Brian Adkin’s killer sentenced to 17 years in Ethiopia
The Ethiopian man who murdered alumnus and Foreign Service Officer Brian Adkins in his home last February was sentenced to 17 years in prison, Adkins’ family and friends said.
Adkins, 25, was found dead in his home in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia’s capital city, where he was working for the U.S. State Department. In an e-mail sent to family, friends and The Hatchet, fellow alumnus and friend Michael Geremia decried the sentence for the unidentified Ethiopian man who confessed to killing Adkins in April.
“Such a lenient sentence, for such a heinous crime, makes a mockery of the principle of justice; undermines the safety of American diplomats everywhere, but particularly in Ethiopia; and lacks any serious deterrent value for future murders of Americans in Ethiopia,” Geremia said.
Adkins’ father, Dan, said the family was “devastated” by the sentence but added that the prosecution has already appealed the ruling.
“To try to make sense of all of this, all we can hope for is that Brian’s work was done here and he was taken to do more important work for our Lord,” Adkins’ father said in the e-mail. “Regardless of the sentencing, this doesn’t change the daily loss that we all feel.”
Though the Adkins’ father said he does not believe in the death penalty, he said he hoped his son’s killer would have received a life sentence, preventing him from ever committing another crime. To make matters worse for the family, Adkins’ father said his son’s killer was tried in Ethiopia, as extradition laws prevented the U.S. from trying the case, leaving his family with no say in the killer’s fate.
“This young man devastated our family and we did not get an opportunity to send a letter or state in court what was done to us,” Adkins’ father said in a phone interview Monday afternoon. “Over there we have no say. We would have no say when he comes up for parole, whether or not we feel after 10 years and nine months if he can be out on good behavior, and it’s not acceptable to me. Our hands are tied in this process. To me, all these young people are going over there with the idea they are safe and they’re not. If there are no repercussions [for committing this type of crime] what is going to keep people from robbing and killing.”
Adkins’ father said he did not know when a decision on the appeal would be made, however he said the process will most likely take months.
“We were told that they had very strict laws in that country back in February, and for this sentence to come down the way it did left us very disappointed,” Adkins’ father said. “The man, only being 18 years old now, can be really young when he gets out of prison. He can still commit this crime again.”
Adkins was honored by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton as one of 231 Foreign Service Officers who has died while serving their tours of duty.
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
Thursday, July 09, 2009
Bi-National Gay Couples Cry Out for Security
This is an issue facing many LGBT Foreign Service families. Our heterosexual colleagues can fall in love overseas and get immigration visas for their spouses. IN fact, because of their service, heterosexual Foreign Service Officers can get what is referred to as "expeditious naturalization" for their spouses, meaning the spouse does not have to live in the U.S. the requisite amount of time before being naturalized.
Not so for LGBT folks in the Foreign Service. We are still often not allowed to bring our partners back to the U.S. if we want to do a D.C. posting (which is necessary to advance your career) unless we can get them a student visa or, if possible, a work visa. And forget retiring to the country you spent your life serving unless you plan to leave behind the partner who served it with you.
Bi-National Gay Couples Cry Out for Security
Shortly before dawn on Jan. 28, a knock at the door turned the idyllic life of Shirley Tan and her family upside-down.
Agents from the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement handed a deportation letter to Tan, the stay-at-home lesbian mom of 12-year-old twin boys. Stunned, Tan, who describes herself as a "housewife," told the agents she had never before seen the letter, dated 2002.
"I was handcuffed and taken away, like a criminal," Tan recently told the Senate Judiciary Committee, which called a first-ever hearing to look into the outrageous harm done to gay bi-national families by locking them out of the protections built into immigration law for heterosexual spouses of U.S. citizens.
"I was put into a van with two men in yellow jump suits and chains, and searched like a criminal. ... All the while, my family was first and foremost the center of everything on my mind," Tan added, as her son Jashley wept so hard that Chairman Patrick Leahy temporarily halted the hearing.
"Young man," the senator said, "your mother is a very brave woman."
Tan testified that she had applied for asylum in the United States after the release in the Philippines of the man who had killed her mother and sister and brutally beaten her. She said she thought her slow-moving appeal was still pending.
