Legal Voice - Legislative Updates Expanded

Legislative Updates

2012 Washington Legislative Session

Legislative Update #2

February 10, 2012

We just reached the halfway point of the Washington Legislature’s 2012 session, and it’s already been a session for the history books!

As you’ve no doubt heard, the House of Representatives passed the marriage equality bill on February 8th, following the Senate’s approval of the bill on February 1st. The Governor will sign the bill on Monday, February 13th, at 11:30 a.m. in the State Capitol Rotunda, and we’d love to see you there for this historic event! If you know you'll be able to join us in Olympia, please RSVP to Washington United for Marriage.

After fighting for years to extend civil marriage to loving and committed lesbian and gay couples, we are overjoyed that this day has finally come.

Of course, we know our opponents will try to repeal the legislation through a public referendum – just as they tried (and failed) to repeal Washington’s domestic partnership law three years ago in the Referendum 71 campaign. But we are ready for this fight. As a core member of the Washington United for Marriage coalition, you can be sure we won’t rest until we’ve won.

We’re also excited to report that the Reproductive Parity Act is continuing to move forward. This legislation (HB 2330/SB 6185) requires health plans in Washington to cover abortion services if they also cover maternity care or services. It will ensure that women in Washington retain existing protections and access to abortion services as the state moves to implement the federal health care reform law.

The Legislature is also ramping up efforts to close the state’s $1.5 billion budget gap. We strongly support efforts to ensure that new revenues are part of the budget solution. After cutting more than $10 billion from the state budget over the last three years, we simply can’t afford another “all cuts” budget that devastates programs serving women and their families. To learn more about the drastic impact of budget cuts on women in Washington, check out this report by the Washington State Budget and Policy Center.

So while we celebrate the victory for marriage equality, we still have a lot of work to do in the second half of this session! Please read on for more information about our priority bills and some of the other legislation that Legal Voice is following.

IN THIS EDITION:

CIVIL RIGHTS

SB 6239/HB 2516 Concerning civil marriage and domestic partnerships
Sponsors: Sen. Murray/Rep. Pedersen
Status: Senate approved 28-21 on Feb. 1. House approved 55-43 on Feb. 8. Governor will sign on Feb. 13 at 11:30 a.m. in the State Capitol.
Legal Voice position: Support

This legislation would extend civil marriage rights to loving and committed lesbian and gay couples in Washington. We strongly support this legislation. Legal Voice has fought for marriage equality for years, and we are thrilled that this dream is on the brink of becoming a reality in Washington. Although opponents of marriage equality have promised to seek a public referendum to repeal this legislation, we and our allies are ready to fight to defend marriage equality at the ballot box.

HEALTH AND REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS

HB 2330/SB 6185 Concerning health plan coverage for the voluntary termination of a pregnancy
Sponsors: Rep. Cody/Sen. Hobbs
Status: Approved by House Health Care & Wellness Committee on Jan. 26 and by House Ways & Means Committee on Feb. 6; approved by Senate Health & Long-Term Care Committee on Feb. 2.
Legal Voice position: Support

As states implement the federal health reform law, women face increased barriers in their ability to access basic reproductive health care; for example, the federal law allows states to ban abortion coverage in health insurance plans. This bill, the Reproductive Parity Act, would ensure that women in Washington State retain existing protections and access to care relating to their pregnancy options by providing that health plans that cover maternity care or services also must cover the voluntary termination of pregnancy.

HB 2200 Establishing the women’s right to know act
Sponsor: Rep. Ahern
Status: Did not receive a hearing and will not advance this session.
Legal Voice position: Oppose

This bill would have imposed mandatory disclosure requirements for women seeking abortions as well as abortion providers. Needless to say, we strongly opposed this legislation. The bill would have prohibited an abortion from being performed unless, within 24 hours of the abortion, the physician performing the abortion or a referring physician, orally and in person, provided the patient with specific disclosures, including information about alternatives to the abortion; the probable gestational age and probable anatomical and physiological characteristics of the fetus; and that abortion will end the life of an “unborn child.” The bill would have required the Department of Health to develop print materials containing this “information,” as well as a list of alternatives to abortion and contact information of agencies that offer alternatives to abortion. In addition, the department would have been required to develop a video showing an ultrasound of the heartbeat of a fetus at four to five weeks gestational age, at six to eight weeks gestational age, and each month thereafter until viability. The patient would have been required to certify in writing that she received and understood the information provided prior to the abortion.

