CO-04 (Special Election) See Full Big Line

(R) Greg Lopez

(R) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump

80%

20%↓

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

90%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

90%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

(R) Ron Hanks

40%

30%

20%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(R) Deborah Flora

(R) J. Sonnenberg

50%↑

15%

10%↓

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Dave Williams

(R) Jeff Crank

50%↓

50%↑

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

90%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) Brittany Pettersen

85%↑

 

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

(R) Janak Joshi

60%↑

35%↓

30%↑

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
February 05, 2009 05:23 AM UTC

Benefits for All Employees

  • 2 Comments
  • by: Pam Bennett

Today’s hearing on SB-09-088, benefits for same sex state employees, was the usual.  Those opposed had various reasons, but nothing creative. The wildly creative people did not attend today’s hearing.

During the hearing Sen. S. Mitchell (aka Rockclimber on Pols) asked Sen. J Veiga about +1.  Which is basically benefits for any couple in a committed relationship.  Sen. Veiga replied that in the current economic situation covering all non-married state employees would be very expensive, plus those non-same-sex employees can become married.  Targeting the bill to those of a small population that cannot marry in Colorado  provides benefits without high cost.

While watching the discourse I started to wonder if Sen. Mitchell would sponsor a bill for +1.  He could not carry it until next year.  But, that is a way to have time to write a tight and comprehensive bill.  

Comments

2 thoughts on “Benefits for All Employees

  1. Shawn Mitchell’s stated concern about the designated beneficiaries bill is that it provides economic benefit to those who could otherwise get married, which he believes will divert people from marriage.

    Senator Mitchell and his far-right colleagues have a history of proposing bills and amendments that provide economic benefits to various people in order to divert the legislature from granting any legal recognition whatsoever to same-sex couples.

    In 2006 it was his designated beneficiaries bill in the Senate and in the House it was generous amendments from concerned, obviously well-meaning Republicans to HB06-1344 so that it wouldn’t discriminate against people committing incest.

    Don’t get distracted by his proposals. History has shown that on the subject of equality Senator Mitchell is all about misdirection.

    1. They won’t let gays get married, and then when we try to extend their rights, they say “well, it could cause fewer straight people to get married.”

      BLAEHEHRGH!!!

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

30 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!