AB 25 passed its final hurdle before being sent to the governor. The Assembly voted 41-32 for the bill. This was the second vote by the Assembly. It had previously passed the Assembly before being sent to the Senate. However, the Senate offered several amendments. As a result of those amendments, the bill had to go back to the Assembly for their final approval.
The bill is now on Governor Gray Davis' desk. He can do one of three things: Sign the bill into law, do nothing and allow it to become law, or veto the bill.
Action Needed:
Governor gray Davis signed AB 25 into law on October 15, 2001.
This is the first time in California’s history that our state legislature and governor have passed legislation granting domestic partnerships equal status with marriage in certain instances. The bill totally undermines the intent of Proposition 22, which passed by almost 62% of the vote and stated that California’s voters believe marriage is between one man and one woman. An overwhelming number of Californians issued a strong statement that the legislators who passed AB 25 and the governor have chosen to ignore."
Assembly Bill 25, authored by Carole Migden (D-San Francisco) is another attack on the basic institution of marriage. AB 25 grants wide-scale provisions to same sex couples that have historically been accorded only to married couples. Among the myriad provisions included in this bill are the following:
Extends group health care insurance for a “domestic partner”
(This places those who are considered “high risk” due to sexual practices in the same insurance pool as low-risk workers, i.e., married couples. Insurance rates will rise.)
Gives income tax deductions in certain instances
Grants employee sick-leave benefits for a “domestic partner or child of a domestic partner” (This will elevate costs to employers.)
Defines “good cause” for the purposes of unemployment benefits to a same-sex partner to include: “the act of accompanying one’s domestic partner to a place from which it is impractical to commute and to which a transfer by the employer is not available” (Taxpayers will bear the brunt of paying for this new designation.)
Entitles “domestic partners” to collect damages for “negligent infliction for emotional distress to the same extent that spouses are entitled” under current California law
Includes domestic partner on a par with a spouse or children for a legal cause of action for the death of a partner (What would happen if the domestic partner had a former spouse and/or children? Would this law pit them against one another in any “cause of action” as the result of a death? Who would have precedence?)
Other provisions include numerous beneficiary clauses including references to wills and the preference of conservatorship to domestic partners. It should be noted that same-sex couples already have the right to make many of these decisions and don’t need additional legislation to give them these “protections.”
