Adjusting the state-tax code to reflect changing social mores is a combination of rote administrative updating and wrought political discomfort if those evolving values remain hot-button issues. That dynamic is consistent in the Colorado Legislature’s work to update the tax code allowing same-sex married couples to file jointly on their state-income tax returns. The Colorado Senate passed the measure Wednesday along party lines, and with predictable oppositional rhetoric.
Senate Bill 19, sponsored by Sen. Pat Steadman, D-Denver, brings Colorado tax code in line with federal rules that recognize married couples – same-sex or otherwise – by requiring that taxpayers’ filing status be consistent on federal and state tax returns. Under the measure, married couples that file jointly on their federal returns will do so on their state returns as well. It is a matter of consistency, more than anything, but opponents of same-sex marriage regard it as something much more menacing.
Steadman’s measure does not affect couples in civil unions – which Colorado allows, while expressly prohibiting gay marriage – it extends to couples that have married in other states but now file income taxes in Colorado. Opponents of SB 19 see it as an end-run around the state’s constitutional ban on gay marriage. Sen. Pat Harvey, R-Highlands Ranch, took the lead with that line of argument. “We have an eight-page bill that does nothing but strike the word marriage out of state statute,” Harvey said. “This is a direct attack on the institution of marriage.”
That is a slightly alarmist reaction to what amounts to administrative housekeeping that puts Colorado and federal tax policy on level planes. The measure does not apply to couples who have entered civil unions – in Colorado or elsewhere – and as such is in keeping with Colorado and federal policy that does not recognize the unions as a tax-filing status change. It simply says that couples must file their state taxes just as they do their federal filings. Steadman summed it up succinctly: “I don’t think this really rises to the level of something that’s an attack on marriage.”
Nevertheless, all 16 Senate’s Republicans voted against SB 19 – making particularly partisan hash out of what should be a relatively mundane issue. The debate about same-sex partnerships – marriage, civil unions or otherwise – has unfolded in almost real-time, with most reasonable people content to let others live, and let live. Those steadfastly opposed to the notion seem to have little else to offer, except for the shaky contention that same-sex unions pose some threat to heterosexual couples. How exactly that works is unclear, and how it applies to state or federal tax code is even more so. That 16 state senators seem to have accepted that line of thinking in voting against SB 19 is not altogether impressive.
The measure now moves to the House, where it is sponsored by Rep. Dominick Moreno, D-Commerce City, and Rep. Joann Ginal, D-Fort Collins. It deserves prompt passage, without the partisanship it faced in the Senate.
