Last week, the Colorado Division of Insurance became the second state agency in the week to issue a bulletin stating that discrimination in health coverage on the basis of sexual orientation and transgender status is impermissible under state law. The bulletin is the latest in a series of decisions by states and employers clearly stating that no person should be denied health care or coverage based on who they are.

The bulletin clarifies that existing law in Colorado prohibits discriminatory practices by insurers, including:

• Denying coverage to a transgender person for medically necessary care that would be covered under current standards for any other individual
• Charging more for health insurance based on a person’s sexual orientation and gender identity or expression.

One Colorado and the Colorado Consumer Health Initiative have been working closely with the Colorado Division of Insurance to seek legal clarification in response to input from Colorado’s transgender community. And the result reflects the growing movement toward equitable health insurance policies at the state and federal level.

Ending discriminatory policies that deny transgender people access to medically necessary care reflects basic values of fairness, and it also aligns with the consensus among major medical associations that transition-related health care is medically necessary for many transgender individuals and that determination of what care an individual patient needs properly rests with medical providers, not insurance companies.

Read the full bulletin and the FAQ from One Colorado and the Colorado Consumer Health Initiative.

Thursday afternoon, Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper (D) officially signed into law civil unions after years of conflict over the issue. It takes effect just six weeks from now on May 1. Colorado joins eight other states that offer civil unions or domestic partnerships for same-sex couples: California, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Nevada, New Jersey, Oregon, and Rhode Island.

State Sen. Pat Steadman, who is openly gay and was one of the bill’s sponsors, opened his remarks Thursday by saying, “Dearly beloved… we’re going to make history.” Watch the Denver Post’s video of Steadman and Hickenlooper’s remarks, the signing, and reactions from those who attended:

On Tuesday evening, Bill O’Reilly finally admitted that “homosexuality has nothing to do with the crime of pedophilia” despite his history of making such connections himself. It seems the admission was too good to be true.

He’s been campaigning against Colorado House Speaker Mark Ferrandino (D) for the lawmaker’s opposition to “Jessica’s Law,” which imposes excessive sentences (mandatory 25 years) for the crime of sexual abuse of minors, but he has repeatedly implied connections between Ferrandino’s sexuality and his opposition to “protecting kids.” Denver Post Opinion Editor Curtis Hubbard was among the most prominent critics of these tactics, and Wednesday night he appeared on O’Reilly’s show so that O’Reilly would have a chance to yell at him.

O’Reilly once again refused to take any accountability for the connection and proceeded to call Hubbard a “ridiculous… smear merchant” and referred to his “vile little columm” as ”libelous speculation”:

HUBBARD: What does his sexuality have to do with his opposition [to Jessica's Law]? [...]

O’REILLY: I described Ferrandino to the audience because the audience doesn’t know who the heck he is, and I did it in the context of what his priorities are. His priorities are civil unions… and legalizing marijuana, and he’s a gay marriage proponent, as you know. [...]

HUBBARD: But Bill, you didn’t introduce them as his priorities… What you specifically did was you asked your guest why he opposed Jessica’s Law, and then you used his sexuality and his support for gay marriage as rationale for why he would oppose Jessica’s Law. [...]

O’REILLY: Oh no I didn’t. I didn’t say anything of the kind. I described who he was — who he says he is — alright? And that’s it. I made no correlation between him being “openly gay” and opposing Jessica’s Law.

Watch it:

Unfortunately, the truth doesn’t support O’Reilly’s revisionist history. His guest when this campaign began, Colorado Rep. Libby Szabo (R), claimed that “the perpetrators hold more credence with [Ferrandino] than the child victims do.” O’Reilly and ambush-reporter Jesse Watters the continued to attack him for “not protecting the kids from sexual predators.” On another episode, O’Reilly continued to defend juxtaposing the issues, claiming Ferrandino is passionate about only a few things, and the kids aren’t one of them. He’s now arguing that he just meant Ferrandino was defending the “trial lawyers,” which he’s never said before and which also makes no sense.

Hubbard likely didn’t expect a very fair conversation, but all he had to do is show up and let O’Reilly spout. There was good reason to doubt the sincerity of his admission earlier this week — the last thing he would ever do is actually admit he was wrong.

Bill O’Reilly has been campaigning against Colorado House Speaker Mark Ferrandino (D) because he won’t allow a vote on a bill to “Jessica’s Law.” Jessica’s Law imposes excessive penalties on individuals who commit sexual abuse against children, and O’Reilly has repeatedly inferred a connection between the fact Ferrandino is openly gay and not “protecting the kids.” Earlier this week, he responded to criticism over this comparison by doubling down on it. On Tuesday’s broadcast, he finally admitted the connection doesn’t exist, but took no accountability for reinforcing it:

O’REILLY: I have to report the truth here. First truism, homosexuality has nothing to do with the crime of pedophilia. Second, everyone we report on is defined and that guy is proud of his circumstance and promotes it, so we reported it.

Watch it (via Equality Matters):

A “truism” is something so obviously true that it isn’t worth mentioning, and the supposed link between homosexuality and pedophilia hardly fits that description. It’s true that there’s no connection, but it has been made or inferred for decades. More importantly, O’Reilly brazenly made it himself without any subtlety to hide behind just seven months ago. He can’t just shrug it off like everybody knows better when he has a history of miseducating his viewers on the issue.

