California State Capitol Update from Assembly Appropriations Committee Hearing on Marriage

EQUALITY CALIFORNIA

California State Capitol Update from Assembly Appropriations Committee Hearing on Marriage Equality Bill

Wednesday, May 18, 2005
12:30 P.M.

The Assembly Appropriations Committee just finished hearing Equality California's
marriage equality bill, AB 19 by Assemblymember Mark Leno. The committee was
reviewing AB 19 for its potential fiscal impact on California's state budget and
economy, and they found out that it's a big plus for our state to treat people
equally.

We won't know the outcome of today's hearing until next week because AB 19 was
determined to affect the state budget by over $150,000, which automatically places
the bill in what is known as the "suspense file." It is actually very common for
bills with a fiscal impact to be placed in the suspense file. AB 19 will now be
voted by the committee next week once all bills have been heard. The eighteen member
Appropriations Committee has ten AB 19 co-authors and three other members who have
pledged to support the bill, and we are confident that it will be sent to the floor.

Today, Williams Project Executive Director Brad Sears testified before the
Appropriations Committee on the fiscal impact of AB 19. He testified that as the
result of sales tax revenues from same-sex weddings, tourism and savings from public
benefit programs, California would net up to $30 million each year by passing the
bill.

Sears also presented the committee with findings from a study co-authored by the
Williams Project, a think tank at UCLA School of Law, and the Institute for Gay and
Lesbian Strategic Studies (IGLSS) at the University of Massachusetts-Amherst. The
study was published earlier this month by the Stanford Law & Policy Review. (The
complete study can be accessed at the Williams Project website,
http://www.law.ucla.edu/williamsproject.)

"This study re-confirms the findings of at least nine other studies that have been
done during the past decade," said Sears. "All of these studies have shown that
recognizing the rights of same-sex couples will have a positive impact on federal or
state budgets."

Sears' study concludes that California will benefit from a boom in tourism if it is
among the first to extend marriage to gay and lesbian couples. When San Francisco
allowed couples to marry for one month last year, over 350 couples flew in from 46
states and 8 countries. The study finds that if same-sex marriage were permanently
offered, each year California would benefit from over $100 million in increased
business revenues, generating over $7 million in sales tax revenues for the state.

Forbes magazine has estimated that if same-sex marriage were legalized across the
U.S., gay weddings would generate $16.8 billion in spending during the first several
years.

In addition, there will be fiscal gains in state programs such as Medi-Cal and
CalWORKS because extending marriage to same-sex couples will mean that the income of
a person's same-sex married partner will be included when determining eligibility
for such programs. "Even if only a small percentage of individuals living with
partners marry and become ineligible for public benefits," said economist and study
co-author, Dr. M.V. Lee Badgett of the University of Massachusetts-Amherst.
"California is likely to reduce its expenditures on these programs by tens of
millions of dollars each year."

These positive consequences are offset, in part, by a decrease in income tax
revenues for the state. Under AB 205, the comprehensive domestic partnership law
that took effect on January 1, same-sex couples are not allowed to file jointly for
state taxes like married couple. As a result, a number of same-sex couples pay more
taxes than they would if allowed to file jointly.

Finally, the committee heard very poignant testimony from Marvin Burrows whose
partner of 51 years Bill died in March. For Marvin, the devastating loss of Bill was
made tragically worse by the lack of financial protection he doesn't have without
marriage. He'll soon have to move out of his home and try to cope with the severe
emotional and financial loss of losing Bill.

"AB 19 would have helped me deal with the issues that came up when I lost my partner
of 51 years...the only time we were apart was when I was in the Air Force," said Mr.
Burrows. "We never had separate bank accounts and always pooled our money. We wanted
to do everything possible to protect our relationship and became registered domestic
partners as soon as the forms were available."

Mr. Burrows concluded: "Because we were not allowed to marry, I've been denied his
pension, access to a spousal Social Security benefit, and would have to pay over
$750 a month to continue my health care insurance that I received through him. With
out these protections, I will have to move from my home. This legislation will give
LGBT Californian's the financial security that has not been there for me. It is too
late for Bill and me, but it is not too late for other gay and lesbian families in
California."

The opposition offered only the feeblest of fiscal arguments against AB 19. From the
committee, Assemblymember Joe Nation questioned the opposition's double standard by
asking why not stop other people from marrying too if it cost the state money.

The momentum is clearly on our side. Marriage equality is both the morally and
fiscally right thing to do for California. Please continue to contact your
Assemblymembers to support AB 19. You are making a tremendous difference for all
LGBT families.

Yours,

Steve Hansen
Associate Director of Legislative Affairs
Equality California


EQCA is a 501(c)4 organization to which donations are not deductible as charitable
contributions for income tax purposes.