What do LGBT people experience when they’re trying to access health insurance or health care? Does it matter? If so, how do we collect information about these experiences?

LGBT data do matter, because the future of health care is built on data. Data create our understandings of how healthy Americans are. They are the points on the map showing us where health gaps exist between different population groups, such as the health disparities affecting LGBT Americans. And they are the building blocks that create the foundation for effective efforts to close these gaps and achieve better health for all.

Maryland is one of the states leading the way in advancing LGBT data collection efforts. The Maryland Health Care Commission, which protects the interests of consumers in Maryland’s health system, is driving an effort to incorporate LGBT consumer input into quality of care and consumer satisfaction evaluations by adding questions about sexual orientation, gender identity, and relationship status (including options for identifying a same-sex partner or spouse) to its evaluation of the state’s patient-centered medical home program.

Maryland’s patient-centered medical home program is a groundbreaking statewide effort to coordinate better care for predominantly lower-income, high-need individuals while lowering costs. Evaluating the experiences of LGBT people in this program — which requires high patient trust in providers and good patient-provider interactions — is an ideal opportunity for the state to develop the tools it needs to extend LGBT-inclusive data collection efforts into other areas of its health system.

One such area will be the state’s oversight of health plans sold through its health insurance exchange. The exchanges, which are new state-based marketplaces where individuals and small businesses will be able to shop for affordable health insurance starting in 2014, have the potential to be new sources of vital data on the health needs and experiences of people across the country.

As CAP explains in a new FAQ on collecting sexual orientation and gender identity data, the exchanges offer a key opportunity to collect information that will help LGBT people benefit from health reform.

In particular, the exchanges must have the capacity to connect a diverse applicant population with appropriate health insurance coverage. To assess how effectively exchange outreach and enrollment programs are connecting with underserved groups of people seeking coverage, exchanges should collect voluntary information from enrollees on a range of demographic factors associated with health disparities, including race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender identity, and primary language.

Exchanges must also certify participating insurance plans and oversee their activities. To monitor how well participating plans are serving different groups of consumers, exchanges should require plans to have the capacity to collect and report the same range of demographic information. To ensure this information is not misused, federal regulations governing the exchanges in every state already prohibit discrimination on any of these bases by exchange employees, contractors, and qualified health plans.

Collecting better and more comprehensive data is a fundamental component of effective health reform. Any efforts to ensure that all Americans have access to insurance and the care they need must include LGBT Americans – and the first step in crafting these initiatives is collecting LGBT data.

Last week, Gallaudet University suspended its chief diversity officer, Dr. Angela McCaskill, after a faculty member filed a complaint that she had signed the petition to challenge Maryland’s marriage equality law. McCaskill suggested she might pursue legal action, but said little else before the end of the week. Today, she spoke out for the first time, explaining her signature and suggesting she would be seeking compensation for emotional distress and reputation damage:

MCCASKILL: Signing that petition is a right that I have as a citizen of the state of Maryland. It simply means that I want to see this very sensitive issue put on the ballot as a referendum in the state of Maryland. [...] I am dismayed that Gallaudet University is still a university of intolerance, a university that manages by intimidation, a university that allows bullying among faculty, staff and students.

Gallaudet President Alan Hurwitz released a statement this morning welcoming McCaskill back to her job, but explaining that the administrative leave was a “prudent action” to allow the university to consider whether her actions violated her job responsibilities. Hurwitz did not specifically address the LGBT community or how McCaskill’s actions may have impacted gay students and staff on campus.

Though many of the governing variables differ, the situation resembles the 2008 case of Crystal Dixon, who as associate vice president for human resources at the University of Toledo wrote a letter to the Toledo Free Press condemning homosexuality as a choice and countering the notion that gay people are “civil-rights victims.” Dixon was fired, and in turn sued the university for violating her free speech. The federal district court ruled that her remarks, as a public employee, were sufficiently insubordinate to her job responsibilities and dismissed her suit. It’s unclear if McCaskill would fare any better in her complaint.

Still, her defense of her signature was clearly fed to her by opponents of marriage equality. There was no valid reason to sign the petition except to support an obstacle to the law taking effect. The argument that people should have the opportunity to vote on civil rights is no less offensive — nor different in any way — than directly opposing marriage equality. Given that her lawyer has said she will not express her personal view on the matter, concerns about her ability to support gay Gallaudet students, as outlined in the vision statement of its Office of Diversity and Equity for Students, may be legitimately warranted.

On Friday, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg (I)announced that he had given a $250,000 donation to Maryland’s marriage equality campaign. Maryland residents will vote on a referendum — known as Question 6 — this November that would legalize same-sex marriage. If Question 6 passes, Maryland will be the first state to legalize marriage equality through the ballot box — though Washington and Maine could also join the ranks, as voters there will weigh in on a similar referenda on Election Day.