EMPLOYMENT AND ECONOMIC RIGHTS

HB 2508/SB 6229 Establishing minimum standards for sick and safe leave from employment
Sponsors: Rep. Dickerson/Sen. Kohl-Welles
Status: Both bills received hearings, but neither bill advanced out of committee.
Legal Voice position: Support

This bill would have required employers with five or more workers to provide paid safe and sick leave to employees. We support this legislation. Women are more likely to be in low-income or part-time jobs and in the occupational sectors that are least likely to have access to paid sick days. In addition, while Washington law (RCW 49.76) requires employers to provide workers with reasonable leave to address the effects of domestic violence, sexual assault, and stalking, this leave is unpaid – and as a result, many are unable to use it. This bill would have required all employers with at least five full-time equivalent employees to provide paid sick leave to employees for their own or their family members’ illness. In addition, the bill would have provided for paid safe days for employees who need leave for reasons covered under RCW 49.76, as well as when the employee's place of business, or child's school or place of care is closed because of specified public health emergencies.

SB 6072 Protecting employees from conduct that violates public policy
Sponsor: Sen. Kline
Status: Hearing held Nov. 29 in Senate Judiciary Committee, but did not advance out of committee.
Legal Voice position: Support

This bill would have established a cause of action, separate from the common law tort of wrongful discharge, to protect employees and independent contractors from adverse actions in retaliation for conduct that promotes public policy. The wrongful discharge tort has been useful in protecting survivors of domestic violence, as courts have found that the state has a public policy against domestic violence. However, existing case law and statutes leave a gap in the remedies available to survivors of gender violence. We supported this bill because it would have helped deter employers from taking adverse action against employees who may miss work because they have taken steps to ensure their or their families’ safety.

SB 6153 Regarding school attendance of children whose parents or guardians receive state assistance
Sponsor: Sen. McAulliffe
Status: Amended version of the bill approved Feb. 2 by Senate Human Services & Corrections Committee.
Legal Voice position: Oppose original version of the bill; monitor the bill as amended.

As originally drafted, this bill would have required parents to ensure regular school attendance by their children as a condition of receiving state assistance, such as Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF). We opposed the original version of the bill because it would have put some of Washington’s most vulnerable women and children at risk of losing essential benefits. However, the bill has now been amended to provide that consistent school attendance by children of TANF recipients will only be an “outcome goal” under the TANF program, without making such attendance a condition of receiving benefits.

VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN

HB 2137 Addressing the transportation and storage of firearms and ammunition in privately owned motor vehicles
Sponsor: Rep. Blake
Status: Did not receive a committee hearing and will not advance this session.
Legal Voice position: Oppose

This bill would have restricted the ability of employers or businesses to prohibit firearms from being kept in vehicles on their property. We opposed this legislation because it would have limited the ability of employers to create strong and sensible workplace safety policies.

HB 2363 Protecting victims of domestic violence & harassment
Sponsor: Rep. Goodman
Status: Passed the House 97-0 on Feb. 9.
Legal Voice position: Support

This bill includes recommendations from a domestic violence workgroup convened by Representative Goodman. Legal Voice participated in the workgroup and supports this legislation. In particular, we strongly support provisions of the bill that will protect the confidentiality of domestic violence survivors and shelters. The bill places explicit restrictions on the ability of courts to require survivors to disclose their addresses or other confidential information to their abusers during court proceedings.

HB 2464 Enacting the stalking protection order act
Sponsor: Rep. Goodman
Status: Approved by House Judiciary Committee on Jan. 30, but did not advance out of the House Committee on General Government Appropriations.
Legal Voice position: Support with concerns

This bill would create a new civil protection order for stalking victims. Currently, the only protection order available to many stalking victims is an anti-harassment order. Those orders carry lower penalties for violation and are often given less enforcement priority than other types of protection orders. Legal Voice supported the bill as originally introduced. However, we are concerned about an amendment adopted by the House Judiciary Committee that narrowed the definition of stalking conduct under the bill. The bill failed to pass out of the House Committee on General Government Appropriations, so it is unlikely that it will move forward as a freestanding bill this session.

HB 2385/SB 6213 Concerning the disclosure of information of an address confidentiality program participant contained in state registered domestic partnership applications and records
Sponsors: Rep. Jinkins/Sen. Kline
Status: Approved by House State Government Committee on Jan. 25 and by Senate Judiciary Committee on Jan. 30.
Legal Voice Position: Support

This bill enables registered domestic partners in Washington to protect the confidentiality of public records regarding their domestic partnership if they are participants in the state Address Confidentiality Program (ACP). The ACP is a program that helps victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, and stalking obtain a safe, confidential address for voting and receiving mail.

