Vermont Senate gives final approval to gay unions legislation

Wednesday, April 19th 2000, 12:00 am

By: News On 6

MONTPELIER, Vt. (AP) -- A bill that would create the closest thing in America to gay marriage won final approval in the state Senate today. The bill now returns to the House for consideratio nof changes to the House-approved version.

The 19-11 vote mirrored preliminary approval that was given to the bill on Tuesday.

Stopping short of recognizing gay marriages, the measure would enable gay couples to form "civil unions" that would entitle them to all 300 or so rights and benefits available under state law to married couples. There was no guarantee other states would recognize the unions, but no residency requirement that would bar couples from other states from coming here to unite at least symbolically.

Democratic Gov. Howard Dean has said he will sign the bill.

The biggest difference between the House and Senate bills is the effective date. Under the Senate proposal, the first civil unions could take place beginning July 1. The House set the date two months later.

Before today's vote, senators turned aside one amendment that would have stated in state law that one of the central purposes of marriage is procreation.

Only about two dozen people lined the Senate galleries today, in contrast to crowds that filled corridors on Tuesday. Most of them wore pink stickers signaling their support for the bill.

There was little reaction in the chamber when the vote total was announced by Lt. Gov. Douglas Racine, but once the Senate adjourned, there were hugs and tears.

"It's great that it passed," said Beth Robinson, one of the lawyers who successfully argued before the Supreme Court that gay and lesbian couples were being unconstitutionally denied the benefits of marriage.

"What's greater to me is the margin by which it passed," Robinson said. "That shows me the Senate understands that gays and lesbians need and deserve the same protections as heterosexuals in our society and that's a great breakthrough."

House Speaker Michael Obuchowski said today he would hold the House vote next Tuesday and was confident it would win final approval in that chamber.

The state Supreme Court set the stage for the legislation with its unanimous December ruling that same-sex couples were being unconstitutionally denied the benefits of marriage.

Under the new legislation, gay and lesbian couples could obtain a license from their town clerks and then have their unions certified by a judge or member of the clergy.

They then would qualify for the wide array of benefits available to married couples, from being able to make medical decisions on behalf of their partners to qualifying for certain tax breaks.

The couples would have to accept the burdens, as well. To breakup a civil union, couples would have to go through Family Court to obtain dissolutions, just as when married couples divorce. Couples would have to accept the joint debts of their partners, as well.

Gay couples would still not be entitled to the federal benefits available to married couples in such areas as taxes and Social Security.

And unlike marriage, civil unions might not be recognized in other states.

At least 30 states have banned gay marriages, and Congress passed the Defense of Marriage Act, which denied federal recognition of homosexual marriage and allowed states to ignore same-sex marriages licensed elsewhere.

"If people want to fly in for the weekend and get a civil unio nlicense and fly home, it's unlikely they're going to have their home state give it any legal recognition," House Judiciary Committee chairman Thomas Little has said.

Supporters refused to add a residency requirement to the bill, arguing it would be potentially unconstitutional. They also said that Vermont should not stand in the way if an out-of-state couple wanted to get the legal recognition that Vermont would offer under civil unions. There is a residency requirement for obtaining dissolution of the union.

On Tuesday, senators had debated whether civil unions would eventually led to gay marriage or whether they would threaten traditional marriage.

"If this bill passed, would it have the tendency to encourage homosexuality?" wondered Republican Sen. John Crowley.

Sen. James Leddy said civil unions would not undermine his 28-year marriage -- or anyone else's.

"There's nothing in this court decision, nothing in this bill, nothing in the committed relationships of two people that presents a threat to my marriage," the Democrat said.

Tuesday's Senate debate lacked much of the passion displayed during 17 hours of debate last month in the House, where the Legislature's only openly gay member spoke several times, drawing tears to the eyes of many observers.

National groups quickly weighed in after Tuesday's preliminary Senate vote.

"It's a tragic day for the state of Vermont, for the Senate has ignored the will of the people," Janet Parshall of the Family Research Council said in a statement. "But it's an even sadder day for the state of marriage, for the Senate action today was a direct assault. A gay rights organization cheered Tuesday's vote.

"Vermont is taking care of its gay and lesbian citizens in away that other states are not," said David Smith of the Human Rights Campaign. "Vermont is restating its commitment to fairness by today's action."

------
On the Net:
Vermont Legislature: http://www.leg.state.vt.us
Family Research Council: http://www.frc.org
Human Rights Campaign: http://www.hrc.org