Bush admin. proffers the ‘Chuck and Larry’ defense to deprive gay federal employees of health benefits.
Bush admin. proffers the ‘Chuck and Larry’ defense to deprive gay federal employees of health benefits.
In September, the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee considered legislation that would provide federal benefits to same-sex domestic partners of federal employees. Howard Weizmann, the deputy director of the U.S. Office Of Personnel Management, objected to the bill because it “could lead to fraud and abuse in the programs we administer.” Weizmann claimed that the office was unaware of any interest from federal employees for such benefits. He even evoked a fictional movie plot of two heterosexual New York firefighters who pretend to be a gay couple to suggest such fraud would be a problem in real life:
First of all, to suggest that we are being far-fetched in the sense that these benefits are open to fraud or abuse. It’s not an unrealistic concern. I would suggest even Hollywood has discussed this in a movie with Adam Sandler. In which, I think, ‘Chuck and Larry’ get married, which the subject of the movie, was quite frankly, was insurance fraud, along the lines of what we’re discussing. This is not far fetched and it’s not disingenuous to suggest such.
Listen:
Open Season for the Federal Employee Health Benefits Program began on November 10 and runs through December 8. The Human Rights Campaign is calling on activists to send a message to OPM, telling the agency that “ALL federal employees should be treated equally and have access to the same benefits to help protect our families.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Weizmann claimed that the office was unaware of any interest from federal employees for such benefits………
OK Guys: I’m one of the more conservative folks on this list (other than the trolls).
But even I find it totally ludicrous that no one in the federal govt (one of the largest employers in the country) has any interest in this.
Maybe they’re afraid to say anything. Maybe the good Weizman says this so beligerently that no one sees any reason to waste oxygen in arguing with him.
But really, can we find some reality here ???????
December 1st, 2008 at 4:56 pmI really need to run some errands but I really don’t wanna miss Daryll and bit. Can someone run out and pick me up some salt herring? Thanks…
December 1st, 2008 at 4:56 pmQueue Daryl the Dipsh1t in 3..2..1..
December 1st, 2008 at 4:56 pmHRC has become as irrelevant in our community as Andrew Sullivan and the Log Cabin folks.
December 1st, 2008 at 4:57 pmGee, if the Bush Administration is going to use “Chuck and Larry” to define policy… why didn’t they use that episode of the Lone Gunman that was shown in 2000 about someone hijacking a passenger plane and flying it into the World Trade Center to define their terrorism prevention policy?
December 1st, 2008 at 4:57 pmUh, there is demonstrated fraud in heterosexual households in regard to health insurance. Does that mean we can stop giving govt employees health insurance ?
December 1st, 2008 at 4:57 pmDB @1
LOL
December 1st, 2008 at 4:57 pmThese people are simply amazing. They get their ideas to establish foreign and domestic policy from movies and TV shows.
It’s no wonder we are in such a mess.
Good news is they still haven’t decided to “lift” ideas from SpongeBob. Although I am not too sure about that one either…
December 1st, 2008 at 4:59 pmGawd it’s going to be great to have grownups in charge of our government.
December 1st, 2008 at 5:01 pmWe’re going to deny equal rights to some of our citizens because it is possible that others might abuse the system?! Why not ban retail sales because some people might shoplift. And, I don’t know, gun sales because they could be used in a crime.
December 1st, 2008 at 5:03 pmdbadass Says:
I really need to run some errands but I really don’t wanna miss Daryll and bit. Can someone run out and pick me up some salt herring? Thanks…
Daryll has already done his one “drive by” post for the day, not sure if he will show.
December 1st, 2008 at 5:04 pmDaryll has missed most of “teh gay” threads lately, maybe “it” just doesn’t get up any more since he finally figured out Huckabee didn’t win.
Of course, no hetero couples EVER get together or stay together in order to receive the insurance benefit…right?
December 1st, 2008 at 5:04 pmYou’d think these morons would at least get their information from the Discovery Channel.
I guess the idea of setting policy based on actual facts is too, you know, elitist.
December 1st, 2008 at 5:04 pmSpeaking of guns, how many of you have ever employed a gun in self defense and how many times have you had to do this in your lifetime? Sorry to be off topic but I am doing some research on this topic. Oh and being drunk with a bunch of your buddies and deciding that you have been wronged somehow doesn’t count. Obviously the same goes for military service and/or police work. If you are already a criminal hanging around with other armed criminals, you don’t count either.
December 1st, 2008 at 5:06 pmThanks.
As an addendum I must say that I have become disenchanted with HRC. The sheer volume of junk mail that they send to supporters starts to concern me. I wonder what percentage of their charitable contribution is used for direct mail. They were not very friendly when I called and asked them to stop sending me mail. Overall, an organization I can no longer support. I would dearly like to send money to somebody to help fund the modern civil rights movement, I’m just not sure where that money would be most effective.
December 1st, 2008 at 5:06 pmAs one who works in private health insurance – fraud, actually – where does this rate?
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz………………
Trust me when I say the government has plenty of fraud problems when it comes to health insurance – I’m talking billions of dollars in fraud.
