programs

issues

Assembly OKs rights for same-sex couples

Contra Costa Times
June 5, 2003
By Lisa Leff

ASSOCIATED PRESS

SAN FRANCISCO - The state Assembly approved sweeping legislation Wednesday that would grant same-sex partners most of the same spousal rights -- and responsibilities -- as married couples.

Passed on a 41 to 29 vote, the bill does not authorize gay men and lesbians to marry. But it would guarantee people who register as domestic partners legal and financial benefits ranging from the ability to file joint income taxes to the standing to petition courts for child support and alimony.

"What it means for both same sex and senior couples is we are about to see California enact a law that will provide them significant rights and protections that they presently don't have, and provide civil rights protections for lesbian and gay couples that no legislature has voluntarily passed in the history of this country," said Geoffrey Kors, executive director of Equality California, a gay civil rights group.

During an hour-long debate, supporters characterized the measure introduced by Assemblywoman Jackie Goldberg, D-Los Angeles, as "landmark legislation," while opponents criticized it as weakening the institution of marriage.

In an effort to defeat the bill, Republican lawmakers argued that the measure conflicts with Proposition 22, a 2000 ballot measure that defined marriage as applying only to a man and a woman.

"There are alternative lifestyles. Fine, do your own thing. It's your business," said Assemblyman Tim Leslie, R-Tahoe City. "But I don't want the government to be instituting this lifestyle as an acceptable alternative lifestyle."

In 1999, California became the first state to allow gay and lesbian couples, as well as elderly couples, to register as domestic partners. Two years ago, the Legislature passed a measure providing registered twosomes about a dozen rights previously available only to heterosexual spouses or next of kin, including the right to make medical decisions for incapacitated partners, to sue for a partner's wrongful death and to adopt a partner's child.

Goldberg's measure expands on those efforts by extending to registered same-sex couples, who now number more than 19,000, every other marriage-based entitlement that could be amended under state law without a two-thirds vote.

They include access to family student housing, bereavement and family care leave, exemptions from estate and gift taxes, child custody and visitation hearings, and health coverage under a spouse's insurance plan.

Other rights once available only to a husband or wife that would be covered by the bill are the right not to be forced to testify against a partner at trial, the ability to apply for absentee ballots on a partner's behalf, and in the event of a loved one's death, the authority to consent to an autopsy, donate organs and to make funeral arrangements.

In addition, the legislation carries new obligations. Registered couples would be responsible for their partner's debts, would have their income factored into their partner's eligibility for public assistance benefits, and would be required to disclose their relationships to avoid nepotism and conflicts of interest.

Gov. Gray Davis, who signed the earlier domestic partner legislation, has not yet taken a position on Goldberg's bill. An analysis released last week by the Williams Project at UCLA and the Institute for Gay and Lesbian Strategic Studies found it would save the state hundreds of millions of dollars in welfare and health benefits.

Besides California, three other states -- Vermont, Hawaii and Connecticut -- and Washington, D.C. have enacted domestic partner laws conferring various health care benefits and legal protections on gay and lesbian couples.

The 41 votes the measure received Wednesday -- the minimum it needed to move on to the state Senate -- reflected the intense lobbying efforts of the bill's opponents, who in recent weeks had targeted Democratic Assembly members representing conservative districts.

Randy Thomasson, executive director of Campaign for California Families, said that if the new domestic partner law makes it through the Legislature and past Davis' desk, his group would sue to prevent it from becoming law on the grounds that it violates the spirit of the voter-approved Prop. 22.

"You don't deserve those marriage rights unless you are a man and woman. No other relationship is equal to it or should claim to be," Thomasson said. "Awarding marriage equivalent rights to non-married couples cheapens the value of every marriage in the state."