SB 5019 Concerning the privacy of nonconviction records
Sponsor: Sen. Regala
Status: Hearing held Jan. 12 in Senate Human Services & Corrections Committee, but did not advance out of committee.
Legal Voice position: Support

We support provisions in this bill that would have restricted courts and other criminal justice agencies from making available publicly on the internet any information regarding the registration, filing, or issuance of an order for protection, if such publication would be likely to reveal the identity or location of the party protected by the order. This provision is consistent with requirements of the federal Violence Against Women Act and would have helped protect the confidentiality and safety of victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, and stalking who seek protection orders.

SB 6511 Concerning court procedures for review of protection orders
Sponsor: Sen. Stevens
Status: Hearing held in Senate Human Services & Corrections Committee on Feb. 2, but did not advance out of committee.
Legal Voice position: Oppose

This legislation would have required the rules of evidence to be strictly observed in proceedings to obtain domestic violence protection orders. We opposed this legislation because it would have made it more difficult for victims of domestic violence (most of whom are unrepresented by lawyers) to navigate the court process for obtaining protection orders.

FAMILY LAW

HB 2193 Concerning third-party visitation
Sponsor: Rep. Pedersen
Status: Approved by House Judiciary Committee on Jan. 19.
Legal Voice position: Support with concerns

This bill would allow persons who have a substantial relationship with a child to petition a court for visitation with the child. We support this legislation with concerns. In appropriate circumstances, we believe that an adult who has a substantial relationship with a child should be able to seek visitation. We also support many provisions of the bill that would prevent third-party visitation petitions from being misused to harass or impoverish parents. However, we have concerns about a provision in the bill that would require a party petitioning for visitation to pay attorney fees in advance to the party responding to the petition, unless the respondent does not have a financial hardship. In practice, this provision could exclude low-income persons from pursuing visitation.

HB 2279 Implementing changes to child support based on the child support schedule work group report
Sponsor: Rep. Moeller
Status: Approved by House Judiciary Committee on Jan. 30 and House Ways & Means Committee on Feb. 7.
Legal Voice position: Monitor

This bill would implement recommendations from a child support schedule workgroup convened by the state Division of Child Support. We support provisions in the bill that would update the economic table used to calculate child support. However, we have concerns about provisions in the original version of the bill regarding a “residential credit.” The residential credit provisions would have reduced a non-custodial parent’s child support obligations based on the number of nights per year that a child spends with the non-custodial parent. The original version of the bill included a mandatory and complex formula for determining the residential credit, which would be very difficult for unrepresented parties to understand. Although the residential credit provisions of the bill were removed by the House Judiciary Committee, we will continue to monitor the legislation to ensure that those provisions are not restored to the bill.

HB 2289 Establishing a flexible approach to child protective services
Sponsor: Rep. Kagi
Status: Approved by House Early Learning & Human Services Committee on Jan. 26 and by House Ways & Means Committee on Feb. 7.
Legal Voice position: Support

This bill would authorize DSHS to establish at least two sites to begin implementing “Family Assessment Response” (FAR) to respond to certain reports of child abuse and neglect. FAR would not include a determination of whether child abuse or neglect occurred, but would instead determine the need for services. The Washington State Institute for Public Policy would evaluate implementation sites and report the results to the Legislature. Using a FAR approach could help improve services to families and address the systemic overlap between domestic violence and child welfare.

HB 2392/SB 6344 Shared parenting responsibility
Sponsor: Rep. Chandler/Sen. Kastama
Status: Did not receive hearings in either house and will not advance this session.
Legal Voice position: Oppose

These bills, which are not identical, would have significantly altered the factors a court could consider when determining the residential schedule (custody) of children at the time of divorce. The legislation would have created a presumption of “shared parenting,” defined as the child spending at least 1/3 of the time with each parent. To overcome this presumption, the opposing parent would have borne the burden of proving that there are limiting factors such as domestic violence or that shared parenting would be detrimental to the child. SB 6344 also would have added a new factor for the court to consider when making a “custody” determination: which parent would be most likely to encourage frequent and continuing contact with the other parent (a.k.a. “friendly parent factor”). Legal Voice has long advocated for individualized parenting plans tailored to the specific needs of each child and his or her parents. Consequently, we do not support a statutory change that would institute shared parenting, as we believe this imposes a one-size-fits-all approach. We are also gravely concerned by proposals to add a “friendly parent factor” for the court’s consideration. We believe this would discourage parents from voicing concerns about the other parent for fear of being labeled “unfriendly” by the court. The implications for women and their children, domestic violence victims in particular, would be dire.

