The federal government is one step closer to providing health care and retirement benefits to domestic partners of its gay and lesbian employees. Yesterday, the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee approved H.R. 2517 by a 23-12 vote. Illinois Democrats Mike Quigley, Danny Davis, and Bill Foster all supported the legislation. GOP Rep. Aaron Schock voted against it. From Alyssa Rosenberg's report on the contentious hearing:

Republican committee members argued that the 2009 Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligations Act was an inappropriate extension of benefits to a small subset of federal employees at a time when unemployment was rising. They also said such a move would threaten the definition of marriage as a union between a man and a woman, and could open the door to fraud by people of the same sex who simply wanted access to benefits.

Democrats countered that extending access to health and survivor benefits to the same-sex partners of federal workers in exchange for an agreement that those employees would abide by rules governing nepotism and financial disclosure for their partners, was a matter of equality and of establishing the federal government as an inclusive, competitive employer.

In a fascinating volley between the two parties, Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) offered an amendment calling for the Government Accountability Office to study, two years after the bill's implementation, how the extension of domestic partnership benefits impacts health care premiums for other employees. Quigley quickly countered, filing an amendment requesting a similar report on whether the bill increased federal recruiting and retention -- an often-overlooked factor in such cost-benefit analyses. Both measures passed.

Here's Quigley's statement on the vote:

“The fact that the federal government, which should be setting an example for the rest of the nation’s employers, is currently discriminating against individuals based on their sexual orientation is frankly, embarrassing,” said Quigley. “Not only are we denying people thousands of dollars in benefits and violating our equal pay for equal work laws, but we’re making the government less competitive for top talent than private sector employers, 10,000 of which offer benefits to people no matter who they choose to love.”

According to The Advocate, the full House could vote on the measure before the end of the year.