Our guest blogger is Crosby Burns, Research Associate for the LGBT Research and Communications Project at the Center for American Progress.

Maj. Shannon McLaughlin and her wife Casey are suing for military benefits to protect their family.

Yesterday our nation celebrated the one-year anniversary of the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (DADT), marking the first time in our nation’s history gay men and women have been able to serve their country openly, honestly, and without fear of punishment.

Unsurprisingly, the transition to open service has proceeded smoothly over the past twelve months, despite doomsday predictions by supporters of the gay ban. In fact, the Palm Center, a research institute at the University of California Santa Barbara, found that DADT repeal has “enhanced the military’s ability to pursue its mission.”

One year later our armed forces are stronger thanks to the honorable service of openly gay men and women. Our military no longer turns away Americans willing to serve their country because of their sexual orientation. Our military no longer forces out otherwise qualified troops — including those with “mission critical” skills such as engineers or Arabic linguists — simply because they are gay. And our military no longer squanders millions of taxpayer dollars to enforce a flawed policy that asks troops to lie about who they are.

Even in a post-DADT world, however, not all is equal for gay and lesbian troops.

Unfortunately, these servicemembers are denied access to the same benefits afforded to their straight counterparts. The primary reason for this inequitable access is the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), a federal law that defines marriage solely as the union between one man and one woman. Under this exclusive definition, same-sex couples — even those who are legally married — cannot access a range of federal benefits normally afforded to married couples, including government programs and tax breaks.

For gay members of the armed forces, DOMA’s restrictive definition of “spouse” prohibits the government from offering a number of benefits to same-sex partners (and potentially to their children) because those benefits are governed by federal laws . These include critical services, such as health  insurance, housing allowances, and other benefits designed to help troops weather the stresses of repeated deployments and military life.

Other benefits, however, are not directly linked to federal law and are instead governed by Pentagon regulations that, but that continue to tie certain benefits to the government’s restrictive definition of “spouse” under DOMA. Benefits in this category include access to legal services, on-base commissary and shopping privileges, and access to deployment and relocation assistance programs.  In the case of these benefits, the Pentagon can act now to immediately provide them for gay servicemembers.

For gay servicemembers to receive these benefits, the Pentagon must revise its regulations to ensure equitable access  regardless of the gender of servicemembers’ spouses. And the Pentagon is doing just that. Following the legislative repeal of DADT, the Pentagon began reviewing which benefits it could legally extend to servicemembers’ same-sex partners and spouses under existing laws. That review is ongoing.

With open service now a reality for one full year, the Pentagon should quickly complete its review and immediately extend all benefits possible under current law to gay servicemembers and their families. Until then, gay servicemembers will continue to serve their country, often putting themselves in harm’s way, while being denied the same benefits and privileges that are afforded to straight troops and their families.

Similarly, senior military officials should support efforts to repeal DOMA, both in Congress and in the courts. Only the end of DOMA will allow gay servicemembers to have equal access to all military benefits to which they are entitled.

Our guest blogger is Crosby Burns, Research Associate for the LGBT Research and Communications Project at the Center for American Progress.

Time and again our nation’s unions have proven key to increasing workers’ wages, helping our economy grow, and building a strong and sustained middle class. In addition to these important benefits, new research from the Center for American Progress (CAP) and American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) reveals that union membership also plays a vital role in leveling the playing field for LGBT workers.

Last week, CAP and AFSCME produced a comprehensive report revealing that LGBT people continue to experience high rates of employment discrimination and are often not afforded equal benefits on the job. Among other findings, CAP and AFSCME found that participation in a union significantly helps solve this problem by increasing the likelihood that LGBT public sector workers will receive equal benefits on the job.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 53 percent of state and local workers with union representation had access to health care coverage for same-sex domestic partners, compared to only 17 percent of non-union state and local workers and 29 percent of private-sector workers (union and non-union).

Similarly, 57 percent of state and local union workers had access to survivor benefits in retirement for same-sex domestic partners, as compared to 47 percent of non-union public-sector workers and just 7 percent of workers in the private sector (union and non-union).