Over the years, Tan had built a good life in Pacifica, Calif., with her American partner, Jay Mercado, their sons and their Catholic church, where the couple sings in the choir and Tan is a Eucharistic minister.
Because Mercardo (like their sons) is a U.S. citizen, she could sponsor Tan for permanent resident status if they were a heterosexual married couple.
According to the 2000 Census, 36,000 mixed-nationality same-sex couples are in the same boat.
Nearly half, 16,000, are raising children. (For more information, go to immigrationequality.org.)
Tan remains in her adopted homeland thanks only to a two-year reprieve arranged by Sen. Dianne Feinstein.
It's wrong for partners of gay U.S. citizens to be so vulnerable. And it's long past time for Congress to help gay bi-national couples, many of whom now must live apart, connected only by cell phones and occasional visits.
The Uniting American Families Act, pending in the House and Senate, would fix the problem by recognizing gay "permanent partners" in immigration law.
The legislation — sponsored by heavy-hitters Leahy in the Senate and Jerry Nadler, who chairs a House Judiciary subcommittee — would amend the Immigration and Nationality Act so partners of gay U.S. citizens or of lawful permanent residents could legally settle here.
Eligibility rules — and the hefty penalties for fraud — would be virtually the same as for married heterosexuals. Nineteen countries — including Canada, France, Germany, Great Britain and Spain — have already taken such steps.
The Leahy-Nadler push recently got a boost when President Barack Obama put overhaul of the nation's broken immigration system on one of his White House's front burners.
If Congress finally passes immigration reform, the Leahy-Nadler fix might be folded into the overall package, finally giving the Tan-Mercado family and thousands of others the security they are crying out for.
As Tan told senators: "After 23 years building our life together, Jay and I know that our family is still at great risk of separation. We have a home together. Jay has a great job. We have a mortgage, a pension, friends and a community. We have everything together, and it would be impossible to re-establish elsewhere."
Basic fairness says they shouldn't have to try.
Deb Price of The Detroit News writes the first nationally syndicated column on gay issues. To find out more about Deb Price and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate web page at www.creators.com.
Not so for LGBT folks in the Foreign Service. We are still often not allowed to bring our partners back to the U.S. if we want to do a D.C. posting (which is necessary to advance your career) unless we can get them a student visa or, if possible, a work visa. And forget retiring to the country you spent your life serving unless you plan to leave behind the partner who served it with you.
Bi-National Gay Couples Cry Out for Security
Shortly before dawn on Jan. 28, a knock at the door turned the idyllic life of Shirley Tan and her family upside-down.
Agents from the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement handed a deportation letter to Tan, the stay-at-home lesbian mom of 12-year-old twin boys. Stunned, Tan, who describes herself as a "housewife," told the agents she had never before seen the letter, dated 2002.
"I was handcuffed and taken away, like a criminal," Tan recently told the Senate Judiciary Committee, which called a first-ever hearing to look into the outrageous harm done to gay bi-national families by locking them out of the protections built into immigration law for heterosexual spouses of U.S. citizens.
"I was put into a van with two men in yellow jump suits and chains, and searched like a criminal. ... All the while, my family was first and foremost the center of everything on my mind," Tan added, as her son Jashley wept so hard that Chairman Patrick Leahy temporarily halted the hearing.
"Young man," the senator said, "your mother is a very brave woman."
Tan testified that she had applied for asylum in the United States after the release in the Philippines of the man who had killed her mother and sister and brutally beaten her. She said she thought her slow-moving appeal was still pending.
Over the years, Tan had built a good life in Pacifica, Calif., with her American partner, Jay Mercado, their sons and their Catholic church, where the couple sings in the choir and Tan is a Eucharistic minister.
Because Mercardo (like their sons) is a U.S. citizen, she could sponsor Tan for permanent resident status if they were a heterosexual married couple.
According to the 2000 Census, 36,000 mixed-nationality same-sex couples are in the same boat.
Nearly half, 16,000, are raising children. (For more information, go to immigrationequality.org.)
Tan remains in her adopted homeland thanks only to a two-year reprieve arranged by Sen. Dianne Feinstein.
It's wrong for partners of gay U.S. citizens to be so vulnerable. And it's long past time for Congress to help gay bi-national couples, many of whom now must live apart, connected only by cell phones and occasional visits.
