Richard Neidich (left) and Edward Horvath were
married in Massachusetts last June. They were criticized by some local gay activists
for subjecting D.C. gays to possible retribution by Congress.
Equality Maryland prepares for November battle at ballot box
Brauchli to replace oft-criticized Downie in September
Gay couples close to ‘legal parity with marriage under law’
advertisement
advertisement
|
LOU CHIBBARO JR.
Friday, April 22, 2005
D.C. Attorney General Robert Spagnoletti startled gay activists and raised the
volume in the city’s debate over gay marriage recognition on April 14 when
he said same-sex couples married in Massachusetts could file a joint D.C. tax
return.
But Spagnoletti tempered his statement, which he released through his staff,
by adding that the D.C. Office of Tax & Revenue reserves the authority to
review joint returns filed by same-sex couples to determine whether they should
be accepted or rejected.
The city’s chief financial officer, Natwar M. Gandhi, who is in charge
of the tax office, told the Washington Post he would discuss the matter with
Mayor Anthony Williams and Spagnoletti to determine how the tax office should
respond if a married same-sex couple files a joint return.
Spagnoletti, who is gay, said through a spokesperson that he issued his statement
in response to a request from a gay male couple in D.C. who were married in
Massachusetts last June.
The two men, Edward G., Horvath, 54, and Richard G. Neidich, 64, contacted
Spagnoletti with the help of gay D.C. Councilmember Jim Graham (D-Ward 1) after
trying unsuccessfully to obtain advice on a joint tax return from the Office
of Tax & Revenue, according to Horvath.
“We are not asking D.C. to legalize gay marriage at this time,”
Horvath said. “We are asking the mayor to recognize same-sex couples who
marry in Massachusetts or any other state that legalizes same-sex marriages.”
Vince Morris, the mayor’s press secretary, said Williams would join Spagnoletti
and Gandhi to review the “entire issue” of whether the city has
the authority to recognize same-sex marriages issued by other states.
Horvath’s and Neidich’s request for a joint D.C. tax return and
recognition of their marriage comes one year after Spagnoletti conducted research
and issued a private legal opinion to the mayor on the question of whether D.C.’s
existing laws give the city authority to recognize gay marriages from Massachusetts.
Sources familiar with the mayor’s office speculated that the Spagnoletti
opinion affirms that city law not only allows, but requires the city to recognize
any legally issued marriage from another state, including a same-sex marriage.
Williams initially said he planned to release Spagnoletti’s opinion last
July. He changed his mind after some gay activists argued that D.C. recognition
of gay marriages would likely prompt Congress to intervene by changing the District’s
law to prevent such recognition.
The Gay & Lesbian Activists Alliance, which has led efforts to curtail
marriage recognition for the time being, issued a statement this week criticizing
Horvath and Neidich for subjecting D.C. gays to possible retribution by Congress
over the marriage issue.
Rick Rosendall, GLAA’s vice president for political affairs, said in
the April 20 statement that GLAA strongly supports full equal marriage rights
for gays but doesn’t support “pushing for it in D.C. at the present
time due to the political situation.”
Rosendall said Graham’s advocacy last year for the mayor to recognize
gay marriages from Massachusetts was also placing D.C. gays at risk for losing
domestic partnership benefits it already enjoys through possible congressional
intervention.
“What Councilmember Graham was pushing all last year for the District
to do, and what Ed Horvath and Richard Neidich want the D.C. government to do,
is the political equivalent of sailing down the Potomac River on a flaming barge,”
Rosendall said.
Graham defended his stance on the issue.
“There are those, for political reasons, who want to contain this issue,”
Graham said this week. “I understand that as a political strategy. But
in some cases, it’s uncontainable.”
Graham said he could not stop Horvath and Neidich from seeking a legal opinion
on their request to file a joint D.C. tax return. Once Spagnoletti issued his
statement advising the two men they could file a joint return, with the stipulation
that the tax office might not accept it, Graham said, the issue became open
for further discussion.
“Should we have withheld that information from the rest of the community?”
Graham said. “I think not.”
At Spagnoletti’s direction, his chief of staff, Pamela Satterfield, sent
Horvath an e-mail dated April 14, explaining the attorney general’s response
to the gay couple’s question about a joint D.C. tax return.
“Same-sex married spouses may file a joint D.C. Form 40 if they hold
a good-faith belief that they are a validly married couple under the laws of
Massachusetts,” Satterfield wrote. “The Office of Tax & Revenue
reserves the authority to review the return for its legal validity under D.C.
law upon receipt of the return in order to determine whether D.C. will accord
recognition to the out-of-state marriage,” Satterfield wrote. “This
review may include proof of marriage, including date and place of the marriage.”
In a separate e-mail to Graham, Spagnoletti stated, “As you can see from
the response we sent to Mr. Horvath on April 14, validly married same-sex couples
may file a joint D.C. Form 40.”
Horvath, who works for the federal government, said he received messages of
support from other gay rights groups over the tax issue, including at least
one national group, but he declined to identify them, saying he would rather
leave it to the groups to issue their own statements at a time they deem appropriate.
David Smith, vice president of the Human Rights Campaign, the nation’s
largest gay political group, called Spagnoletti’s statement on joint tax
filings for married gay couples “an isolated situation unique to D.C.”
“Its national significance is minimal,” Smith said. “But
anything that happens in D.C. has an impact on what Congress does,” he
said. “So the political impact can lead to complications that must be
considered.”
The National Gay & Lesbian Task Force did not respond to a request for
comment by press time.
Although GLAA does not support efforts to push for marriage recognition at
the present time, other local activists said they were pleased with Horvath
and Neidich’s request for recognition of their marriage.
“At some point you just have to take a stand,” D.C. gay activist
Phil Pannell said. “I can understand being careful about the prevailing
political climate. But a time comes when you just have to take a stand,”
he said. “If you get knocked down, you get up and keep fighting.”
Gay Democratic activist Peter Rosenstein, who has served as an adviser to Williams,
said he is sympathetic to GLAA’s concerns about congressional intervention
but said he has urged the mayor to recognize same-sex marriages from Massachusetts
because existing D.C. law clearly calls for such recognition.
“It can’t be suppressed if it’s legal to do this under D.C.
law,” Rosenstein said. “If these two gentlemen file a tax return,
you can’t suppress a rule that comes out of that. So I believe the mayor
will be forced to make some type of formal decision this year.”
GLAA has argued that the D.C. Council and the mayor have approved a number
of recent advances in domestic partnership benefits for same-sex couples in
the District. The group has proposed that the city incrementally expand the
rights, benefits and obligations for domestic partners until their rights approach
those enjoyed by married couples.
Congress, which blocked the implementation of the city’s first domestic
partners law for nearly 10 years, has allowed the city to expand on that law
without interference in recent years. GLAA says this incremental approach is
the best possible route to take until anti-gay sentiment in the Republican-controlled
Congress subsides.
Lou Chibbaro Jr. can be reached at lchibbaro@washblade.com.
|
