BILL ANALYSIS
AB 205
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 30, 2003
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Darrell Steinberg, Chair
AB 205 (Goldberg) - As Amended: March 25, 2003
Policy Committee: JudiciaryVote:9-4
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
Yes Reimbursable: Yes
SUMMARY
This bill extends most of the rights and responsibilities
available to married couples under state law to registered
domestic partners. Specifically, this bill:
1)Provides that, effective January 1, 2005, registered domestic
partners, former domestic partners, and surviving domestic
partners shall have the same rights, protections, and
benefits, and shall be subject to the same responsibilities,
obligations, and duties under state law as granted to, and
imposed upon, spouses, former spouses, and widows or widowers,
respectively, of a civil marriage. Among these rights are
laws regarding taxation, including joint filing of income tax
returns, marital tax exemptions, estate tax exemptions, and
non-reassessment of real property upon a spouse's death.
2)Provides that the rights and obligations of domestic partners
with respect to a child of either partner are the same as
those of former or surviving spouses in a civil marriage.
3)Repeals existing provisions for the termination of a domestic
partnership under specified circumstances and instead provides
for termination by: (a) filing a Notice of Termination of
Domestic Partnership with the Secretary of State (SOS) if
certain conditions are met, including that there are no
children involved and the domestic partnership is not more
than five years in duration; or (b) commencing proceedings for
dissolution, nullity, or legal separation in superior court.
4)Requires the SOS to notify all registered domestic partners,
prior to three specific dates, regarding the bill's changes to
law and also makes related and conforming changes to the
AB 205
Page 2
definition of "domestic partner" and the law relating to
domestic partners.
FISCAL EFFECT
1)General Fund revenue loss of up to several million dollars
annually from the joint filing of tax returns by domestic
partners. (The total annual revenue loss is unknown, but
would depend on the number of domestic partners each year who
elect to file joint instead of single returns, the incomes of
these individuals, and the tax savings each partnership
realizes. For example, there are currently almost 20,000
registered domestic partnerships. If 10 to 20 percent of
partnerships filed jointly and realized tax savings of $500 to
$1,000 each, the total state revenue loss would be $1 million
to $4 million.)
2)The SOS estimates one-time costs of about $50,000 to revise
forms, prepare and mail the required notifications, and modify
software.
COMMENTS
1)Purpose . This bill, sponsored by the Coalition for Pride and
Equality (CAPE), extends most of the rights and
responsibilities of marriage available under state law to
domestic partners. CAPE maintains that granting these rights
will help domestic partners to "care for each other and their
families, including community property, financial support
obligations, assumption of parenting responsibilities, and
mutual responsibility for debts. The bill will provide
crucial protections for children who deserve to have a fully
legalized relationship with both of their parents, and deserve
to have parents who have a recognized legal relationship to
each other."
The author indicates that the bill is intended to ensure that
domestic partners have the opportunity to obtain the rights,
protections, benefits, responsibilities, are obligations
regarding such laws relating to:
a) Domestic relations, including, but not limited to,
rights and obligations of financial support during and
after the relationship, community property, and evidentiary
privileges;
AB 205
Page 3
b) Child custody, visitation, and duties of financial
support of children;
c) Title and other incidents of the acquisition, ownership,
or transfer of real or personal property during life or at
death, as well as laws relating to access to student family
housing, senior citizen housing, and rent control
protections;
d) Obligations to make disclosures regarding spousal
relationships and to take other steps to prevent conflicts
of interest;
e) Government benefits, including, but not limited to,
workers' compensation, public assistance, transfer of
licenses upon death, and the ability to apply for absentee
ballots and other documents for a spouse;
f) Taxes, including, but not limited to, joint filing of
income tax returns, marital tax exemptions, estate tax
exemptions, and non-reassessment of real property upon a
spouse's death;
g) Health insurance coverage for family members, family
care and medical leave, bereavement leave, coverage of
family members under medical, dental, life, and disability
insurance, and spousal pension rights and death benefits;
h) Legal claims related to, or dependent upon, family
status, including, but not limited to, claims for loss of
consortium, and victim's compensation;
i) Anatomical gifts, consent to autopsy and disposition of
remains, and rights of burial in family cemeteries; and
j) Laws prohibiting marital status discrimination.
2)Rights Not Granted . Not all of the rights and
responsibilities available to and imposed upon married couples
will be extended to domestic partners under this bill. First,
the bill deals only with the rights and responsibilities
available under state and not federal law. Thus, none of the
1,049 federal protections, benefits, and responsibilities (per
U.S. General Accounting Office), such as social security,
AB 205
Page 4
Medicare, and federal tax considerations, would be extended to
domestic partners under this bill. Second, the bill provides
no assurance to domestic partners that their partnerships will
be legally recognized in other states. Third, this bill does
not address those rights and responsibilities available to
married couples under the California Constitution, initiative
statutes, or those statutes that have been established in ways
that cannot be changed by the Legislature with a bill passed
by a simple majority vote.
3)Opposition . The Committee on Moral Concerns states that the
bill will "expand domestic partnership laws to be equal with
marriage, thus creating gay marriages?Contrary to the bill's
language, California has a legitimate interest in not
legalizing gay marriages or expanding domestic partner laws."
The Campaign for California Families also opposes this
measure, opining that the bill will "essentially create
homosexual 'marriage' in California by awarding virtually all
the rights of marriage to 'domestic partners,' which are
overwhelmingly homosexual couples."
4)Prior Legislation . AB 26 (Migden)-Chapter 588/ Statutes of
1999, authorized domestic partnership registration in
California. AB 25 (Migden), Chapter 893/Statutes of 2001
granted limited rights to domestic partners in the areas of
hospital visitation and health benefits if one of the partners
is a state employee.
Analysis Prepared by : Chuck Nicol / APPR. / (916) 319-2081