National

The Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, the storied healthcare facility of U.S. presidents and wounded warriors, is making history again, becoming the first U.S. active military medical facility to earn the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) Foundation’s Leader in LGBT Healthcare Equality designation.

The world’s largest military hospital is joined this year by a growing number of healthcare facilities in the South in embracing LGBT-inclusive policies and practice, according to  a report released today by the HRC Foundation.

“We are thrilled that a record number of healthcare facilities — from Walter Reed National Military Medical Center to an increasing number of hospitals in the South — have committed to providing fully LGBT-inclusive healthcare for the patients they care for each year, as well as to protecting their LGBT workers from discrimination,” said HRC President Chad Griffin. “Over the last several years, our nation has made substantial progress on LGBT equality, including historic gains in the availability of full-inclusive healthcare.”

“I commend leaders of these inclusive facilities for using HRC’s Healthcare Equality Index as a roadmap, and for advancing equality in health care for our nation’s LGBT patients, their families, and for medical providers and caregivers,” Griffin said. “We still have much work to do to achieve full equality, but today we have a record number of leaders setting an example for other healthcare facilities across our nation.”

A record 2,061 healthcare facilities are rated in the HRC Foundation’s 2016 HEI survey, up 37 percent from the last survey. And an unprecedented 496 healthcare centers from all regions of the U.S. earned the Leader in LGBT Healthcare Equality designation this year, with substantial gains in the South — including in Alabama, where three major Birmingham-area facilities were awarded leader status for the first time.

While every region of the country saw an increase in the number of medical facilities earning HEI leader status this year, the South stepped up with the second highest number of new leaders. It now ranks second only to the Northeast region in the number of hospitals and healthcare facilities committing to LGBT-competent and inclusive care.

Walter Reed, which admits more than 13,000 service members annually to its facilities and treats nearly 30,000 each year in its emergency department, joins the nation’s system of veterans hospitals as a Leader in LGBT Healthcare Equality. The U.S. Veterans Health Administration and an overwhelming majority of its hospitals began participating in the  Healthcare Equality Index (HEI) in 2013.

To earn healthcare leader status, facilities must have established LGBT-inclusive patient non-discrimination policies, as well as employment non-discrimination policies that are fully LGBT-inclusive. They also ensure equal visitation rights for LGBT people, patients and families; and their staff members participate in training in LGBT patient-centered care.

“Walter Reed joins diverse healthcare facilities across the U.S. that are making tremendous strides toward LGBT patient-centered care,” said Tari Hanneman, author of the HEI and Deputy Director of the HRC Foundation’s Health and Aging Program. “In unprecedented numbers, they are committing to fully LGBT-inclusive policies for both their patients and their employees.”

Leadership shown by Walter Reed, the nation’s veterans hospitals, and other medical facilities embracing LGBT inclusion is sorely needed. While a record number of healthcare centers earned leader designation this year, too many continue to fall short in providing vital patient and employee non-discrimination protections.

Nearly half of the facilities that were independently researched by HRC Foundation staff performed poorly, particularly in the area of non-discrimination policies: only 58 percent have patient non-discrimination policies that include both sexual orientation and gender identity; and just 53 percent have LGBT-inclusive employment non-discrimination policies.

And four states have no facilities earning leader status this year: Alaska, Idaho, Oklahoma, and Wyoming.

The HEI’s findings demonstrate the patchwork of protections nationwide for LGBT patients and their families, as well as LGBT healthcare facility employees, underscoring the need for uniform federal non-discrimination protections. LGBT Americans are facing a harsh choice between healthcare facilities that have policies that guarantee them equal care, and those that have consistently failed to take steps to ensure all patients receive inclusive, compassionate and respectful care.

The good news? The number of active HEI participants continues to grow, and their leaders are striving to meet HRC’s criteria for equal treatment of LGBT patients, as well as employees, and are succeeding. Many are going well beyond the survey’s criteria to do right by all their patients and workers by adopting additional HRC-recommended best practices, including offering employees trans-inclusive health insurance coverage.

