Federal employees’ same-sex relationships would be treated similarly to marriage under legislation introduced on Dec. 19 by Sens. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., and Gordon Smith, R-Ore., and 19 co-sponsors. The bill is called the Domestic Partner Benefits and Obligations Act of 2007.

“It’s time for the federal government to catch up with the private sector, not to just set an example, but so that it can compete for the most qualified employees and ensure that all of 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.”

The legislation allows same-sex domestic partners to take advantage of health, retirement, and other benefits associated with federal employment. It also extends restrictions such as anti-nepotism and financial disclosure rules, which now apply only to legal spouses.

A companion bill was introduced in the House under the lead sponsorship of Democrats Tammy Baldwin, D-Wis., and Henry Waxman, D.Calif., and Republicans Tom Davis, Va., and Chris Shays, Conn. It has 35 additional co-sponsors. Similar legislation previously has been introduced in both chambers.

The Human Rights Campaign has pressed for the legislation. It noted that a majority of the Fortune 500 companies, the largest in the nation, provide domestic partner benefits to their employees.

Repeal of legal provisions barring persons who are HIV positive from entering the country was introduced in the Senate on Dec. 14 by John Kerry, D-Mass., and Gordon Smith, R-Ore. It would reform the Immigration and Nationalities Act.

“It’s incredible that the federal government still tolerates a ban that not only restricts AIDS experts with the disease but also refugees who are seeking asylum in our country,” said Kerry. “My legislation would end this draconian law.”

Only a dozen other countries have similar restrictions, including Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Libya and Sudan. China recently changed its policy.

On World AIDS Day 2006, President George W. Bush said he would modify administration of the law to make it easier for persons to get an exemption to enter the country. However government lawyers concluded that the law gave them little flexibility. Some advocates have argued that recent modifications proposed by the Department of Homeland Security are even worse than what currently exists.

Much of the processing of visas at U.S. consulates is handled by local employees and an applicant disclosing his or her HIV status when seeking a visa waiver opens up the possibility that the information may spread and put them at risk for discrimination in their own country. Persons are not allowed to apply for a work permit or asylum either.

“What’s more, it is all left to the discretion of the consular officers who likely do not have the medical knowledge to make these decisions [of granting a waiver]. No guidelines are given on how to make these determinations and there is no appeal process whatsoever,” said Kerry.

[Source: Lambda Legal]