OTHER LEGISLATION OF INTEREST

HB 2196 Adopting the uniform collaborative law act
Sponsor: Rep. Eddy
Status: Passed House 95-0 on Jan. 23; referred to Senate Judiciary Committee.
Legal Voice position: Monitor

This bill would establish standards for the practice of collaborative law in Washington. The bill includes provisions to ensure that domestic violence victims do not participate in collaborative law proceedings unless their safety is reasonably assured.

SB 6095 Making technical corrections to gender-based terms
Sponsor: Sen. Kohl-Welles
Status: Approved by Senate on Jan. 27 by a vote of 44-0; referred to House Judiciary Committee.
Legal Voice position: Support

This bill is part of a multi-year effort to ensure that the Revised Code of Washington uses gender-neutral terms, unless a specification of gender is intended.

Legislative Update #1

January 31, 2011

The Washington Legislature has completed three weeks of the 2012 session, and we aren’t getting much sleep these days! This year is a short 60-day session that must end by March 8th. To meet that deadline, all policy bills must be voted out of committee no later than February 3rd to keep moving through the legislative process.

We’ve been so busy this session that we haven’t yet provided you with a full update of our work in Olympia. Please look for a complete legislative update next week. In the meantime, here’s a quick report on our two top legislative priorities this session: Marriage Equality and the Reproductive Parity Act.

As you’ve probably heard, marriage equality has strong momentum in the Legislature. The legislation (HB 2516 and SB 6239) will extend civil marriage to loving, committed lesbian and gay couples – a goal Legal Voice has been pursuing for years. We were elated when Governor Gregoire announced her strong support for marriage equality at the beginning of the month – and now a majority of members in both the Senate and the House have announced their support as well!

Marriage equality legislation has now passed out of committee in both houses. The full Senate is scheduled to vote on the legislation February 1st. We are expecting the debate to begin at 6:00 p.m., although the time is subject to change.

The Reproductive Parity Act is also moving forward with support in both houses. This legislation (HB 2330/SB 6185) provides that if health plans cover maternity care or services, they must also cover the voluntary termination of pregnancy. The bill would ensure that women in Washington retain existing protections and access to abortion services as the state moves to implement the federal health reform law.

The Legislature had hearings on the bill on January 19th, when most of Western Washington was shut down by snow. But we didn’t let the weather stop us! A strong pro-choice contingent made it through the snow to testify in favor of the bill and to show our support.

We’re glad to report that the Reproductive Parity Act has now passed out of committee in both the House and the Senate. We’re excited the bill is moving forward, and we will keep working with our allies to get it signed into law this year.

So while this session has been exhausting, we’re thrilled by the progress so far. Stay tuned for more information and a complete legislative update next week!

Special Session 2011

Special Session Update

December 21, 2011

December has been a busy month in Olympia! Last week, the Washington Legislature completed a 17-day special session devoted largely to budget issues. After the holidays, legislators will return to Olympia on Monday, January 9 for the regular 2012 legislative session.

During the special session, the Legislature made some progress in closing a $2 billion shortfall in the state budget. With bipartisan support, legislators approved a bill to reduce the budget gap by about $480 million, mostly through spending cuts and fund transfers. However, legislators still must find another $1.5 billion to close the remaining budget shortfall when they return to Olympia in January.

Legal Voice is part of a coalition called Our Economic Future advocating for a balanced, humane approach to the state budget – one that includes a full discussion of new revenue options. Over the last three years, the Legislature has cut more than $10 billion in state spending. We need new revenue to avoid even more devastating cuts to essential programs serving women and their families.

In addition to the budget debate, marriage equality will be a top issue facing the Legislature in 2012. Legal Voice is proud to serve on the governing committee of Washington United for Marriage, a coalition working to secure civil marriage for loving, committed lesbian and gay couples. As you know, Legal Voice fought for marriage equality in Washington for many years, and we are determined to make 2012 the year this vision becomes a reality. You can help by help by clicking here to send a message to your legislators.

Of course, we will also be working in the Legislature on the full range of issues facing women and their families, including women’s health, reproductive rights, economic equality, and violence against women. Starting in January, we will be providing regular legislative updates throughout the session.

We look forward to keeping you informed about our work in Olympia in 2012! In the meantime, best wishes for a happy holiday season.