Today, a federal judge announced that he will issue a ruling mandating that Ohio recognize same sex marriages performed out of state.
Governor Kasich has a long history of voting against shared benefits for domestic partners, and, in 2011, he used an executive order to sneak discriminatory policies against homosexual state-goverment employees past Ohioans. In contrast, under Ed FitzGerald’s leadership, Cuyahoga County voted to give benefits to children of homosexual domestic partners.
KASICH SNUCK DISCRIMINATORY POLICY INTO OHIO LAW
Kasich Revised State Policy To Allow Discrimination On Basis Of Gender Identity The Columbus Dispatch reported on January 22, 2011 that, “Gov. John Kasich signed an executive order yesterday setting an anti-discrimination policy for state-government employment…Kasich said in his campaign that he would continue a 2007 order from former Gov. Ted Strickland that prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity, but Kasich’s order leaves out ‘gender identity.’” [Columbus Dispatch, 1/22/11]
KASICH VOTED THREE TIMES AGAINST SHARED MEDICAL BENEFITS
1998: Kasich Opposed Medical Benefits For Homosexual Couples In San Francisco. In 1998, Kasich voted to prohibit funds from being used to implement the San Francisco ordinance that requires private companies and organizations contracting with or receiving grants from the city to provide health care benefits to unmarried domestic partners of their workers. [HR 4194, Vote #349, 7/29/1998; CQ Weekly, 8/1/98]
1993: Kasich Voted To Ban Funds For Domestic Partners Program In DC. In 1993, Kasich voted in favor of legislation prohibiting Washington, D.C. from using federal funds to enforce “domestic partners” legislation allowing city workers to extend health benefits to an unrelated adult partner. [HR 2492, Vote #313, 6/30/1993; Washington Times, 7/04/93]
1992: Kasich Opposed Health Coverage For Domestic Partners. In 1992, Kasich voted against a domestic partnership law allowing D.C. employees to extend health care coverage to a “domestic partner.” The bill would also prohibit the use of federal funds for abortions except to save the life of the woman, but would place no prohibition on the use of locally raised funds. [HR 5517, Vote #275, 7/8/1992; Washington Times, 7/12/92]