMENTS

• I just PCSed to Europe with my partner of 8 years. Of course we had to pay for her ticket since our marriage is not recognized on the Federal level. We were married legally in California when the state opened it up to same sex partners. Upon my arrival to my duty station I attempted to get her a dependent ID card so that she could have all the many privileges that other spouses have. I was very hurt to find out that because of DOMA that my spouse is not considered to be an "authorized" spouse. She can't shop on post or drive my car like all the "authorized " spouses can. Of course this is just a dent in comparison to the many other privileges that she will not have access to. A Visa would really be nice! I have seen heterosexual couples get married literally days prior to their PCS so that they can get these benefits for their new spouses. I have seen soldiers leave their families for prostitutes that they have "romanced" up in the red light district, marry them and get these "authorized" spouses ID cards. I have even known swingers in the government community that are able to get their spouses ID cards. Is it just me or doesn't it seem wrong and unjust that a monogamous and dedicated couple such as myself and my spouse of 8 years cannot get Federal benefits? Even after we have a legal marriage certificate from the state of California? What gives? srtrammell Posted October 11, 2008 5:13 PM
• To the workers whose religious view abound, this is why there is a need for separation of church and state, as for the benefits LGBT folks deserve the same benefits the heterosexual ones get. As a 20 years government employee that has paid into the system, I should expect the same rights as well benefits. If I find that person that fits the bill, I will be seeking these benefits that some here would tell me I do not deserve. In terms of choice, it is what you are born as, same as race, and in time the human genome project will no doubt prove this. When that happens, I would like to see how the different government agencies will address those that posted such hateful comments since the government does not tolerate racist or faith based discrimination. Elizabeth Carroll Posted September 19, 2008 3:15 PM
• Opposite sex partners CAN get benefits for their "partner". All you have to do is apply and show proof that you are living as a couple (common-law). It's done all the time. AJ Posted August 1, 2008 10:25 AM