The Uniting American Families Act, pending in the House and Senate, would fix the problem by recognizing gay "permanent partners" in immigration law.
The legislation — sponsored by heavy-hitters Leahy in the Senate and Jerry Nadler, who chairs a House Judiciary subcommittee — would amend the Immigration and Nationality Act so partners of gay U.S. citizens or of lawful permanent residents could legally settle here.
Eligibility rules — and the hefty penalties for fraud — would be virtually the same as for married heterosexuals. Nineteen countries — including Canada, France, Germany, Great Britain and Spain — have already taken such steps.
The Leahy-Nadler push recently got a boost when President Barack Obama put overhaul of the nation's broken immigration system on one of his White House's front burners.
If Congress finally passes immigration reform, the Leahy-Nadler fix might be folded into the overall package, finally giving the Tan-Mercado family and thousands of others the security they are crying out for.
As Tan told senators: "After 23 years building our life together, Jay and I know that our family is still at great risk of separation. We have a home together. Jay has a great job. We have a mortgage, a pension, friends and a community. We have everything together, and it would be impossible to re-establish elsewhere."
Basic fairness says they shouldn't have to try.
Deb Price of The Detroit News writes the first nationally syndicated column on gay issues. To find out more about Deb Price and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate web page at www.creators.com.
OPM 'Wholeheartedly' Endorses Benefits for Same-Sex Partners
This from the Washington Post this morning. What a difference ten months can make.
OPM 'Wholeheartedly' Endorses Benefits for Same-Sex Partners
In case there was any lingering doubt from last fall about the government's position on providing full domestic benefits for same-sex partners of federal workers, Office of Personnel Management Director John Berry erased them yesterday.
The White House and OPM, he said at the top of his statement to a House hearing, "wholeheartedly endorse passage" of legislation that would provide them with health and retirement coverage.
His clear, declarative statement could not have been more of a turnaround from the agency's bumbling presentation in September. Then, an OPM official told a Senate committee that the Bush administration had no position on similar legislation, only to correct himself minutes later after an aide informed him that OPM actually opposed the bill.
The official's use of the movie "I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry," an Adam Sandler film about two firefighters who pretend they are lovers so they can get domestic partner benefits, to demonstrate the dangers of insurance fraud, also left many incredulous.
But now the Obama administration has reversed the Bush administration's position, and the new policy was presented by the government's highest ranking openly gay official.
The current policy, Berry said, "is unjust and it directly undermines the Federal Government's ability to recruit and retain the nation's best workers. Historically, the federal government has in many ways been a progressive employer, but we're behind the private sector and 19 states, including Alaska and Arizona, on this one. Almost 60 percent of Fortune 500 companies already offer similar benefits to the same-sex domestic partners of their employees. . . . The Federal Government does not effectively compete with these companies for every talented person when we fail to offer comparable job benefits to our employees."
President Obama took a small but important step toward ending federal workplace discrimination against gays and lesbians when he issued a memorandum last month that allows same-sex partners of federal employees to be covered by federal long-term care insurance. The memorandum also allows the workers to use sick leave to care for their same-sex partners. But extending full benefits requires legislation of the sort being considered by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee's federal workforce subcommittee.
Berry's argument did not convince Rep. Jason Chaffetz of Utah, the top Republican on the subcommittee, which held the hearing. He said the bill "is directly discriminatory against heterosexual couples" who cohabitate without marriage. The legislation would not cover them.
Those couples, however, have the option to marry, which would allow them to be covered.
Berry does not have that option. He and his partner of 13 years would benefit from the bill because Berry's partner does not have employer-provided insurance.
Unlike some other hearings about federal workforce issues that were relatively lonely affairs, yesterday's session was packed with spectators who waited in a long line to get in. Many in the audience appeared to support the legislation, but not the Chaffetz-invited group of sharply dressed ministers from the Missionary Baptist Ministers Conference.
Pastor T.L. Rogers of Triumphant Church in Hyattsville was among those who says he thinks the bill would invite fraud because a non-gay couple could pretend to be lovers to reap the employee benefits. "If I have a cousin who does not have insurance, I can say he is my domestic partner," Rogers said in an interview.