His admission is also compromised by his description of Ferrandino as having a “circumstance” that he “promotes.” Being gay is not a condition, nor can homosexuality be reinforced in anyone. Under the premise of a campaign to “protect the children,” O’Reilly is only continuing to reinforce stigma against gay people with this kind of rhetoric. If he actually supports civil unions as he claims, he has no grounds for demonizing others for doing the same.

Tonight, Denver Post Opinion Editor Curtis Hubbard, who criticized O’Reilly for his smear campaign against Ferrandino, will appear on his show to confront him in person. Maybe fourth time’s the charm for O’Reilly figuring out how to respect the inherent dignity of an elected official.

Photo Credit: Craig F. Walker, The Denver Post

The Denver Post commemorated yesterday’s passage of civil unions in Colorado’s House with a front-page picture of Speaker Mark Ferrandino (D) kissing his partner Greg Wertsch — complete with a bottle of formula on the desk that belongs to their foster child. Anticipating negative reactions from readers, the editors published a defense for running the picture, arguing that it “shows the truth, no matter how objectionable” [see update below]:

One of the missions as journalists is to take our readers where they can’t go, and the speaker’s office is definitely one of those places. Ferrandino, who is gay, has been fighting to get this bill passed for at least the last three years, and he spoke eloquently on the subject while the bill was being debated. So it made sense to get his perspective. [...]

We have received objections to our photographs of gay couples before, so we all knew there would likely be a negative reaction to running the picture of Ferrandino. The civil unions vote was historic for Colorado and celebrating it was not a surprise. That led one editor to note, “We have no issues showing a straight couple kissing on election night.”

Another detail that made the photo so compelling was the baby bottle on Ferrandino’s desk. It belongs to the foster child he and his partner have; given that the civil unions bill offered protections for children and families, it was another element that gave context.

There is a difference between a picture that people object to and an “objectionable” photo. It’s disappointing that the editorial board thought the decision was “difficult.” Indeed, the one editor’s observation is key: it’s not kissing that people object to — it’s homosexuality . What has proven to be one the most effective ways to shift people’s opinions on gay rights is knowing gay people and learning about their lives and their families. No number of objections changes the reality that the Speaker of the Colorado House is a gay man with a loving partner and child; and reporting on reality is never a difficult decision.

Fox News’s Bill O’Reilly has led a campaign of smear and harassment in recent weeks against Colorado House Speaker Mark Ferrandino (D) because of his belief that Ferrandino is protecting child molesters by opposing “Jessica’s Law.” Jessica’s Laws impose excessive mandatory sentences for child sexual abuse, but Colorado already has tough laws and neither the law enforcement community nor victims’ advocate groups support the proposed change. After suggesting Ferrandino was protecting somebody because he was gay, O’Reilly then sent a reporter to harass him on the street while he was walking his dog.

Numerous mainstream outlets, including the Denver Post, have criticized O’Reilly for saying “gay” with the expectation that his audience understand that to mean “pervert-pedophile.” On Monday, after once again laughing that Ferrandino “looked like a complete fool” when he was ambushed on the street, O’Reilly explained that referencing the Speaker’s sexual orientation was important context because people don’t know who he is:

O’REILLY: We described the speaker as “openly gay” because Americans don’t know who he is and that description is used in almost every article ever written about him. And the reason we brought up civil unions is because Ferrandino objected to that vote being sabotaged by Republicans a few years ago, then he turned around and used the same technique to table Jessica’s Law. [...]

It matters that he is openly gay because he did the same thing to Jessica’s Law that he objected to on the civil unions situation… You have to basically get behind the motivation of the man, and his motivation is very narrow. He’s got only a couple of things he wants to do in there that he feels passionate about, but the kids apparently he doesn’t feel passionately about because he sabotaged it.

Watch it (HT: Equality Matters):

O’Reilly is still arguing that being gay and not protecting kids are somehow connected. Perhaps in his mind, he still conflates supporting civil unions with being gay, but of course he also admits to supporting civil unions himself. There’s no explanation for constantly inferring that Ferrandino’s sexual orientation is relevant to his other actions except to reinforce mythical associations between homosexuality and pedophilia. This is not a new tactic for O’Reilly either; just last summer he blatantly defended making such connections in defense of hate groups that do the same.
Read more

Openly gay Colorado Speaker Mark Ferrandino (D)

Just now, the Colorado House voted 39-26 to grant final approval to a bill that would offer civil unions to same-sex couples, advancing  it to Gov. John Hickenlooper’s (D) desk for his promised signature. Colorado has a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage, so civil unions are an important extension of partner benefits until that amendment can be repealed or overturned.

Lawmakers have attempted to pass civil unions for several years now. In 2012, enough Republicans supported the bill for it to pass, but Republican leadership in the House blocked it by sending it to a (fourth) committee whose members voted to kill it. The expediency with which the bill advanced this year reflects the large victories Democrats enjoyed in the November election.

Here is how the House voted: