HOUSE BILL REPORT
2SHB 3104
This analysis was prepared by non-partisan legislative staff for the use of legislative members in
their deliberations. This analysis is not a part of the legislation nor does it constitute a
statement of legislative intent.
As Passed House:
February 15, 2008
Title: An act relating to expanding rights and responsibilities of all couples recognized as domestic partners under chapter 26.60 RCW.
Brief Description: Expanding rights and responsibilities for domestic partnerships.
Sponsors: By House Committee on Finance (originally sponsored by Representatives Pedersen, Hankins, Moeller, Walsh, Linville, Takko, Upthegrove, Kessler, Jarrett, Ericks, Wallace, Grant, Eickmeyer, Quall, Clibborn, Dunshee, Lantz, Sullivan, Simpson, Blake, Hunter, Roberts, Rolfes, Williams, Sells, Schual-Berke, Springer, Eddy, Hunt, Hudgins, Santos, Cody, Seaquist, Fromhold, Nelson, McIntire, Chase, Hasegawa, Appleton, Darneille, Haigh, Sommers, Dickerson, Kirby, Wood, Flannigan, Conway, Goodman, Kenney, Kagi, Ormsby, Loomis, McCoy, Barlow, O'Brien, Pettigrew, Morris, Liias and VanDeWege).
Brief History:
Judiciary: 1/29/08, 1/30/08 [DPS];
Finance: 2/6/08 [DP2S].
Floor Activity:
Passed House: 2/15/08, 62-32.
Brief Summary of Second Substitute Bill |
|
HOUSE COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY
Majority Report: The substitute bill be substituted therefor and the substitute bill do pass. Signed by 7 members: Representatives Lantz, Chair; Goodman, Vice Chair; Flannigan, Kirby, Moeller, Pedersen and Williams.
Minority Report: Do not pass. Signed by 4 members: Representatives Rodne, Ranking Minority Member; Warnick, Assistant Ranking Minority Member; Ahern and Ross.
Staff: Trudes Tango (786-7384).
HOUSE COMMITTEE ON FINANCE
Majority Report: The second substitute bill be substituted therefor and the second substitute bill do pass. Signed by 6 members: Representatives Hunter, Chair; Hasegawa, Vice Chair; Conway, Ericks, McIntire and Santos.
Minority Report: Do not pass. Signed by 3 members: Representatives Orcutt, Ranking Minority Member; Condotta, Assistant Ranking Minority Member; Roach.
Staff: Rick Peterson (786-7150).
Background:
Last year the Legislature created a domestic partnership registry in the Office of the Secretary
of State (Secretary), specified eligibility requirements for same-sex couples and some
qualifying different-sex couples to register, and granted certain rights and responsibilities to
registered domestic partners. Those rights and responsibilities generally involved areas of
law dealing with health care decision-making; powers of attorney; rights and responsibilities
related to the death of a domestic partner; and other provisions.
A state registered domestic partnership may be terminated by either party filing a signed,
notarized notice of termination with the Secretary and paying a filing fee. If the notice of
termination is not signed by both parties, the party seeking termination must also file an
affidavit stating that service of the notice on the other party has been made.
Upon receipt of the notice of termination, filing fee, and affidavit, the Secretary must register
the notice of termination and provide a certificate of termination to each party. The
termination is effective 90 days after the date of filing the notice. A state registered domestic
partnership is automatically terminated if either party subsequently enters into a marriage,
with each other or another person, that is recognized as valid in this state.
Summary of Second Substitute Bill:
Various rights and responsibilities that are granted to spouses are granted to state registered
domestic partners. The process for terminating a domestic partnership is changed. Before
the effective date of the act, the Secretary must send a letter to registered domestic partners
notifying them that laws affecting domestic partnerships have changed. A legal union
between a same-sex couple, other than a marriage, that is created in a different state and that
is substantially equivalent to a Washington domestic partnership shall be recognized in
Washington.
Termination of Domestic Partnerships
To terminate a domestic partnership, a domestic partner must file a petition for dissolution in
superior court and follow the same procedures applicable to dissolution of marriages. Once a
month, the State Registrar of Vital Statistics must submit a list of persons who have dissolved
their domestic partnerships to the Secretary.
Parties may use a nonjudicial termination process by filing a notice of termination with the
Secretary if, at the time of filing the notice:
(1) both parties desire that the domestic partnership be terminated and both have signed the
notice of termination;
(2) neither party has minor children, whether born or adopted before or after the domestic
partner registration and neither party is pregnant;
(3) the domestic partnership is not more than five years in duration;
(4) neither party has any ownership interest in real property and neither party leases a
residence (except a lease of a residence occupied by either party that terminates in a year
and does not include an option to buy);
(5) there are no unpaid obligations over $4,000 incurred by either or both parties after the
domestic partnership registration, except for debts on a vehicle (this threshold amount
will be adjusted for inflation every two years);
(6) the total fair market value of community property assets, minus any encumbrances, is less
than $25,000 and neither party has separate property assets in excess of $25,000 (adjusted
for inflation);
(7) the parties have executed an agreement establishing the division of assets and debts and
have executed any documents to effectuate the agreement; and
(8) the parties waive any rights to maintenance by the other party.
