Palin and Same Sex Benefits

From County Fair:

In an August 29 article, the Associated Press reported that Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin “opposes gay marriage — constitutionally banned in Alaska before her time — but exercised a veto that essentially granted benefits to gay state employees and their partners.” However, the AP did not note, as the AP had previously reported, that the bill she vetoed in December 2006 was a response to a 2005 Alaska Supreme Court ruling that the state’s policy of denying spousal benefits to same-sex partners of public employees violated the Alaska Constitution. The bill would have prohibited state officials from granting such benefits despite a 2006 state Supreme Court order requiring them to issue regulations granting benefits pursuant to the 2005 decision by January 1, 2007. Further, the AP did not note that Palin stated that she vetoed the bill because the Alaska attorney general had advised her that it was unconstitutional, not because she believed same-sex partners of public employees should receive benefits. Indeed, Palin’s office stated in its veto message: “The Governor’s veto does not signal any change or modification to her disagreement with the action and order by the Alaska Supreme Court.” Further, the AP did not note that as a candidate for governor, Palin also reportedly supported a ballot question banning benefits for same-sex couples.

Read the rest here

3 thoughts on “Palin and Same Sex Benefits

  1. this is mildly confusing… ‘exercised a veto that essentially granted benefits to gay state employees and their partners’

    in essence, she vetoed it then? and has banned and vetoed everything before and after then?

  2. The Alaska Supreme Court had ruled that failure to grant benefits to same sex couples was unconstitutional. Then the Alaska legislature drafted legislation to prevent same sex couples employed by the State from receiving certain benefits. The Gov vetoed it, because it would also have been unconstitutional, thus saving the State the time and money of fighting a losing cause before the Courts. The point is, she vetoed the Bill for pragmatic reasons and not because she is pro same sex rights. I must admit, I don’t know what she’s done since then but, I’d assume that the legislature wouldn’t bother drafting that kind of bill again.

    Yes, the American way can be confusing.

  3. Pingback: A lot can happen in a week… « Doing Feminism

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s