Related articles:

Domestic-partner benefits get boost Domestic partner benefits for state workers closer to realityReview panel aides recommend OK of domestic partners proposal

Other articles by Paul Davenport:

AZ Senate OKs proposed budget; House action nextFiling says AZ death method still subject to challenge English- learner changes shelved GOP officials explore options for Flake's spot on Nov. ballot AZ impact debated from California OK of gay marriages State considers a ban on texting while on the road Ruling legalizing gay marriage in CA prompts call for Senate vote here Popular Arizona bill to regulate mortgage 'originators' is stalled Licensing of Arizona loan originators hits legislative roadblock Expansion of suit, $40B sought over anti-war T-shirts

General
ADVANCED AUTOMOTIVE
DISPATCHER/SECRETARY Trades/Construction
Pioneer Landscaping
Yard Person/Loader Operator Automotive
Oilstop
Oil Change Techs Production and Manufacturing
Pioneer Landscaping
Crushing Crew Trades/Construction
Paragon Electric
Electricians Administrative & Professional
Tucson Symphony
Teleservices Sales/Courtesy Rep Trades/Construction
Jacobs Electric
Electricians & Helpers

PHOENIX — Arizona state government employees and retirees will be able to provide their domestic partners with taxpayer-subsidized health insurance coverage under rule changes proposed by Gov. Janet Napolitano's administration and approved Tuesday by a state panel.

The Governor's Regulatory Review Council voted 4-0 to approve rule changes proposed by the Department of Administration with support from Napolitano. Some Republican legislators opposed the move.

The changes to state employee benefits rules expand the definition of "dependent" to include domestic partner, regardless of whether the worker or retiree is of the same or opposite sex.

Dependents of domestic partners also will qualify under the changes, which will take effect 60 days after filing with the Secretary of State. That would allow the new coverage to begin Oct. 1.

The review council, which has the final say over many agencies' proposed rules, considers whether rules are necessary, legal and have benefits that outweigh costs.

Council members didn't comment during their voice vote, which followed a hearing that lasted nearly two hours and included extensive questioning of supporters and opponents.

A staff attorney and economist for the council had recommended approval of the rule changes, calling them legally within the department's authority and cost-effective.

Critics said the changes would undermine the institution of marriage, burden the state with added costs at a time of budget trouble and, by doing it through rule changes, trample the Legislature's policymaking role.

Supporters said providing benefits to partners and their dependents would help the state reduce costly turnover by being more competitive in recruitment and retention.

Not only will the state more competitive, the changes will be in a position "to do the right thing," said Administration Director Bill Bell.

Napolitano also has argued that it was a question of fairness — equal benefits for equal work. In her first year in office, the Democratic governor issued an executive order banning discrimination in state personnel practices based on sexual orientation.

Peter Gentala, an attorney for the Center for Arizona Policy, later declined to say whether the Scottsdale-based social conservative advocacy group would file a court challenge. Any legal challenge probably couldn't be mounted until the rule changes take effect, he said.

Gentala said the department lacks the legal authority to make the rule changes.

"That's basically a backdoor piece of legislation and that's outside their authority through the rulemaking process. If something that substantial needs to happen, then it should happen through the legislative process," Gentala said. "This is a significant policy change."

A legislator who was advocated for the rule changes later applauded the vote.

"It's just good to see that Arizona enters the 21st Century and we'll now be able to be competitive with our cities and our municipalities and other states," said Sen. Ken Cheuvront, a Phoenix Democrat who is gay.

Laveen resident Donald Pertzborn said he objected to the state subsidizing gay and cohabitating lifestyles that he and others consider abhorrent: "Ought we be giving the same benefits to people who have lifestyles that are not consistent with husband and wife?"

The state Senate on March 18 narrowly rejected a Republican bill to block the move by changing state law to define "dependent" as a spouse or unmarried child of an employee or retiree. The bill was supported by social conservatives and opposed by gay rights advocates.

The department's proposal would affect benefits systems serving some 65,000 state employees and 9,000 retirees. According to state projections, the number of partners likely to be covered take effect ranges from 317 to 853 at a cost to the state of up to $4.25 million.

The department said at least 15 other states already provide domestic partner benefits.

The department said state officials received 1,429 written comments from 913 individuals and groups. Among the 913 individuals and groups, 787 supported the proposals and 112 opposed them, with 14 merely seeking clarification.

Supporters included university officials, the American Civil Liberties Union's Arizona branch, the Anti-Defamation League, a Tempe firefighters group and state Sen. Amanda Aguirre, D-Yuma. Opponents included the Center for Arizona Policy, the Alliance Defend Fund and five Republican state representatives.