Date: 27 Apr 1994 15:30:15 -0700 From: "Mills Mike" Clint Talbott- Please print this editorial in your Revolving Door column as soon as possible. Thank you. -Mike Mills =-=-=-=-=-= The University of Colorado Board of Regents has made a serious blunder. Allowing bigotry to cloud its better judgement, the Board has bluntly interfered with the negotiation of student health insurance policies. The result will likely be higher premiums for everyone. It's time to clear the air and look at exactly what the Regents did at their April meeting down in Cortez. The University actively discriminates on an institutional basis, by denying same-sex couples the benefits it gives to married employees and students. A married heterosexual employee may receive subsidized health insurance for his or her spouse, may take sick or funeral leave to care for or bereave a loved spouse or spouse's relative, and is assured that his or her spouse will receive a financial benefit from the University in the event of the employee's death. A married heterosexual student may enroll his or her spouse in the Wardenburg Health Insurance, may live in CU Family Housing at significantly reduced rent, and may purchase football tickets at student rates for his or her family. None of these benefits are available to students and employees who are involved in a committed relationship with someone of the same sex. This year a task force appointed by Chancellor Corbridge has been looking into extending spousal benefits to unmarried domestic partners. We received word from John Hancock, the student health insurance carrier, that students would be able to receive Wardenburg Insurance for their unmarried partners at the same premium that married students currently pay. John Hancock currently includes domestic partners in its contract to several other universities and institutions. No one's premiums would be affected. The University does not subsidize student health insurance at all. Most of those who would have benefited from the inclusion of domestic partners in Wardenburg Insurance would not have been "homosexual partners," despite what newspaper headlines have said. They would have been heterosexual partners of students who choose, for whatever reason, not to marry. There was no reason not to include these domestic partnerships in the policy change, so we did. The student government (UCSU) and the University's Joint Budget committee negotiate a new contract with John Hancock every year. This is not a process in which the Regents normally involve themselves. But this year, alarmed by press reports of "benefits" for "homosexual partners" of students, the Regents moved swiftly. Within a week of its first coverage in the Colorado Daily, the Regents had resolved to limit Wardenburg Insurance to those categories currently receiving it. The ironies here are too numerous to count. Thinking they could somehow avoid the appearance of bigotry, the Regents have said they took their action to prevent cost increases. But the Regents' resolution prevents many other changes to the Wardenburg contract which were planned to save costs next year. As a result of the Regents' action, students may be paying more. The Regents shot first and created excuses later. All of the reasons given by the Regents for their actions are laughable. Regent Peter Dietze refused to believe that costs would not be affected by the change. Well, then, why doesn't he call John Hancock for himself? Why doesn't he ask Tony Grampsas, chair of the Joint Budget Committee, who called the proposal "a moot issue," saying "it has no impact on the state budget." Dietze mentions that,"Wardenburg Health Center is being subsidized by student fees." This is true. But it has nothing to do with Wardenburg Insurance. Wardenburg Health Center has had domestic partner benefits for some time now, and any student can elect to have his or her partner pay these student fees. The benefit for the partner is a discount on services at Wardenburg. For students on the Wardenburg Insurance Plan, the remainder is paid by John Hancock. Those not on the insurance plan pay the remainder out of pocket. Dietze also said that domestic partner benefits could not be extended to students without extending them to faculty and staff at the university. This is simply not true. The student health insurance policy is radically different and completely autonomous from any of the policies available to faculty and staff. The Regents vigorously deny that their intervention was motivated by homophobia, but are quick to defend themselves by pointing to the homophobic State Legislature. Says Kathy Arnold, sponsor of the measure,"This will cost us dearly with the Legislature." Regent Harvey Phelps echoes,"[If] it hurts us in the Legislature, then I'm against it." (Daily Camera, 4/22/94) If there is anything to be learned from the struggles for civil rights that this country has been through, it is that the bigotry of others cannot justify discrimination. Beyond simply caving in to homophobia, Regents Phelps, Dietze, Robb, and Winn have made clear that they are homophobic themselves. Asked if CU should be recognizing same-sex couples, Regent Norwood Robb came right out and said,"I have a problem with that." This is the same Regent who said in April of 1991 that he opposed adding sexual orientation to the University's nondiscrimination clause because,"We need a wide diversity of views." (Colorado Daily) Regents Dietze, Phelps, and Winn voted against a resolution in April 1992 that would have prevented discrimination against students on any basis save merit. After a diatribe about AIDS and anal intercourse, David Winn said,"We can't talk about alternative lifestyles without talking about alternative deathstyles." (Colorado Daily 1/22/93) This man is currently the Chair of the Board of Regents. Ironically, Dietze justified his opposition by saying "That amounts to the regents' shaping the relationship between the students and the university." (Colorado Daily, 12/25/92) And micromanaging student health insurance isn't? The regents who voted for this policy of discrimination are all guilty of acting based on ignorance, fear, and bigotry. They are elected to six year terms and are accountable to no one. They are out of control. There needs to be some system of checks and balances to insure that the regents represent the interests of the University of Colorado. Their idiocy can go unchecked no longer. I urge everyone who can to protest the homophobia of the Board of Bigots at the Trumbo Fountain on Monday at noon. Mike Mills is a member of the Chancellor's Task Force on Human Resources.