Reps. Mark Pocan (D-WI) and Charles Rangel (D-NY) this week sent a letter to Chairman Mac Thornberry requesting the House Committee on Armed Services hold a hearing on the challenges faced by gay, lesbian, and bisexual service members who were discharged from the military on the basis of their sexual orientation.

The letter states: “Since World War II, more than 100,000 individuals are estimated to have been discharged from the military due to their sexual orientation. Today, thousands of gay, lesbian, and bisexual veterans are tarnished with discharge statuses other than honorable. This status affects both their access to benefits they have earned from their service and their opportunities in civilian life, potentially hindering employment opportunities and the right to vote.”

Reps. Pocan and Rangel previously introduced the Restore Honor to Service Members Act in July 2015, which would help service members discharged solely due to their sexual orientation correct their military records to reflect their honorable service and reinstate the benefits they earned. The Restore Honor to Service Members Act has 113 cosponsors, including 4 Republicans, in the House and 38 cosponsors in the Senate.

A signed copy of the letter can be found here and the full text is below.

 Dear Chairman Thornberry:

 We write today to request the House Committee on Armed Services hold a hearing on the challenges faced by gay, lesbian, and bisexual service members who were discharged from the military on the basis of their sexual orientation and who seek to have their discharge characterization upgraded to “honorable.” Specifically, we request the Committee examine undue difficulties in the current review process and evaluate bipartisan solutions to address these problems.

The repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” in 2011 represented a significant step forward for our military and brought justice to thousands of gay, lesbian, and bisexual service members. This change allowed all individuals wishing to serve our country the opportunity to do so without being forced to hide who they are, and signaled to those discharged due to their sexual orientation that their service is deeply valued. Our military readiness and national security are stronger and we are closer to the American ideals of fairness and equality due to the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

Unfortunately, too many service members still bear the scars of this discriminatory policy. Since World War II, more than 100,000 individuals are estimated to have been discharged from the military due to their sexual orientation. Today, the records of thousands of gay, lesbian, and bisexual veterans are tarnished with discharge statuses other than honorable. This status affects both their access to benefits they have earned from their service and their opportunities in civilian life, potentially hindering employment opportunities and the right to vote. Even those discharged under “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” who received an honorable discharge status risk facing discrimination and a violation of privacy because the Narrative Reason for their discharge may include “Homosexual Conduct,” “Homosexual Act,” or “Homosexual Marriage.”

In response to the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” the Department of Defense (DoD) took an important step by implementing a process for service members to appeal their discharge status and change their discharge narrative. However, this can be a burdensome course of action for service members, who often need to obtain legal counsel to navigate the process and provide paperwork they may no longer have.

We have introduced the Restore Honor to Service Members Act in order to streamline and codify the current DoD policy, ensuring all gay, lesbian, and bisexual service members have the opportunity to correct their record and affirm their honorable service. This legislation simplifies the paperwork requirement for a service member to initiate a review and clarifies that a review cannot be denied solely based on a lack of documentation. Further, the bill moves the burden to produce relevant documentation from the service member to the DoD. Lastly, the legislation requires military service historians to review the circumstances of these discharges, helping service members prove they were discharged solely due to their sexual orientation. The Restore Honor to Service Members Act has gained broad, bipartisan support in the United States Congress – 113 cosponsors in the 114th Congress – and offers a strong path forward to address current difficulties.

Our service members deserve a straightforward and accessible process to ensure their honorable service is reflected in their records. For these reasons, we urge the House Committee on Armed Services to schedule a hearing on this issue in the near future. We look forward to your response.

Earlier today, experts, civil rights leaders and a member of Congress hosted a press call to condemn the “religious freedom” arguments used to justify discrimination in state-based legislation and in the upcoming Supreme Court arguments in Zubik v. Burwell.

