In June of 2009, President Obama asked federal agencies to “conduct a thorough review of the benefits they provide and to identify any that could be extended to LGBT employees and their partners and families” within the scope of current law. Today, the administration released an additional memorandum directing agencies to “extend a host of benefits to their employees’ same-sex domestic partners as permitted by law.”

These benefits include:

credit union membership; access to fitness facilities; hardship transfers to maintain or improve the health of a domestic partner to the same extent provided to opposite-sex spouses; planning and counseling services (including briefings on employee pay and allowances, career counseling, retirement counseling, financial counseling, resource and referral services, planning sessions for permanent change of duty station, deployment support, parenting support groups, and elder care support groups); family assistance services (including adoption counseling, parenting counseling, childcare, elder care, financial planning, and home improvements); family and morale/wellness/recreation(MWR) events (including barbeques, golf outings, or awards ceremonies); access to medical treatment; access to lodging or allowances; joint consideration of transfers; and accidental death and dismemberment insurance.

Agencies that provide new benefits are also instructed to “provide them to the same-sex domestic partners of their employees and those same-sex domestic partners’ children” “to the extent permitted by law.” Agencies with greater flexibility over benefits must provide those extra benefits to their employees’ same-sex domestic partners and their children, in accordance with current law.

“For far too long, many of our Government’s hard-working, dedicated LGBT employees have been denied equal access to the basic rights and benefits their colleagues enjoy. This kind of systemic inequality undermines the health, well-being, and security not just of our Federal workforce, but also of their families and communities,” Obama writes in the memorandum. “Although legislative action is necessary to provide full equality to LGBT Federal employees, the agencies have identified a number of benefits that can be extended under existing law.”

To that end, Obama issued a separate statement renewing his call “for swift passage of an important piece of legislation pending in both Houses of Congress—the Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligations Act.” “This legislation, championed by Senators Joe Lieberman and Susan Collins and Congresswoman Tammy Baldwin, would extend to the same-sex domestic partners of Federal employees the full range of benefits currently enjoyed by Federal employees’ opposite-sex spouses. I look forward to signing it into law,” Obama said. The bill has been reported out of committees in the House and Senate and “awaits consideration by the full body of both chambers.”

Republican senators, who initially threatened to filibuster the Defense Authorization bill over an amendment that would begin the process of repealing the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell law, have now decided to protest the measure “over a provision offered by Sen. Roland Burris (D-IL) that would allow servicewomen to receive abortion care in military hospitals if they pay for the procedure themselves, CQ Today reports.”

The amendment “repealed the prohibition in the use of private funds to pay for abortion care in military hospitals but maintains restrictions on the use of federal money for abortion services at military hospitals except in case of rape, incest or life endangerment.” Last month, the Senate Armed Services Committee voted 16-10 to approve the Burris amendment,” but some Republicans are now seeking to control how service members appropriate their own private funds:

Some GOP senators have tied the abortion provision with legislation that would allow gays and lesbians to openly serve in the military, calling the measures examples of “social engineering” and vowing to filibuster when the bill is brought to the floor, CQ Today reports. In a May 28 floor speech, Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) said the abortion provision would allow military medical facilities “to be used for abortions performed late term, abortions performed for purposes of sex selection, abortions performed for any reason, abortions at will.” The amendment is “another piece of social engineering, another vast and serious and consequential departure from long-standing Department of Defense policy,” Wicker said, adding, “I guarantee you this will be challenged on the floor for the House and Senate with separate amendments.”

Republicans may be eager to re-litigate the abortion debate ahead of the midterm elections, but the measure places one more hurdle to passing the Defense Authorization measure before the August recess. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) has not scheduled a date for bringing the measure to the Senate floor and President Obama has already issued a veto threat against the version of the bill passed by the House last Friday, which includes funding for a second engine for the F-35 fighter that both the Pentagon and the White House have said is a big waste of money.

Any attempt to filibuster the measure, however, will likely fail given the pro-choice voting record of the two Republicans senators from Maine.

