OLYMPIA — Lawmakers are looking to expand the state’s domestic partnership law by granting same-sex couples more than 170 of the benefits and responsibilities given to married couples, including property and guardianship rights.
Sen. Ed Murray, D-Seattle, who sponsored the original domestic partnership measure last year, is sponsoring the expansion bill in the Senate this year; Rep. Jamie Pedersen, D-Seattle, is sponsoring the measure in the House. A news conference to announce the bill was planned for today at on the Capitol campus.
“It’s a significant piece of legislation, but it still leaves hundreds of rights and benefits and responsibilities of marriage out,” Murray said, noting that the bill covers only a fraction of the 485 rights and responsibilities married couples have.
The 199-page bill makes several changes to state law, including requiring domestic partners of public officials to submit financial disclosure forms, just as the spouses of heterosexual officials do.
The measure also would give domestic partners the same spousal testimony rights that married couples have, allowing domestic partners the right to refuse to testify against each other in court.
The bill makes changes to 173 sections of state law, adding domestic partners to sections where previously only spouses were mentioned, including sections about probate and trusts, community property and homestead exemptions, and guardianship and powers of attorney.
“The overriding theme for this package is the financial security of domestic partners and their families,” Pedersen said. “A lot of this is tied to letting people organize their affairs so they are secure financially.”
The process of ending a domestic partnerships also would be changed, allowing the secretary of state to end partnerships only in the first five years, with several more restrictions relating to children, real property or unpaid debts.
All other partnerships would be dissolved in superior court — similar to conventional divorce.
The underlying domestic partnership law already provides hospital visitation rights, the ability to authorize autopsies and organ donations, and inheritance rights when there is no will.
To be registered as partners, couples must share a home, must not be married or in a domestic relationship with someone else, and be at least 18.
In a provision similar to California law, unmarried heterosexual senior couples also are eligible for domestic partnerships if one partner is at least 62. Lawmakers said that provision was included to help seniors who are at risk of losing pension rights and Social Security benefits if they remarry.
As of Friday, 3,246 domestic partnership registrations had been filed since the law took effect last July, and three partnerships have been dissolved, according to the secretary of state’s office.
“They’re in every district in the state,” Pedersen said. “Those are real people that every legislator can put a face on.”
Murray and Pedersen, two of the Legislature’s five openly gay lawmakers, said they had the support of Democratic leadership for the measure. And while Gov. Chris Gregoire hasn’t yet seen the bill, she is supportive of expanding the domestic partnership law, spokesman Aaron Toso said.
Some opponents have argued that the domestic partnerships dilute traditional marriage; others have said the original law was unnecessary because most of the rights being offered could be acquired by legal contract.
Rep. Dan Newhouse, R-Sunnyside, who voted against the original bill, said this year’s expansion attempt is no surprise, since supporters said last year that they would introduce new rights every year.
“It wasn’t unexpected, and certainly the proponents have been honest about what their goals are,” he said.
Newhouse said until he sees the bill, he couldn’t comment on what his stance would be this year. Senate Republicans wouldn’t offer comment until they saw the bill, either.
The bill is a continuing effort to expand rights for gays and lesbians in the state. In 2006, Murray spearheaded a gay civil rights bill that became law after nearly 30 years of failure in the Legislature.
That measure added “sexual orientation” to a state law that bans discrimination in housing, employment, insurance and credit on the basis of such characteristics as race and religion.
Supporters acknowledge that full gay marriage is their ultimate goal, but say they don’t want to rush the state into taking that step.
“If you just have a debate around the word ‘marriage’ it’s harder to do than if you break out individual parts of it and have a long discussion,” Murray said. “Because really, the culture is changing, and the politics has to catch up with the culture.”
The state Supreme Court upheld Washington’s ban on same-sex marriage in a 5-4 decision in 2006, ruling that state lawmakers were justified in passing the 1998 Defense of Marriage Act, which restricts marriage to unions between a man and a woman.
Murray said gay-rights supporters will come back every year to introduce new rights until eventually they get to marriage.
“We’re having this discussion around family security and property and nursing homes not because we want domestic partnerships, but because we want marriage,” he said. “Our hope is that having these discussions is going to allow us in the next several years to have a vote within the Legislature on marriage equality for gay and lesbian Washingtonians.”
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