On the call, The Leadership Conference Education Fund released an update to its recent report Striking a Balance: Advancing Civil and Human Rights While Preserving Religious Liberty, which documents how religious arguments have been used to justify discrimination against diverse communities including opposing the abolition of slavery, women’s suffrage and equality, racial integration, inter-racial marriage, immigration, the Americans with Disabilities Act, same-sex marriage, and the right to collectively bargain.  Click here to access the report.

The call comes as more than 100 anti-LGBT bills—many attempting to create religious carve-outs for discrimination—have been introduced in states nationwide this year, and days before the Supreme Court hears arguments in Zubik v. Burwell, a case considering whether non-profits may use religion to justify denying employees health insurance that includes contraceptives.

Quotes from the call’s participants are below.

Wade Henderson, president and CEO of The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights and The Leadership Conference Education Fund

“So-called ‘religious freedom’ bills like those introduced in Congress and in states nationwide, and similar arguments being used in Supreme Court cases like Burwell v. Hobby Lobby and this week’s Zubik v. Burwell, are attempting to twist these values into an ugly justification of bigotry. These arguments are not new. But they are dangerous. There can be no religious exemption from basic human dignity. And to wrap this bigotry in a false flag of religious liberty is the true abomination.”

Congressman Bobby Scott (D-VA), Ranking Member of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce

“When RFRA was adopted in the early 1990s, it was supported by a broad bipartisan coalition and was intended to provide protection for religious minorities. Since the passage of the federal RFRA, 21 states have passed state RFRAs, and this activity in the states makes it clear that it is past time for Congress to reexamine the overreach of RFRA. That is why I filed an amicus brief in the Zubik v. Burwell case. I am concerned that RFRA is being used as a sword, and not a shield, to advance harm to the rights of others in the pursuit of another’s religious exercise.”

Sarah Warbelow, legal director at the Human Rights Campaign (HRC)

“Over the years, it’s become clear that the new crop of states that are interested in perpetuating these RFRA laws are motivated by an interest in discrimination. A lot of that discrimination will occur to the LGBT community, who are often the target of such legislation. These bills are not motivated by a true desire to protect religious minorities, but instead to allow an individual to claim their religious beliefs as a reason to poke holes in legislation designed to protect us all.”

Gretchen Borchelt, vice president for reproductive rights and health at the National Women’s Law Center

“Women deserve insurance coverage of birth control no matter where they work. No woman should be denied the benefit she is entitled to as a matter of law because of her employer’s religious beliefs.”

The Kansas House of Representatives has passed SB 175 – a bill that would put LGBT college students at even greater risk of discrimination. Now headed to Gov. Sam Brownback’s desk, the legislation would force public universities to fund student organizations that discriminate by restricting their membership and denying LGBT students from participating under the guise of “religious beliefs.”

“Each and every lawmaker who voted for this reckless legislation have in doing so abandoned their duty to serve and protect all Kansans. SB 175 has nothing to do with American values or religious liberty and everything to do with blatant discrimination against tens of thousands of college students from all across the country,” said HRC President Chad Griffin. “If signed into law, this disgraceful bill would undermine non-discrimination policies and protections at colleges and universities throughout Kansas. We urge Governor Brownback to stand on the right side of history and veto this draconian measure.”

The bill jeopardizes non-discrimination policies that have already been put into place by many of Kansas’ educational institutions, including the Kansas Board of Regents and the University of Kansas. These policies require that student organizations which receive financial and other support from the school do not discriminate against students based on race, sex, religion, sexual orientation, or gender identity. SB 175 blows a hole right through them – and allows discrimination against any of these groups if one cites a “religious belief” as a justification.

These policies are incredibly important because they allow all members of the student body to participate in student groups and prevent such groups from discriminating against students with state funding.

Passed by the Kansas Senate last year, the legislation now awaits a decision by Gov. Brownback, who made headlines last year for his anti-LGBT executive order that put LGBT Kansans at risk of greater discrimination. If Gov. Brownback signs the legislation, it would be the first stand-alone anti-LGBT bill signed into law in 2016.