Moments ago, disgraced former pastor Ted Haggard announced that he would be opening a more inclusive church that would be open to “gay, straight, bi, tall, short” members and would focus on “helping other people going through the most difficult times of their lives.” In 2006, Haggard stepped down as president of the influential National National Association of Evangelicals after admitting to “sexual immorality” with a male prostitute and drug use.

Asked if his new church would take a position on homosexuality, Haggard said “we will take positions.” “I’m going to teach the bible, chapter by chapter, verse by verse,” “but I don’t want to be a political activist.” Haggard explained that the church wouldn’t advocate a specific public policy, but would instead “encourage” members to strive towards the ideal of biblical heterosexuality and monogamy:

HAGGARD: We are a church and I believe that God’s ideal plan for marriage is the union of a man and a woman in a heterosexual monogamous relationship, so those are the types of marriages we will do in our church. Now, as for society, working with that question, that is a totally different subject. But within the Church, that’s where we at St. James will be. [...]

Let me say something regarding your question regarding same-sex marriage. … I answered it by saying, ‘it is God’s ideal.’ It is also God’s ideal that people pray continually, it is God’s ideal that all of us have our weight under control. It is God’s ideal that mothers never get so frustrated and heart broken that they yell at their children. It is God’s ideal that there not be any abuse or poverty or shame in people’s lives. …God has ideals, that’s what we discuss. But earth is not heaven. And here on earth, sexuality is very complex and very confusing. Weight issues are a deep struggle that people go through, health issues, prayer issues, whether there is a God issue. …Inside the Church we discuss God’s ideals, but the discussion about public policy is a total separate discussion….

Watch the highlights:

Before resigning in disgrace after a three-year relationship with a male prostitute, Haggard was one of the Christian Right’s most powerful figures and a close confidante of the Bush White House. While he has recently claimed that “I was never a religious right, hateful, anti-gay guy,” at his peak, Haggard catered to the Christian Right’s demonization of gays, calling homosexuality a “sin” and arguing, “We don’t have to debate about what we should think about homosexual activity, it’s written in the Bible.” Haggard also said that Western civilization could be devastated by same-sex marriage.

Next month, same-sex partners of federal employees will be able to apply for long-term health benefits, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) announced on Tuesday. The new rules come as a result of a memorandum President Obama signed last June extending some federal benefits — like long-term insurance and allowing employees to take sick leave to care for a sick partner or non-biological child — to same-sex partners of federal workers.

“Under this regulation, the definition of “qualified relative” is expanded to cover the same-sex domestic partners of eligible Federal and U.S. Postal Service employees and annuitants,” the agency wrote in the federal registry:

OPM received 51 comments on our proposal to extend benefit eligibility to same-sex domestic partners, with the comments running about 3 to 1 in favor of such a change. A number of comments asked that opposite-sex domestic partners be included. However, as stated in the proposed regulation, opposite-sex domestic partners were not included because they may obtain eligibility to apply for Federal long term care insurance through marriage, an option not currently available to same- sex domestic partners.

Some comments suggested a clarification of the documentation that OPM will require to verify the domestic partner status. The documentation will consist of an attestation that the domestic partners meet the criteria in Sec. 875.213(b). OPM does not expect to establish more rigorous criteria for the attestation as that would impose a greater burden on domestic partners than other qualified relatives. For instance, we do not require documentation such as bank statements or other proof of financial support for spousal coverage

There are currently two separate bills in the House and Senate to provide full federal benefits to same sex domestic partners of federal employee. Aides to Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) — a key sponsor of the measure in the Senate — have suggested that the senator may introduce legislation the bill on the floor “within weeks and well before July 4th.”

The legislation was voted out of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee last year on a bipartisan basis (Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) co-sponsored the measure), but Lieberman had promised not to move this on the floor of the Senate “until we get the explicit offsets” from OPM, which are now available. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that the legislation would cost approximately $310 million through 2020 and benefit some 30,000 employees with same-sex partners.

The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee approved a similar domestic partner benefits bill in November of 2009, but it also still has to pass the full chamber.