No Maryland state employees enrolled their same-sex spouses for health benefits during the state’s first enrollment period for gay couples, according to Gov. Martin O’Malley’s office.
The state’s Office of Budget and Management opened the special enrollment period for same-sex couples following a February mandate from Attorney General Douglas F. Gansler that state agencies begin recognizing out-of-state gay marriages.
Although no one enrolled their same-sex partners for benefits, a handful of gay couples submitted their marriage certificates for the record.
“We have received a number of marriage certificates from employees already receiving domestic partner benefits, which means the only change would be that they would be in the system recognized as ‘married,’ ” said O’Malley spokesman Shaun Adamec. The state has received fewer than 10 certificates, but more may have been submitted that have not been processed, he said.
Maryland already extends health benefits to same-sex couples who register as “domestic partners” — meaning they share a bank account and home address, and agree to sign a contract saying they have been in a relationship for at least one year.
The state’s policy change does not award additional benefits to domestic partners. It simply removes the registration legwork, requiring only a marriage certificate to obtain joint health insurance.
Del. Heather Mizeur, D-Silver Spring, attributed the lack of enrollment to a federal tax on domestic partners’ health benefits policies, making insurance for gay couples more costly than for straight couples.
“It’s cheaper for us to pay for [my partner] to be on a separate plan at our firm than enroll her in the state plan because the federal government doesn’t recognize our relationship.”
The federal government taxes domestic partner benefits as additional income. Domestic partners pay an average $1,068 more annually in taxes than married employees with the same coverage, according to a study by two liberal think tanks — the Williams Institute at UCLA’s law school and the Center for American Progress.
“If my partner didn’t have access to health care any other way, I absolutely would have enrolled and paid the tax penalty,” Mizeur said.