The Human Rights Campaign (HRC) has announced that HRC’s Board of Directors, comprised of community leaders from across the nation, voted Friday to issue the following Congressional endorsements focusing on incumbent members of Congress.

“From supporting nationwide marriage equality, to co-sponsoring the Equality Act, these members of Congress have demonstrated a strong commitment to equality during their terms,” said HRC President Chad Griffin. “These members of Congress are standing with the bipartisan majority of Americans who believe that everyone, including LGBT people, should be able to have a fair chance to earn a living, provide for their families, and live free from fear of discrimination. HRC is proud to support them in their re-election campaigns.”

In the Senate, HRC has endorsed Michael Bennet (D-CO), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Mark Kirk (R-IL), Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Patty Murray (D-WA), Brian Schatz (D-HI), Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Ron Wyden (D-OR).

HRC’s endorsed members in the U.S. Senate have demonstrated a commitment to LGBT equality during their Senate service, including by supporting marriage equality and voting for employment non-discrimination protections (ENDA). They are also all co-sponsors of the Equality Act, the new bipartisan legislation introduced last year to extend existing civil rights protections to LGBT people. They also voted to support the following key issues:

• The Runaway and Homeless Youth Act: An amendment that would ensure essential service providers dealing with runaway and youth homeless youth would not be allowed to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. Up to 40 percent of homeless youth identify as LGBT, even though they make up only 5 to 10 percent of the overall youth population.
• The Student Non-Discrimination Act: SNDA would expressly prohibit public schools from discriminating against any student on the basis of actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity. Federal statutory protections explicitly address discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex and disability, but not sexual orientation or gender identity.
• Social Security and Veterans Budget Amendment: An amendment offered by Sen. Brian Schatz to ensure same-sex couples have access to Social Security and veterans benefits.

In the House, HRC has endorsed Pete Aguilar (D-CA), Brad Ashford (D-NE), Ami Bera (D-CA), Julia Brownley (D-CA), Cheri Bustos (D-IL), Bob Dold (R-IL), Gwen Graham (D-FL), Ann Kuster (D-NH), Sean Patrick Maloney (D-NY), Rick Nolan (DFL-MN), Scott Peters (D-CA), Raúl Ruiz (D-CA) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ). HRC’s endorsed House members have supported LGBT equality by agreeing to co-sponsor the Equality Act and who support marriage equality.

They also voted to uphold President Obama’s executive order on discrimination against LGBT federal contractors: In a June 2015 vote, House members voted to uphold President Obama’s executive order on discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. The order explicitly protects transgender federal employees from workplace discrimination by amending an order issued by President Bill Clinton banning sexual orientation discrimination within the federal workforce. In the same order, President Obama set strong new standards banning employment discrimination by federal contractors, which employ 20 percent of the American workforce.

To find out where your Member of Congress stands on marriage equality and other key issues, check hrc.org/resources/your-elected-officials.

Cohabitating couples are splitting up with the help of lawyers in a growing number of relationships.  According to 45% of members in a recent survey of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers (AAML), legal disputes between unmarried couples who had previously lived together are on the rise during the past three years.  A significant 70% of the attorneys also noted a decrease in cohabitation agreements being drawn up between same-sex partners since same-sex marriage has been legalized.

“Even without an engagement ring or marriage license, a live-in relationship can often produce a number of legal complexities and tangled disputes that could require the involvement of legal counsel,” said Joslin Davis, president of the AAML.  “While cohabitation agreements might represent an effective option for a variety of partners with finances and assets to protect, we are also finding a substantial decrease in these contracts for same-sex clients, coinciding with the marriage equality movement in recent times.”

Overall, 45% of AAML members have cited an increase in the number of legal disputes between unmarried couples who had previously lived together during the past three years, while 53% stated no change, and 2% saw a decrease.  In all, 26% cited an increase in cohabitation agreement requests from unmarried couples, 68% said no change and 6% noted a decrease.