A domestic partnership is no longer automatically terminated if the parties enter into a
marriage recognized in this state with another person.
Rights and Responsibilities
Rights and responsibilities granted to spouses in various areas of law are extended to state
registered domestic partners. The amended statutes generally involve: dissolutions;
community property; estate planning; taxes; court process; services to indigent veterans and
other public assistance; conflicts of interest for public officials; and guardianships. The
following is a list of the broad categories and a summary description of some of the changes
made in each category.
Dissolution, Parenting Plans, Child Support
Community Property and Other Property Rights
Judicial Process and Victim's Rights
Taxes
Public Officials
Public Assistance
Veterans
Guardianship and Powers of Attorney
Probate and Trust Law
Notice to Registered Domestic Partners
Sixty days before the effective date of the act, and again 30 days before the effective date, the
Secretary must send a letter to the mailing address of each registered domestic partner
notifying the person that Washington's laws will change. The letter must state that persons
who do not wish to be subject to the new rights and responsibilities must terminate their
domestic partnership before the effective date of the act.
Appropriation: None.
Fiscal Note: Available.
Effective Date: The bill takes effect 90 days after adjournment of session in which bill is passed, except section 1043, which reinstates prior law related to mediation in family law cases after a scheduled expiration and takes effect January 1, 2009, and section 1047, relating to family court programs, which takes effect July 1, 2009.
Staff Summary of Public Testimony: (Judiciary)
(In support) Over 3,300 couples have registered since last year, and they come from every
district in the state. The bill addresses the injustice to same-sex couples who are not allowed
to marry. Domestic partnerships will be more stable and secure under this bill. This bill does
not amend the marriage statutes and does not eliminate the Defense of Marriage Act.
Providing a dissolution process for domestic partners is important when domestic partners
have children together and share assets, and the current dissolution process is a well-known
system already in place. Currently there is no legal roadmap for courts to follow when
same-sex couples separate and the process of figuring it out in court is costly and confusing.
The state should honor all of its veterans equally. The veterans rights are limited in scope
and would apply to different-sex domestic partners too. There are rights and responsibilities
that cannot be obtained by private contract, such as homestead exemptions and community
property laws. Domestic partners should be able to stay together in long-term care facilities
and should be treated with the same respect and fairness as married couples. This bill is
about loyalty and commitment.
(Opposed) This bill is a movement to normalize abnormal behavior. It is unhealthy for the
culture. Polls show that the majority of citizens in Washington do not want same-sex
marriage. This issue should be a referendum to the people to let them decide. Although all
people are valued, this bill would be destructive to traditional marriage. Marriage is designed
to promote stable families, which in turn produce stable societies. The Legislature should not
weaken marriage, which historically has always been between a man and a woman. This bill
is a step towards legalizing same-sex marriage and the proponents are very clear that is the
goal. The bill violates the spirit of the Defense of Marriage Act.
Staff Summary of Public Testimony: (In Support) The bill will allow transfer of the home
title to a domestic partner without real estate excise tax applying. For purposes of a loan,
banks will not take into consideration the income of a domestic partner unless that person is
on the title. The property tax deferral provisions are important. They will allow a domestic
partner to take over a property tax deferral and remain in the home in case of a financial
emergency. This bill is an essential step toward achieving equal treatment for all families.
(Opposed) The bill will be financially destructive to all families in Washington. It will be
destructive to state and county. Many countries in Western Europe are ahead of us in
approving domestic partnerships. Not a single county in Europe has a fertility rate that can
sustain their own population. Financially and taxwise this bill undermines, and does not
undergird, the concept of marriage and relationships. It will not make marriage more stable.
Persons Testifying: (Judiciary) (In support) Representative Pedersen, prime sponsor; Leah
Shultz; Andrew Kamins; Mark Anderson; Judy Fleissner; and Carol McKinley.
(Opposed) Yoshe Revelle; Arne Walker, Family Policy Institute of Washington; Bob Higley;
and Tony Cube, Washington Catholic Conference.
Persons Testifying: (Finance) Representative Pedersen, prime sponsor; Jan Abbott Lighty;
Hank Balson; and Bill Bubay.
(Opposed) Don Crawford and Arne Walker, Family Policy Institute of Washington.