BILL ANALYSIS
AB 25
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 16, 2001
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Carole Migden, Chairwoman
AB 25 (Migden) - As Amended: April 5, 2001
Policy Committee: JudiciaryVote:8-2
Labor 5-2
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
Yes Reimbursable: No
SUMMARY
This bill expands the group of individuals who may register as
domestic partners, and confers various new legal rights on all
registered domestic partners. Specifically, this bill:
1)Expands those who may register as domestic partners to include
opposite sex couples where only one person is over age 62.
(Under current law, both partners must be over 62.)
2)Requires that health plans and disability insurers offer
employers the option to purchase coverage for domestic
partners of employees, in the same manner as for other
dependents.
3)Treats domestic partners the same as spouses and dependents of
employees for purposes of exempting dependent health coverage
from state taxation.
4)Extends to a domestic partner the same entitlement as a spouse
to receive unemployment benefits if the reason for leaving his
or her employment is to move with a domestic partner to a new
location from which it is impractical to commute.
5)Authorizes a domestic partner, to the same extent as a spouse,
to file a claim for disability benefits on behalf of his or
her partner when the partner is mentally unable to file the
claim.
6)Establishes that a domestic partner who receives a retirement
allowance as the surviving beneficiary of a state employee is
also entitled to continued health coverage. The children of
AB 25
Page 2
such domestic partners are also entitled to this health
coverage.
7)Authorizes an employee who would be entitled to use sick leave
to care for a child, stepchild, parent or spouse, to also use
his or her sick leave to care for a domestic partner, or a
child of the domestic partner.
8)Extends to domestic partners the right currently given to
family members and others to make medical treatment decisions
on behalf of a partner if the partner is in a health facility
and is incapable of giving informed consent.
9)Authorizes a domestic partner to participate fully and have
standing to appear in conservatorship proceedings and be
appointed as conservator in the same manner as the spouse of a
conservatee or proposed conservatee.
10)Allows a domestic partner the right to inherit property if
one partner dies without a will, and to be appointed as
administrator of his or her deceased partner's estate, in the
same priority position as a surviving spouse.
11)Revises the statutory will form to include domestic partners
in the class of beneficiaries to whom a testator may leave
assets and property.
12)Authorizes a domestic partner to bring a cause of action and
recover damages for negligent infliction of emotional distress
and wrongful death, to the same extent that spouses are
entitled do so under California law.
13)Authorizes a domestic partner to petition the county for
adoption of their partner's child.
FISCAL EFFECT
1)The Franchise Tax Board estimates annual General Fund revenue
losses of about $1 million related to the tax provisions of
the bill.
2)Potential annual costs of about $100,000 to the Unemployment
Insurance Fund for payment unemployment benefits to eligible
domestic partners.
AB 25
Page 3
3)Any increased costs to the Secretary of State to register
additional domestic partnerships would be minor and would be
covered by registration fees.
4)Potential additional state costs to continue health benefits
for those surviving domestic partners who also receive a
retirement allowance and for their children.
COMMENTS
1)Purpose . This bill is sponsored by the California Alliance
for Pride and Equality (CAPE). In commenting on the need for
this measure, the author states:
"[U]ntil the enactment of AB 26 in 1999, same sex couples and
their families received no recognition under California law.
Even with the enactment of the domestic partner registry with
hospital visitation rights and health benefits for public
employees, few substantive benefits are available to domestic
partners who register. [This bill] would extend to domestic
partners substantive legal and economic benefits that married
spouses enjoy. These are basic protections such as health
insurance coverage for many private sector employees, an end
to state taxation of domestic partner health benefits, the
right to medical decision making in the hospital, recognition
of domestic partners under the state's inheritance laws, the
right to sue for economic loss and emotional distress caused
by the death of a partner, the ability to use sick leave to
care for their families, and other important rights."
2)Prior Legislation . In 1999, the Legislature enacted AB 26
(Migden)-California's first domestic partnership statute. AB
26 defines domestic partners as "two adults who have chosen to
share one another's lives in an intimate and committed
relationship of mutual caring" and who file a Declaration of
Domestic Partnership with the Secretary of State.
Last year, the following four bills together contained several
of the provisions included in AB 25-AB 1990 (Romero), AB 2047
(Steinberg), AB 2211 (Kuehl), and AB 2421 (Migden).
3)Opposition . The Campaign for California Families argues that
this bill robs marriage of its uniqueness by giving 11
different marriage benefits to non-spouses and contends that
in addition to undermining marriage between a man and a woman,
AB 25
Page 4
this bill is unnecessary because many of the benefits it seeks
can already be accessed through inexpensive legal contracts
and reasonable planning. This bill also burdens private
businesses and taxpayers.
The Traditional Values Coalition (TVC) argues that the bill is
an attempt to circumvent the will of the majority of
Californians who voted for Proposition 22 which, they claim,
"declared that the rights and privileges of marriage should
not be extended to other forms of so-called 'unions'."
Analysis Prepared by : Chuck Nicol / APPR. / (916)319-2081