In an email to supporters of Question 6, Bloomberg said:

I do not believe that government has any business telling one class of couples that they cannot marry. The 14th Amendment guarantees us all equal protection under the law, and that’s what Question 6 does — it treats all citizens equally under the law, while protecting religious liberty at the same time.. . . The next great barrier to full equality under the law is marriage equality. There is no doubt in my mind this barrier will fall, just as so many others have.

This is not Bloomberg’s first donation in support of same-sex marriage, however. In 2011, the billionaire mayor gave the maximum donation of $10,300 to four Republican state senators who voted in favor of New York’s marriage equality law, helping three facing primary challenges win reelection. (The fourth retired.) Bloomberg also gave the maximum amount to five Democratic legislators who voted in favor of the measure.

Bloomberg says the law, which generated $259 million in economic benefits for NYC in its first year alone, “made our city more open, inclusive and free — and it has also helped to create jobs and support our economy.” Experts estimate marriage equality would benefit Maryland’s economy by over $90 million annually.

– Greg Noth

Maryland Marriage Alliance Chairman Derek McCoy told the Chesapeake Christian Fellowship that children of same-sex couples do not fare as well as children of opposite-sex couples because they are not God’s “best.” And his source for this claim was the widely-debunked Regnerus “study.”

As first noted by Jeremy Hooper on Good As You, McCoy told the congregation:

If you look at statistics, I’m telling you, if you look at statistics, you look at understanding and how things work, kids fare better with a mom and a dad. There is a recent study out there, called the Regnerus study, but basically it’ll tell you straight up—largest sample study and it’s taken a long time to get out there—but it’ll tell you about kids that are being raised in these homes, they are not fairing as well. Now I could go down the stats, you say “we’ll that’s not true.” No I’m telling you, they did a statistical study on this stuff. And they’re just not fairing as well. Because, guess what. It’s not what God created, it’s not his best.

Listen to the audio here:

The faulty “study” McCoy cites has been widely condemned by professors, therapists, and physicians. Mark Regnerus failed to draw a distinction between children raised by same-sex couples and children who believed at sometime before their 18th birthday their mother or father had “ever ha[d] a romantic relationship with someone of the same sex.” The study was funded by right-wing organizations and the majority of its subjects grew up in the 70s, 80s, and 90s — when same-sex relationships were more heavily stigmatized and not recognized in any state.

The American Psychological Association has consistently determined that there is “no scientific evidence that parenting effectiveness is related to parental sexual orientation: lesbian and gay parents are as likely as heterosexual parents to provide supportive and healthy environments for their children.”

Despite previously decrying efforts to “celebritize” the issue, Maryland’s opponents of marriage equality have launched a new ad featuring Baltimore Ravens center Matt Birk. Birk spoke out recently against the freedom to marry, rivaling the position of his teammate, Brendon Ayanbadejo. In the new 30-second ad, he accuses gay couples of being selfish for wanting the right to marry, insinuating that they will somehow harm the children they are already raising. He also suggests that the few benefits granted by domestic partnerships are more than enough:

BIRK: Marriage is more than what adults want for themselves. It is also about the next generation. Marriage is and should remain between a man and a woman. Gay and lesbian couples already receive benefits in Maryland, like hospital visitation, state health benefits, and tax breaks. We don’t need to redefine marriage.

Watch it:

Last month, when supporters of Maryland marriage equality gathered for a New York fundraiser, the head of the main opposition group denounced the star-studded event as an attempt to “celebritize” the issue. But now, the same group is readying a new ad highlighting a Baltimore Ravens player who opposes LGBT rights, relying on his celebrity for their own cause.

As Susan Sarandon, John Waters, Josh Charles, Ed Norton, Barbara Bush (daughter of President George W. Bush), Russell Simmons, and others joined Gov. Martin O’Malley (D-MD) to support Question 6, Maryland Marriage Alliance’s Derek McCoy accused the pro-equality group of “trying to celebritize the issue.” In a fundraising email, McCoy wrote:

Backed by Hollywood donors, homosexual activists are already proclaiming victory in their efforts to redefine marriage in Maryland. They are taking their fundraising out of state where they can attract major donors. We know that in spite of the millions that they will receive from movie stars, Marylanders WILL NOT allow marriage to be redefined.

But the McCoy seems to have quickly forgotten his concern. Monday, he told the Baltimore Sun that his group would release an ad this week featuring Ravens center Mark Birk voicing his opposition to civil marriage equality in the Free State. “We saved our videos for October. We’ll start doing more of them,” McCoy boasted.