[Digger comments: There is an easy solution to this. Pass federal same-sex marriage now.]
Of course, this version of the Chuck and Larry argument implies that large numbers of people would risk committing a federal crime, by signing an affidavit subject to perjury laws, that certifies the partner relationship meets a set of criteria that says, among other things, the couple share each other's financial obligations. Married couples don't have to submit such documentation.
Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), the chief sponsor of the legislation, said intentional false statements to obtain benefits could get culprits five years in prison or a $10,000 fine. As shot with holes as our health-care system is, it's still unlikely that many people would risk that punishment to get the federal benefits.
Baldwin noted that as a lesbian, she is denied the same level of compensation as her straight, married colleagues in Congress. She and her partner also are not subject, as they would be under the legislation, to the same obligations of married couples. In Baldwin's case that would include disclosure of her partner's income and debts.
Baldwin summed up the rationale for her bill with a simple statement about fairness. The purpose, she said, "is to ensure that hard-working Americans can no longer be denied equal compensation for equal work just because of who they love."
Written statements from the hearing are available here.
OPM 'Wholeheartedly' Endorses Benefits for Same-Sex Partners
In case there was any lingering doubt from last fall about the government's position on providing full domestic benefits for same-sex partners of federal workers, Office of Personnel Management Director John Berry erased them yesterday.
The White House and OPM, he said at the top of his statement to a House hearing, "wholeheartedly endorse passage" of legislation that would provide them with health and retirement coverage.
His clear, declarative statement could not have been more of a turnaround from the agency's bumbling presentation in September. Then, an OPM official told a Senate committee that the Bush administration had no position on similar legislation, only to correct himself minutes later after an aide informed him that OPM actually opposed the bill.
The official's use of the movie "I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry," an Adam Sandler film about two firefighters who pretend they are lovers so they can get domestic partner benefits, to demonstrate the dangers of insurance fraud, also left many incredulous.
But now the Obama administration has reversed the Bush administration's position, and the new policy was presented by the government's highest ranking openly gay official.
The current policy, Berry said, "is unjust and it directly undermines the Federal Government's ability to recruit and retain the nation's best workers. Historically, the federal government has in many ways been a progressive employer, but we're behind the private sector and 19 states, including Alaska and Arizona, on this one. Almost 60 percent of Fortune 500 companies already offer similar benefits to the same-sex domestic partners of their employees. . . . The Federal Government does not effectively compete with these companies for every talented person when we fail to offer comparable job benefits to our employees."
President Obama took a small but important step toward ending federal workplace discrimination against gays and lesbians when he issued a memorandum last month that allows same-sex partners of federal employees to be covered by federal long-term care insurance. The memorandum also allows the workers to use sick leave to care for their same-sex partners. But extending full benefits requires legislation of the sort being considered by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee's federal workforce subcommittee.
Berry's argument did not convince Rep. Jason Chaffetz of Utah, the top Republican on the subcommittee, which held the hearing. He said the bill "is directly discriminatory against heterosexual couples" who cohabitate without marriage. The legislation would not cover them.
Those couples, however, have the option to marry, which would allow them to be covered.
Berry does not have that option. He and his partner of 13 years would benefit from the bill because Berry's partner does not have employer-provided insurance.
Unlike some other hearings about federal workforce issues that were relatively lonely affairs, yesterday's session was packed with spectators who waited in a long line to get in. Many in the audience appeared to support the legislation, but not the Chaffetz-invited group of sharply dressed ministers from the Missionary Baptist Ministers Conference.
Pastor T.L. Rogers of Triumphant Church in Hyattsville was among those who says he thinks the bill would invite fraud because a non-gay couple could pretend to be lovers to reap the employee benefits. "If I have a cousin who does not have insurance, I can say he is my domestic partner," Rogers said in an interview.
[Digger comments: There is an easy solution to this. Pass federal same-sex marriage now.]
Of course, this version of the Chuck and Larry argument implies that large numbers of people would risk committing a federal crime, by signing an affidavit subject to perjury laws, that certifies the partner relationship meets a set of criteria that says, among other things, the couple share each other's financial obligations. Married couples don't have to submit such documentation.
Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), the chief sponsor of the legislation, said intentional false statements to obtain benefits could get culprits five years in prison or a $10,000 fine. As shot with holes as our health-care system is, it's still unlikely that many people would risk that punishment to get the federal benefits.
Baldwin noted that as a lesbian, she is denied the same level of compensation as her straight, married colleagues in Congress. She and her partner also are not subject, as they would be under the legislation, to the same obligations of married couples. In Baldwin's case that would include disclosure of her partner's income and debts.
Baldwin summed up the rationale for her bill with a simple statement about fairness. The purpose, she said, "is to ensure that hard-working Americans can no longer be denied equal compensation for equal work just because of who they love."
Written statements from the hearing are available here.
Monday, July 06, 2009
Still Waiting
So the memo is out. People are registering their domestic partners. Everything was to be in place for the start of the pay period beginning July 5.
I am still waiting.
We got our affidavits in on time. And we were even registered as a tandem for a day. Then our assignment techs came back and said they had to take that designation away until they got "more guidance." They said they wanted to make sure we weren't folded into each other's orders because since we are both officers, we each have our own orders.
So they listed us as domestic partners, pending "guidance."
The problem is they already have the guidance. They were told this should be done.
The bigger problem is that listing us as domestic partners rather than as a tandem is EXACTLY what would cause us to be folded into each other's orders.
Bureaucracy's can be frustrating.
I am still waiting.
We got our affidavits in on time. And we were even registered as a tandem for a day. Then our assignment techs came back and said they had to take that designation away until they got "more guidance." They said they wanted to make sure we weren't folded into each other's orders because since we are both officers, we each have our own orders.
So they listed us as domestic partners, pending "guidance."
The problem is they already have the guidance. They were told this should be done.
The bigger problem is that listing us as domestic partners rather than as a tandem is EXACTLY what would cause us to be folded into each other's orders.
Bureaucracy's can be frustrating.
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
GLIFAA dissed by the White House?
I am beginning to wonder what is up. No representative from GLIFAA was invited to the White House signing of the memorandum on June 17. Perhaps an oversight. Media coverage neglected to mention GLIFAA, despite the fact that only two federal agencies were specifically mentioned in the memorandum, the State Department and the Department of Justice. And GLIFAA has been working with the State Department since BEFORE day one. We worked with the previous administration. We worked with the transition team. And we have worked with this administration. It was GLIFAA that prepared the papers, still available at whitehouse.gov, outlining which benefits the Secretary could extend to same-sex partners with just the stroke of her pen, and which required congressional action. She took each of our recommendations.
So fine, we weren't invited to the small gathering for the signing. But now this: Gay leaders invited to the White House to meet the President. Not to diminish the role played by FedGLOBE, but the much more of the credit for the benefits extended belongs to GLIFAA. But while the same members of the FedGLOBE were invited to both White House events, GLIFAA was again left off the list.
I'd like to believe that these events were a bone tossed to those who got less than we did, but I am not sure I do.
Gay Pride at the White House
President Obama hosted hundreds of gay rights leaders and activists at the White House earlier today, marking the 40th anniversary of the birth of the modern gay rights movement.
As The Post's Michael D. Shear reports, Obama "became the first Oval Office occupant to officially celebrate gay pride in the White House even as the gay community remains bitterly divided about the pace of Obama's efforts to turn words into action for their agenda.
"In recognizing the march of progress since the protests outside New York's Stonewall Inn 40 years ago, Obama achieved a milestone for many gay and lesbian Americans who mark the day as the beginning of their modern rights movement.
"But the excitement among the several hundred guests invited by the first couple to the East Wing Monday was tempered by frustration among many who believe that the president has moved too slowly to make good on his campaign promises."
Below find a list of the federal government and political officials and other prominent activists invited to attend the meeting, as provided in a White House pool report:
John Berry, Director of Office of Personnel Management
Fred Hochberg, Chair, Export-Import Bank
John Easton, Director, Institute of Education Sciences at the Department of Education
Christine Quinn, Speaker of the New York City Council
Judith Appelbaum, Department of Justice
Vic Basile, Office of Personnel Management
Jeremy Bernard, National Endowement for the Humanities
Raymond Buckley, DNC Vice-Chair
Jamie Citron, Department of Health and Human Services
Cheryl Cook, Department of Agriculture
Steven Elmendorf, Democratic Party consultant, Washington, D.C.
