Should gay couples be paid more than straight couples?
Cambridge, Mass., reimburses married gay employees for a tax their heterosexual counterparts don't have to pay — raising questions about political correctness

The city of Cambridge, Mass., has become the first in the country to pay workers a stipend to cover a federal tax on health benefits for their same-sex spouses. Twenty-two married gay school and city employees opted to add their spouses to their employer-provided health insurance, but the federal government considers the value of that health coverage taxable income because the couples are in homosexual relationships. The 22 individuals covered by Cambridge's new policy pay an extra $1,500 to $3,000 in taxes annually. Picking up the tab will cost the city $33,000 a year. "This is about equality," says Marjorie Decker, a Cambridge city councilor. Is it fair to put something extra in the paychecks of gay couples?
No, it is about political correctness: If this were about fairness, says Joe Carter at First Things, Cambridge would also be paying the extra tax for unmarried workers who pay taxes for their dependents covered under the city's health insurance benefits. It doesn't, of course, because "this isn’t really about equal pay for equal work. This was merely a publicity stunt by the city of Cambridge to signal what side of the politically-correct divide they are on."
"Extra pay for being gay married"
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
It is the taxation that is unfair: It's ridiculous to suggest that this is some kind of gay-rights favoritism, says Scott Rosenfeld at Passport. "It's about fairness." The Defense of Marriage Act discriminates against gay married couples by forcing a tax on them that their heterosexual counterparts don't have to pay. This only evens the scales by canceling out the surtax imposed to penalize them for being gay.
"Cambridge pays gay employees more to offset unfair health care tax"
This is a sign anti-gay discrimination is on the way out: Cambridge is doing what it has to do to end discrimination against same-sex couples within its city limits, says Bridgette P. LaVictoire in Lez Get Real. But the courts, too, are starting to "put homosexuality into a legally protected class with regards to civil rights." That, ultimately, means that the Defense of Marriage Act is doomed, so special policies like Cambridge's "will no longer be necessary in the near future."
"Cambridge, Mass., to reimburse married gay workers for wages lost due to unfair taxation"
Sign up for Today's Best Articles in your inbox
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
-
Tariffs were supposed to drive inflation. Why hasn’t that happened?
Talking Points Businesses' planning ahead helped. But uncertainty still looms.
-
How can you find a financial adviser you trust?
the explainer Four ways to detect professionals who will act in your best interest
-
8 gifts for the host that does the most
The Week Recommends Show your appreciation with a thoughtful present
-
The JFK files: the truth at last?
In The Spotlight More than 64,000 previously classified documents relating the 1963 assassination of John F. Kennedy have been released by the Trump administration
-
'Seriously, not literally': how should the world take Donald Trump?
Today's big question White House rhetoric and reality look likely to become increasingly blurred
-
Will Trump's 'madman' strategy pay off?
Today's Big Question Incoming US president likes to seem unpredictable but, this time round, world leaders could be wise to his playbook
-
Democrats vs. Republicans: who are the billionaires backing?
The Explainer Younger tech titans join 'boys' club throwing money and support' behind President Trump, while older plutocrats quietly rebuke new administration
-
US election: where things stand with one week to go
The Explainer Harris' lead in the polls has been narrowing in Trump's favour, but her campaign remains 'cautiously optimistic'
-
Is Trump okay?
Today's Big Question Former president's mental fitness and alleged cognitive decline firmly back in the spotlight after 'bizarre' town hall event
-
The life and times of Kamala Harris
The Explainer The vice-president is narrowly leading the race to become the next US president. How did she get to where she is now?
-
Will 'weirdly civil' VP debate move dial in US election?
Today's Big Question 'Diametrically opposed' candidates showed 'a lot of commonality' on some issues, but offered competing visions for America's future and democracy