But this damn sure ain’t one of ‘em.
December 1st, 2008 at 5:09 pmApparently, basing policy on facts and information is too taxing for republicans…they’d rather wait ’til the movie comes out.
*rimshot*
It’s interesting to note how republicans hold Hollywood so contemptible, yet draw all their positions from the movies and teevee. (”24″ for terrorism policy, “Chuck And Larry” for equal rights partnership, “Minority Report” for foreign policy, “Coma” for healthcare, and “Peewee’s Playhouse” for global leadership.)
December 1st, 2008 at 5:14 pmSoooo, to fight the War on Terra, we look to the TV show “24″ and Jack Bauer for safety. As to our federal employees seeking benefits for their partners, we look to another fake Hollywood production to defend the indefensible?
Are these people insane? Do they know that the TV shows and such ARE NOT REAL? What is next, giving advice on the weather throughout the midwest by pointing to the movie ‘The Wizard of Oz’? Geez, my head hurts now…
December 1st, 2008 at 5:14 pmOnly 50 more days of these bastards. Then an adult will be in charge again.
December 1st, 2008 at 5:14 pmdbadass Says:
Speaking of guns, how many of you have ever employed a gun in self defense and how many times have you had to do this in your lifetime? Sorry to be off topic but I am doing some research on this topic. Oh and being drunk with a bunch of your buddies and deciding that you have been wronged somehow doesn’t count. Obviously the same goes for military service and/or police work. If you are already a criminal hanging around with other armed criminals, you don’t count either.
Thanks.
I only used a gun to shoot someone shooting at me while in the military, so guess I don’t count =)
December 1st, 2008 at 5:17 pmI would suggest even Hollywood has discussed this in a movie with Adam Sandler. In which, I think, ‘Chuck and Larry’ get married
The Onion has been the higher headquarters of the OPM for the last eight years, apparently. I’m sure they’ll be relieved to turn that agency back over to President (I’m freakin’ sick and tired of tacking on “-elect”) Obama on January 21st.
December 1st, 2008 at 5:19 pmThis is truly mind-boggling. Does Weizmann have any idea at all how dumb he sounds? Since he’s obviously in need of a clue, I’ll gladly provide a couple of them.
First — yes, it’s possible that two people of the same sex could fake a marriage to get some employment benefits as a “spouse” if gay marriage was legalized. It’s also possible that two people of the opposite sex could do this RIGHT NOW because heterosexual marriage is legal IN ALL FIFTY STATES. If this is a serious problem, wouldn’t it be a serious problem now?
Second — this, coming from an administration that has done everything possible to maintain the status quo on a broken health insurance system, illuminates the problems of the broken system with unusual clarity. If people didn’t have to get married to get health care they can afford, they wouldn’t marry solely for that reason. Simple enough. Fix our health insurance system and marriage fraud won’t be a problem. People shouldn’t have to marry to get health benefits. People shouldn’t have to stay in bad marriages to avoid losing health benefits. And people shouldn’t have to stay in bad jobs just because of health benefits. A third grader could grasp this.
December 1st, 2008 at 5:19 pmThanks Wayne.
December 1st, 2008 at 5:21 pmFor anyone else interested. Please respond two pages down or so back at one of the buy guns before Mr. Obama takes them away thead. The claim was made that an American defends themselves every 13 seconds with a gun. I myself am not overly opposed to guns I just think reasonable restrictions make sense. Anyway, try as I might I can’t find a single person I know who has ever been in that position so I am just curious who all these people are and how they get themselves into all this dangerous circumstances
Zooey Says:
Of course, no hetero couples EVER get together or stay together in order to receive the insurance benefit…right?
Darryl’s wife: Right on, Zooster!
December 1st, 2008 at 5:21 pmdbadass Says
December 1st, 2008 at 5:06 pm
Speaking of guns, how many of you have ever employed a gun in self defense and how many times have you had to do this in your lifetime?
___________________________________________________________
I have never needed to employ any firearm in self-defense. I have only used guns when I was in the military, and even then I have only fired at regulation targets in controlled situations. I never served in combat. I have never fired at any animals, either.
December 1st, 2008 at 5:22 pmFor those of us old enough to remember Murphy Brown and story boards they designed to spotlight Dan Quayle’s stupid remarks about single mothers, I find this argument hilarious!
Still not sure how BushCo decided on their “turrist” strategy as there was a never an “Ernest Goes to Iraq” movie. Oh, what am I talking about – there was not strategy!
PEACE
December 1st, 2008 at 5:26 pmYa know, having an administration that bases policy on feature films and TV shows is bad enough; did they have to go the extra mile and base their whole governing ethos on the Police Academy moives?
December 1st, 2008 at 5:31 pmAlright, I suppose I should go get that herring. You watch no sooner than I split those two will appear.
December 1st, 2008 at 5:31 pmdbadass Says
December 1st, 2008 at 5:21 pm
The claim was made that an American defends themselves every 13 seconds with a gun.