Eric Fanning, Department of Justice
Hon. Michael Guest, Former Ambassador
Gavin Hilgemeier, Federal GLOBE
Leonard Hirsch, Federal GLOBE
Lorilyn Holmes, Federal GLOBE
Hon. James Hormel, the first openly gay U.S. ambassador
Kevin Jennings, Department of Education
Jennifer Jones, Department of Housing and Urban Development
Frank Kameny, Washington, DC
Elaine Kaplan, Office of Personnel Management
Thomas Lopach, Export-Import Bank
Mary Beth Maxwell, Department of Labor
Kevin Naff, Washington Blade
David Noble, NASA
Gautam Raghavan, Department of Defense
Steven Ralls, Washington, D.C.
Ellen Ratner, Washington, D.C.
Bishop Gene Robinson, Diocese of New Hampshire
Hilary Rosen, Washington, D.C.
Judy Shepard, Matthew Shepard Foundation
Rick Stafford, DNC LGBT Caucus Chair
Andrew Tobias, DNC Treasurer
Alex Wagner, Department of Defense
Tobias Wolff, Philadelphia, Pa.
So fine, we weren't invited to the small gathering for the signing. But now this: Gay leaders invited to the White House to meet the President. Not to diminish the role played by FedGLOBE, but the much more of the credit for the benefits extended belongs to GLIFAA. But while the same members of the FedGLOBE were invited to both White House events, GLIFAA was again left off the list.
I'd like to believe that these events were a bone tossed to those who got less than we did, but I am not sure I do.
Gay Pride at the White House
President Obama hosted hundreds of gay rights leaders and activists at the White House earlier today, marking the 40th anniversary of the birth of the modern gay rights movement.
As The Post's Michael D. Shear reports, Obama "became the first Oval Office occupant to officially celebrate gay pride in the White House even as the gay community remains bitterly divided about the pace of Obama's efforts to turn words into action for their agenda.
"In recognizing the march of progress since the protests outside New York's Stonewall Inn 40 years ago, Obama achieved a milestone for many gay and lesbian Americans who mark the day as the beginning of their modern rights movement.
"But the excitement among the several hundred guests invited by the first couple to the East Wing Monday was tempered by frustration among many who believe that the president has moved too slowly to make good on his campaign promises."
Below find a list of the federal government and political officials and other prominent activists invited to attend the meeting, as provided in a White House pool report:
John Berry, Director of Office of Personnel Management
Fred Hochberg, Chair, Export-Import Bank
John Easton, Director, Institute of Education Sciences at the Department of Education
Christine Quinn, Speaker of the New York City Council
Judith Appelbaum, Department of Justice
Vic Basile, Office of Personnel Management
Jeremy Bernard, National Endowement for the Humanities
Raymond Buckley, DNC Vice-Chair
Jamie Citron, Department of Health and Human Services
Cheryl Cook, Department of Agriculture
Steven Elmendorf, Democratic Party consultant, Washington, D.C.
Eric Fanning, Department of Justice
Hon. Michael Guest, Former Ambassador
Gavin Hilgemeier, Federal GLOBE
Leonard Hirsch, Federal GLOBE
Lorilyn Holmes, Federal GLOBE
Hon. James Hormel, the first openly gay U.S. ambassador
Kevin Jennings, Department of Education
Jennifer Jones, Department of Housing and Urban Development
Frank Kameny, Washington, DC
Elaine Kaplan, Office of Personnel Management
Thomas Lopach, Export-Import Bank
Mary Beth Maxwell, Department of Labor
Kevin Naff, Washington Blade
David Noble, NASA
Gautam Raghavan, Department of Defense
Steven Ralls, Washington, D.C.
Ellen Ratner, Washington, D.C.
Bishop Gene Robinson, Diocese of New Hampshire
Hilary Rosen, Washington, D.C.
Judy Shepard, Matthew Shepard Foundation
Rick Stafford, DNC LGBT Caucus Chair
Andrew Tobias, DNC Treasurer
Alex Wagner, Department of Defense
Tobias Wolff, Philadelphia, Pa.
Saturday, June 27, 2009
The changes are official
Here is the ALDAC regarding the same-sex partner benefits Secretary Clinton announced last week:
R 262320Z JUN 09
FM SECSTATE WASHDC
TO ALL DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR POSTS COLLECTIVE
AMEMBASSY TRIPOLI
UNCLAS STATE 066740
FROM U/S KENNEDY
E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: AMGT, APER
SUBJECT: Implementing Benefits for Same-Sex Domestic Partners of Foreign Service Employees Serving Abroad
Ref: State 063819
1. Last Thursday, the Secretary announced that the Department is extending the full range of legally available benefits to same-sex domestic partners of members of the Foreign Service sent to serve abroad. I am pleased to advise that the implementing changes to the Foreign Affairs Manual (FAM) will be effective for the Department of State on June 26, 2009. If other agencies decide to implement these changes as well, they may choose the same date or any subsequent date.
2. The interim changes to the FAM are available on line at http://hrweb.hr.state.gov/prd/hrweb/dg/pc/same_sex_domestic_partners.cfm. We expect them to be published in final within 30 days, following interagency review. We encourage you to review them to gain a fuller understanding of the benefits extended in reftel.
3. To obtain benefits for their same-sex domestic partners, employees must:
(1) file an affidavit of eligibility for benefits and obligations (also available at http://hrweb.hr.state.gov/prd/hrweb/dg/pc/same_sex_domes
tic_partners.cfm) and,
(2) update their OF-126(Residency and Dependency Report, see para 6). Please read and consider the affidavit carefully before signing.
4. Domestic partners must also comply with the same security requirements and undergo the same background review as spouses. Domestic partners must also have a valid medical clearance for the post of assignment. Those already at post should follow the procedures for a newly acquired dependent - they will be given access to the overseas health unit for up to 90 days pending completion of their medical clearance. It is important to note that domestic partners must have health insurance as the Department acts only as a secondary payer in event of overseas hospitalization.
5. As per the FAM regulations, the affidavit must affirm, among other things, that the employee and his/her domestic partner:
(a) are each other's sole domestic partner and intend to remain committed to one another indefinitely;
(b) have a common residence, and intend to continue the arrangement;
(c) are at least 18 years of age and mentally competent to consent to contract;
(d) share responsibility for a significant measure of each other's common welfare and financial obligations;
(e) are not married to, joined in civil union with, or domestic partners with anyone else; and
(f) are same-sex domestic partners, and not related in a way that would prohibit legal marriage in the State in which we reside.
6. For State employees, both documents should be directed to your Assignment Technician in HR/EX. The OF-126 must be filed electronically. An updated version is available to each employee through his/her GEMS account on HR Online. The signed affidavit can be e-mailed to your assignment technician at "HR-EX-ASU" on the Global Address List or faxed to 202-663-0449. You may file these forms immediately.
7. Employees of other foreign affairs agencies should consult their Human Resources Office for filing instructions. We offer that the OF-0126, available on the Department of State's intranet, might be amended with a pen-and-ink change to add "domestic partner" in the box requesting "relationship".
8. Additional instructions and guidance will be issued in the coming days on specific benefits. In addition, while we are willing to offer diplomatic and official passports to eligible US citizen domestic partners, diplomatic visas and work eligibility for them depends upon host governments. In this regard, bilateral work agreements may have to be renegotiated.
9. As we proceed to implement this important initiative, we welcome any suggestions you may have for improvement.
10. Minimize considered.
CLINTON
R 262320Z JUN 09
FM SECSTATE WASHDC
TO ALL DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR POSTS COLLECTIVE
AMEMBASSY TRIPOLI
UNCLAS STATE 066740
FROM U/S KENNEDY
E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: AMGT, APER
SUBJECT: Implementing Benefits for Same-Sex Domestic Partners of Foreign Service Employees Serving Abroad
Ref: State 063819
1. Last Thursday, the Secretary announced that the Department is extending the full range of legally available benefits to same-sex domestic partners of members of the Foreign Service sent to serve abroad. I am pleased to advise that the implementing changes to the Foreign Affairs Manual (FAM) will be effective for the Department of State on June 26, 2009. If other agencies decide to implement these changes as well, they may choose the same date or any subsequent date.
