With much hoopla, Elizabeth Birch's 9-year tenure as head of the Washington-based Human Rights Campaign, the nation's largest - and wealthiest - lesbigay lobby, is coming to an end. But all the accolades leave me uneasy. True, under Birch HRC grew substantially. But too many of the group's efforts seem to have been on behalf of itself: growing HRC's staff, improving HRC's employee benefits, and - most impressively - buying and renovating a big (and expensive) HRC headquarters building in D.C.
Despite all the cash raked in through swanky fund-raising dinners, what of the group's actual accomplishments? Their beloved Bill Clinton signed the anti-gay Defense of Marriage Act, believing (correctly) that his gay supporters would swallow it without a murmur, and also signed legislation making "don't ask, don't tell" the military's policy, after raising too early - and then quickly dropping - support for ending the gay ban.
OK, there were symbolic gestures, such as Clinton's recognizing gay pride month and making a number of lower-level gay federal appointees as payback for gay support. But what of the Employee Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), HRC's long-ballyhooed big goal? Even with a Democratic House and Senate during his first two years, Clinton and House-leader Dick Gephardt didn't move on it.
Before Birch, HRC had only made endorsements in congressional races. Under Birch, presidential politics became key, not only providing big support for Clinton, but endorsing Al Gore early in the primary season, well before the GOP had even settled on a candidate (which explains Al and Tipper's appearance at Birch's big farewell dinner). These moves made HRC seem more partisan, an adjunct of the Democratic National Committee, as it were. Moreover, in some years during Birch's tenure HRC's well-publicized candidates' "scorecards" took into account votes in favor of the federal government's racial-preference mandates and unrestricted government funding for abortions, among other not-so-gay issues.
Still, compared to the radical poseurs at the National Gay & Lesbian Task Force, HRC was a model of moderation - not wacky leftists, just partisan Democrats with an extremely flimsy "nonpartisan" veneer.
Discrimination Against the Unwed.
This week's cover story in Business Week looks at "Unmarried America" and how the new demographics of the non-traditional family ("singletons" living alone, unmarried straight co-habitators, single parents, and gay couples) are changing America. The news peg:
The U.S. Census Bureau's newest numbers show that married-couple households -- the dominant cohort since the country's founding -- have slipped from nearly 80% in the 1950s to just 50.7% today. -- Also fueling the demographic change: More people are coming out of the closet and setting up same-sex households.
The unmarried, however, often find themselves getting the short end of the stick. They:
are often subjected to discrimination in housing and credit applications. They pay more for auto and homeowners' insurance" In the workplace, unmarried people wind up making an average 25% less than married colleagues for the same work because of the marriage-centric structure of health care, retirement, and other benefits".
As the reality of unmarried America sinks in, CEOs, politicians, and judges will be challenged to design benefits, structure taxes, and develop retirement models that more fairly match the changing population.
These include corporate domestic-partner benefits, which,
however, are fully taxed under federal and state law (unlike
spousal benefits). Business Week concludes: "No matter how the
politics play out, the demographic convulsion is certain to cause a
collective reexamination of what it means to be full-fledged
members of society."