___________________________________________________________
That’s a rather interesting claim. I just pounded a few figures into a calculator and realized that at that rate, in a year, an American defends themselves with a gun 2,425,846 times. That’s either a lot of people or one very fearful individual.
But how was this figure arrived at? Polls? Police records? Are these threats requiring self-defense with potential deadly force real or perceived? And how is a “real” threat defined?
I suspect the number was pulled out of somebody’s a$$.
December 1st, 2008 at 5:32 pmdbadass Says:
December 1st, 2008 at 5:21 pm
I only fired a few shots at a range several years back with my pro-gun pops. Never cared to return and didn’t inspire me to own a gun. If I live in a place where education, volunteering, and jobs is a high priority then crime is low and heated debates are unnecessary. Small guns can stay in the side arms of a local, ethical police force.
That is a vision, if not entirely rooted in reality. I am stunned, frankly, that we all can’t easily agree that automatic weapons should never be in the hands of your next door neighbor. People actually put up a fight.
December 1st, 2008 at 5:33 pmdbadass Says
December 1st, 2008 at 5:06 pm
Speaking of guns, how many of you have ever employed a gun in self defense and how many times have you had to do this in your lifetime?
I fired a shot into the air once, followed by a loud yell, in defense of property. There was a group of hunters who apparently did not realize there was a dwelling nearby, as they felt they had the right to follow their beagles (who couldn’t read the signage) onto private (and posted) land.
December 1st, 2008 at 5:35 pmHere’s a clear difference between liberals and conservatives: liberals seek the best solution to problems, based on reasonable anlysis of facts and data.
Conservatives, on the other hand, will dismiss good policy out-of-hand if there is the slightest possibility that someone may take unfair advantage of its provisions. Unless that person is a personal friend of theirs or a big campaign contributor, that is.
December 1st, 2008 at 5:35 pmmisshusseinmolly;
December 1st, 2008 at 5:36 pmThe claim was in a link I couldn’t open but it’s name seemed less than unbiased. I feel bad tying things up here and I wasn’t kidding about the salt herring but I will check back at the original thread when I return in an hour or so in case you or others have any further thoughts on the matter. Again my apologies to others as to this OT business
dbadass, I say go get your herring. We’ll hold down the fort. If Daryll or bit show up, we’ll keep ‘em occupied. I won’t let anyone mention “President-elect Huckabee” since that seems to chase Daryll away.
December 1st, 2008 at 5:43 pmZooey Says:
Of course, no hetero couples EVER get together or stay together in order to receive the insurance benefit…right?
I am sure there are way more heterosexual couples who are getting health insurance by pretending they are married than there are gay couples who need it.
My very good friend has been with her partner for 8 years now. They never got married. She simply changed her name to his last name and viola… They don’t file a joint tax return, but he does declare her on his health insurance.
It’s pretty easy to do. I have never seen an employer ask for a marriage certificate before awarding insurance.
December 1st, 2008 at 5:45 pmDammit, ralph…
December 1st, 2008 at 5:46 pmI had a gun pulled on me by a robber one time, about 40 years ago, in the parking lot of a liquor store.
he’d waited for me behind my car, until i had the door open and was getting in. then he stuck it in my ear and told him to give him all my money. I did. then he told me not to look around for 10 seconds, and split. i didn’t move for closer to a minute…
December 1st, 2008 at 5:48 pmBilbo,
My sister did that for years by declaring that she and her guy were common-law married. They didn’t actually get married until this state stopped recognizing common-law marriage.
I guess it’s ok to “work the system” only if you’re straight.
December 1st, 2008 at 5:54 pmJebus – next thing you know, the Bushies’ll be getting their foreign policy ideas from that stupid TV show “24″ —- oh, wait.
December 1st, 2008 at 6:05 pmdbadass Says
December 1st, 2008 at 5:06 pm
Speaking of guns, how many of you have ever employed a gun in self defense and how many times have you had to do this in your lifetime?</em
December 1st, 2008 at 6:16 pmI’ve never owned a gun and never need one. BTW 75% of the police officers shot are shot with their own weapon so pulling that gat could get you killed with it
On topic didn’t one of Bush’s team of clowns use a Jack Bauer reference in defense of torture
If I were Mr. O, what I’d do is use my growing bully-pulpit to draw down the wrath of the electorate upon the bushies in rebuke to their presumption,
And i’d make known, quietly, among career civil servants (those hired before jan, 2001) that there would likely be no repercussions for bureaucrats who ignored the midnight Bushit regulation roll-backs…
December 1st, 2008 at 6:16 pmthanks ralph. The herring is secured.
December 1st, 2008 at 7:04 pmAre you going to kipper him?
December 1st, 2008 at 7:29 pmI am struggling to come up with a sil pun/joke
December 1st, 2008 at 7:37 pmDo these people have a single attack that couldn’t also be used against heterosexual couples?
I mean, honestly, it’d be easier for most straight people to marry someone of the opposite sex they weren’t actually interested in to commit insurance fraud.
December 1st, 2008 at 10:34 pmthey should know fraud…fraud is the only thing this administration does well besides funneling taxpayer dollars to their cronies…
December 2nd, 2008 at 5:14 am