Read more

The Family Equality Council has released a new platform that addresses the need of “Modern Families,” those being raised by same-sex parents. The new document serves as an alternative to the anti-gay condemnations of the Republican Party platform and fleshes out just how marriage equality and other protections will help children:

We are a nation of blended and multi-generational families, adoptive and foster families, families headed by single parents, divorced parents, unmarried parents, same-sex couples, and more. American families may be diverse, but we all have at least one thing in common—we want our children to be safe, healthy, happy and supported. When our families are rendered invisible, our ability to provide for each other and our children comes under attack. As a nation, we must honor and support the many kinds of families that exist, rather than dismiss the vast majority of households in this country as second-class. We call for the full inclusion of all families, including familiesheaded by  lGBT people and same-sex couples, in the life of our nation. all families are entitled to equalrecognition under the law with responsibilities, benefits and protections.

Here are some of the calls to action offered by the platform:

• Standardize the definition of “family” on forms and documents without assuming there is always a “mother” and a “father.”
• Pass the Every Child Deserves a Family Act to ensure same-sex couples’ right to adopt or serve as foster parents.
• Achieve full federal recognition of same-sex marriage to allow all families to access the same economic benefits and legal securities.
• Pass the Safe Schools Improvement Act and Student Non-Discrimination Act to create safe learning communities for LGBT youth and the children of LGBT parents.
• Pass the Employment Non-Discrimination Act and Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligations Act to ensure LGBT families are not vulnerable to workplace discrimination.
• Expand healthcare provisions to ensure same-sex families have equal access to the care they need.
• Pass the Housing Opportunities Made Equal Act to make sure LGBT people are protected from housing discrimination.
• Pass the Uniting American Families Act, the DREAM Act, and Comprehensive Immigration Reform to ensure same-sex families are never separated by antiquated immigration laws.
• Reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act with explicit domestic violence protections for LGBT people.

The Family Equality Council has also released a video about the impact of inequality on children:

Brittney Leon and Terri-Ann Simonelli with their domestic partnership certificate (via the Las Vegas Review-Journal).

A same-sex couple in Nevada is raising awareness about the inequality couples experience without marriage after Spring Valley Hospital refused to recognize their relationship. Brittney Leon and Terri-Ann Simonelli have a domestic partnership, which under Nevada state law grants couples all the same rights as married couples. When Leon checked into the hospital last month because of complications in her pregnancy, the admissions officer told Simonelli she would have to secure power of attorney to be with her partner.

Leon ended up losing her baby, and Simonelli had to rely on the doctor for updates, spending long stretches of time without news on her partner’s condition and the fate of her family. This was despite the fact that the hospital had no hesitations about accepting Leon’s insurance, which is provided through Simonelli’s job. The Las Vegas Review-Journal attempted to get a comment from the hospital about the incident:

A woman who identified herself as public relations representative at Spring Valley Hospital told a Review-Journal reporter in a phone interview that the hospital policy requires gay couples have power of attorney in order to make medical decisions for each other .

When asked if she was aware of Nevada’s domestic partnership law, she accused the reporter of bias and hung up the telephone.

Over two years ago, President Obama ordered the Department of Health and Human Services to establish a rule that would prevent hospitals from denying visitation privileges to the partners of gays and lesbians. It’s unclear whether the power-of-attorney requirement violates that memorandum — though it obviously discriminates against same-sex couples — or whether it is indicative of how little authority the new rule has.

Leon and Simonelli have decided not to file a complaint, but their story is an important reminder of how same-sex couples are treated as second-class citizens. Even though they hypothetically have all of the same rights under the state’s domestic partnership law, they were still treated in an incredibly crass way in a time of emergency and heightened emotional stress.

When Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer (R) assumed power in 2009, she quickly advanced a law that would have stripped same-sex couples of their state domestic partner benefits. Lambda Legal fought back in a case now known as Diaz v. Brewer and won in both federal district court and in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, arguing that the law discriminated against same-sex couples who could not otherwise obtain the benefits through marriage.

Now, Brewer is asking the Supreme Court to step in and reverse the Ninth Circuit’s decision. Tara Borelli of Lambda Legal is confident that the injunction against the law taking effect will stand:

BORELLI: We are confident that the lower courts’ decisions upholding domestic partner coverage for lesbian and gay employees will continue to carry the day. Arizona’s arguments have been turned down again and again by the federal courts, and we expect it will be no different here.

The argument against Brewer’s law strongly parallels the case against California’s Proposition 8 banning same-sex marriage, which the Supreme Court will also have an opportunity to hear this coming year. In both cases, the law in question attempted to strip away a right that was already in effect for same-sex couples. The Court could, however, rule that both are unconstitutional for that reason without mandating that either Arizona’s benefits or California’s marriages are fundamental rights that gays and lesbians deserve access to.