March 25, 2009

Busy legislative session for Colorado Catholic Conference

Bills on tuition equity, domestic partnership and contraception of particular interest to Catholic community

By John Gleason

This legislative session, the Colorado Catholic Conference is involved with several bills winding their way through the legislative process. The conference is the state-level, public policy arm of the Catholic Church in Colorado. 

Jennifer Kraska, executive director of the conference, said bills addressing tuition equity, domestic partnership benefits and contraception are of particular interest.
Senate Bill 170, sponsored by Sen. Chris Romer, D-Denver, concerns nondiscrimination in determining the amount students pay for higher education if they have been part of the educational system in the state.

“The conference supports SB-170 because it gives students who went to school in Colorado the right to pay in-state tuition, regardless of immigration status,” she said. The conference looks at it this way: these kids didn’t make the decision to come to this country, this state, but they should be afforded the opportunity to pay the same tuition prices that any other student would pay.”

Kraska added that in the current form of the bill, no taxpayer dollars are used or being earmarked toward these students.

“It doesn’t give anyone automatic scholarships or grants,” she said. “It just allows them the chance to pay in-state tuition.”

Kraska said that the bill faces some opposition in both houses, but Gov. Bill Ritter has said he supports it and has indicated that he’ll sign it should it reach his desk.

House Bill 1260, the Designated Beneficiary Agreement, sponsored by Rep. Mark Ferrandino, D-Denver, and Sen. Jennifer Veiga, D-Adams County, would authorize two competent adults, who are not married, to enter into a designated beneficiary agreement, making each adult a designated beneficiary of the other.  In the absence of a legal document, a designated beneficiary agreement entitles each party to, among other things, be a proxy decision-maker, be treated as a dependent under the other designated beneficiary’s benefits for health insurance and have standing to sue for wrongful death of the other designated beneficiary. 

Initially opposed to the legislation, Kraska said the conference is now monitoring the bill as it is discussed in committee.

“We were successful at getting an amendment to the bill that took out language which would have recognized domestic partnerships and civil unions from other states,” Kraska said.  “Had the language been kept in, the conference would have opposed the legislation. As it stands now, the bill is not something the Church opposes per se.”

But Senate Bill 88, which would extend state employee group benefits to domestic partners of state employees, is opposed by the conference, Kraska said.

“This bill would define domestic partnership for the purposes of state employees receiving health benefits,” Kraska said.

The bill would have the effect of seeming to equate marital and non-marital unions, Kraska explained, and would contribute to the already serious loss of respect for and commitment to marriage and family life.

Senate Bill 88 has passed out of the House State, Veterans and Military Affairs Committee and will be going to the House Appropriations committee.

“The conference opposes this bill,” Kraska said, “and people need to be contacting their representatives about this.”

The bill receiving the most attention from the Colorado Catholic Conference so far this legislative session is Senate Bill 225, the Birth Control Protection Act, sponsored by Sen. Betty Boyd, D-Jefferson County, and Rep. Ann McGihon, D-Arapahoe County. The bill would define contraceptives or contraception as a medically acceptable drug, device or procedure used to prevent pregnancy.

“The conference is opposed to this bill,” Kraska said. “Sponsors say that contraception is not currently defined anywhere in our constitution. The reason they’re running this bill now is to prevent a personhood amendment from ever infringing on a woman’s right to contraceptives.  In 2008 a personhood amendment was defeated.  Had it passed, that amendment would have outlawed contraception.” 

At the meeting of the House Committee for Health and Human Services last week, Dr. Matt Luttrell, a physician from Fort Collins who specializes in emergency medicine, argued against SB-225. 

“The state of Colorado is trying to define pregnancy as implantation of the embryo in the uterus,” he told the committee, “but the medical reality is that pregnancy starts at conception.  Why is the state trying to redefine pregnancy as implantation rather than fertilization?”

Following testimony, which included support from Planned Parenthood, the committee passed SB-225 on a party line vote of 6-4.