2. The interim changes to the FAM are available on line at http://hrweb.hr.state.gov/prd/hrweb/dg/pc/same_sex_domestic_partners.cfm. We expect them to be published in final within 30 days, following interagency review. We encourage you to review them to gain a fuller understanding of the benefits extended in reftel.
3. To obtain benefits for their same-sex domestic partners, employees must:
(1) file an affidavit of eligibility for benefits and obligations (also available at http://hrweb.hr.state.gov/prd/hrweb/dg/pc/same_sex_domes
tic_partners.cfm) and,
(2) update their OF-126(Residency and Dependency Report, see para 6). Please read and consider the affidavit carefully before signing.
4. Domestic partners must also comply with the same security requirements and undergo the same background review as spouses. Domestic partners must also have a valid medical clearance for the post of assignment. Those already at post should follow the procedures for a newly acquired dependent - they will be given access to the overseas health unit for up to 90 days pending completion of their medical clearance. It is important to note that domestic partners must have health insurance as the Department acts only as a secondary payer in event of overseas hospitalization.
5. As per the FAM regulations, the affidavit must affirm, among other things, that the employee and his/her domestic partner:
(a) are each other's sole domestic partner and intend to remain committed to one another indefinitely;
(b) have a common residence, and intend to continue the arrangement;
(c) are at least 18 years of age and mentally competent to consent to contract;
(d) share responsibility for a significant measure of each other's common welfare and financial obligations;
(e) are not married to, joined in civil union with, or domestic partners with anyone else; and
(f) are same-sex domestic partners, and not related in a way that would prohibit legal marriage in the State in which we reside.
6. For State employees, both documents should be directed to your Assignment Technician in HR/EX. The OF-126 must be filed electronically. An updated version is available to each employee through his/her GEMS account on HR Online. The signed affidavit can be e-mailed to your assignment technician at "HR-EX-ASU" on the Global Address List or faxed to 202-663-0449. You may file these forms immediately.
7. Employees of other foreign affairs agencies should consult their Human Resources Office for filing instructions. We offer that the OF-0126, available on the Department of State's intranet, might be amended with a pen-and-ink change to add "domestic partner" in the box requesting "relationship".
8. Additional instructions and guidance will be issued in the coming days on specific benefits. In addition, while we are willing to offer diplomatic and official passports to eligible US citizen domestic partners, diplomatic visas and work eligibility for them depends upon host governments. In this regard, bilateral work agreements may have to be renegotiated.
9. As we proceed to implement this important initiative, we welcome any suggestions you may have for improvement.
10. Minimize considered.
CLINTON
Friday, June 26, 2009
Colbert: Stonewalling
This is funny, sad and sort of true. Secretary Clinton is much more of a "fierce advocate."
| The Colbert Report | Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c | |||
| The Word - Stonewalling | ||||
| ||||
Thursday, June 25, 2009
Jerusalem Pride
I was in Jerusalem for one of their Pride parades. I didn't participate, not because I am closeted (obviously I am not), but because it was unsafe. But even though the ultra orthodox threw feces on the marchers and one person was stabbed, in ways, Israel is ahead of us on gay rights. Gay marriages from a broad are recognized by the state (there are no secular marriages performed in Israel so all secular marriages from abroad are recognized). And the below was included in the article on Jerusalem Pride.
Jerusalem Gays Hold Eighth Pride Parade Despite Ongoing Controversy
[...]
Although lagging behind such countries as Canada or Holland, Israel is seen as one of the most advanced nations when it comes to gay rights. Soldiers are allowed to be openly gay in the military, and while same-sex couples cannot get married in Israel, their marriages, when conducted abroad, are recognized as legal upon return to the country. Gay partners of diplomats are accorded the same rights and benefits as heterosexual diplomatic spouses. [...]
Jerusalem Gays Hold Eighth Pride Parade Despite Ongoing Controversy
[...]
Although lagging behind such countries as Canada or Holland, Israel is seen as one of the most advanced nations when it comes to gay rights. Soldiers are allowed to be openly gay in the military, and while same-sex couples cannot get married in Israel, their marriages, when conducted abroad, are recognized as legal upon return to the country. Gay partners of diplomats are accorded the same rights and benefits as heterosexual diplomatic spouses. [...]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
