Continued from Page A-1 mitted, long-term relationships, the lawsuit argues, and should have equal access to the health insurance, pension and survivor ship rights offered to married government workers. Seven of the couples are Ju neau women, with at least one of each couple being a state em ployee. The eighth is a pair of An chorage men, one of whom works for the city. The lawsuit does not argue that benefits should be given to opposite-sex unmarried couples. Rudinger said that is because op posite-sex couples have the op tion to get married to secure benefits. Allison Mendel, an Anchorage lawyer working with the AKCLU on the case, said a challenge to the same-sex marriage ban was rejected as being too lengthy a process. “This is a less complicated, less complex lawsuit,” she said. “These people have real-life is sues they need solved now.” State Sen. Loren Leman, A Anchorage and co-sponsor of the same-sex marriage ban, said the benefits lawsuit is a thinly dis guised attempt to make an end run around the ban, which was overwhelmingly approved by voters last November. “In my opinion, Alaskans have spoken and we have established in this state what marriage is and how we treat it,’ Leman said. “Every time these people want to substantially change societal policies, they go to the court system, where they think they can find one judge willing to step out and change things,” Leman continued. ‘“What they need to do is find a legislator to propose leg islation, have debates, and if they win, take it to the governor.” But Rep. Bill Hudson, R-Ju neau, said he doesn’t think the lawsuit bears on the constitu tional amendment. Hudson told the Juneau Empire that the rights of gays and lesbians is a topic “that people have a lot of interest in and the court seems the right first step’ if Alaska’s laws are to be changed. In February 1998, Anchorage Superior Court Judge Peter Michalski ruled against a 1996 state statute banning same-sex marriage, saying the state first had to prove a compelling in terest in regulating the funda mental right to choose a life partner. Michalski’s ruling came in a 1997 lawsuit filed by an An chorage gay couple, Jay Brause and Gene Dugan, who argued that the state law discriminated against them because they couldn’t enjoy the material ad vantages of marital status, in cluding health insurance, survivorship benefits and other rights.