Thanks Lisa…much to think about.

Big marches in California right now.

It will come. Perhaps not as soon as we would like, but it will come. The tide has already turned and is slowly sweeping the country. California will likely recognize same sex marriage before much longer. Parts of the South may take longer and it may take a Supreme Court ruling to push it through there. Sooner or later, it will be the law of the land.

Frankly, I found this “decision” entirely contradictory to the one that legalized same-sex marriage. Very disappointing, and as far as I can tell, motivated purely by the desire to pander to a slender majority.

thanks lisa – the message this sends is chilling – who are they gonna target next? where is the next basic human right targeted going to come from?

I think we can not repeat enough times exactly what you mentioned above: the difference between people getting married in a church and people going down to the City Clerk’s office and getting a marriage license.

I honestly think people do not understand the difference, so the more times we make it clear we are talking about the marriage LICENSE, not the WEDDING, the better we do.

MadProf–I agree 100%. It’ the license, not where the “ceremony” is performed. I married one couple in my living room in under 5 mins and mailed the signed license in the next day. They are legally married, and happy there wasnt a big to-do made over it.

LIsa, read a thread somewhere today, that ’splained the HUGE opening this verdict gives to lead the way for ‘civil rights’ in dominating the debate.

Thought was, the battle to make CIVIL RIGHTS more of import legal wise, is better than trying to legislate MARRIAGE, which too many oppose.

Bottom line, equal rights and property, insurance, and all the OTHER issues fall in line with civil rights, like in Europe, and marriage is no longer the issue for RIGHTS.

Wish I had kept that url, but hey, I liked the read . . . . and not once did I think it was a scam upon the LGBT community . . . .

Anyone else know about this line of legal thought?

I think the chilling message is that any majority can get an initiative passed ot screw over a minority. What if an initiative was place don the ballot that denied non-legal citizens the right to drive a car or own property? Or for people over 77 to drive? (this is LA, we are car-centric), etc…this ruling appears ot to say that a majority holds sway over minority rights, tho IANAL

i don’t understand it either edp. makes no sense at all

One of my more conspiracy-oriented friends thinks that Big Business is opposed to civil marriage equality because it would mean more costs in terms of spousal insurance, and more costs ot the govt in terms of survivor benefits..I dont have any figures on the number of businesses offering domestic partner insurance, so I can’t speak on that, and in terms of survivor SS benefits–you either get your own or your spouse’s SS payments when you are eligible,so that seems to be a paper tiger argument.

I think really it comes down to some irratinal, illogical, faith-based bais, which thus means we have the influence of repressive religions upon the State.

At risk of overstating the obvious, I suspect very few of the H8ers actually believe there is something intrinsically sacred about marriage. The only tradition they are concerned about is the one that involves keeping a long oppressed minority in it’s place.

As angering as this is, it’s really scary that the California Supreme Court has ruled that mobs can take away the rights of people. I would love to see someone bankroll a constitutional initiative prohibiting left-handed people from owning property. They’re only 10% of the population and the Bible extolls the virtue of right-handedness.

But yeah, considering the rules of the game this is a good thing to work on. Without the government license, the marriage isn’t real. The guy who talks to God in the special clothes is just performing a skit, it has nothing to do with anything.

Marriage is always, everywhere primarily a civil institution concerned with the allocation of reciprocal rights and obligations, most of which can only be obtained through marriage. Only a small number of cultures sanctify marriage the way Christians do, though a somewhat larger number seek divine blessings for the marriage (though in the same way they would do for a new business or a new field). For perhaps the majority of the world’s cultures, they do do not involve the god botherers at all. It is for example a wholly civil matter in Islam (marriage is a contract, just like a business contract).

Your friend is right . . . it’s always about the money, power, and control of the money and assets.

Denying benefits is sacrosanct across the board of any conservative idealogy.

That’s a no brainer, IMHO . . .

New wingnut propaganda? “Muslims have a marriage contract–If we allow civil marriage equality why we’ve let the infidel heathen terrorists win!”

Since that would require them to actually learn something about another culture it ain’t gonna happen.

Ken The Fuck Starr. Srsly. Can you believe it?

Our side is so incredibly too nice it’s ridiculous.

This panty-sniffing piece of mrs. grundy energizer bunny fuck will be tut-tutting my crotch for $$ and political gain when I’m drooling in the old dykes home at age 99!

Hard to figure, unless you suppose that the California Supremes are a bunch of screeching wingnut morons…but we know they’re not, because they legalized same-sex marriage to start with. If nothing else, this certainly reinforces my general opinion of ballot initiatives as a way of legislating–it’s a bad idea that ultimately serves only the lowest common denominator. It mystifies me that the California Supremes don’t seem to have noticed that.

Everybody who has ever gotten married knows the truth of what Lisa has pointed out. In the eyes of the state, it is filing of the paperwork that constitutes a marriage.

I’ve done it twice now, and both times it was clear that it was the paperwork that was critical. In fact, the second time around we signed all the paperwork ahead of time. Afterwards, the minister asked us if he should mail the paperwork in, saying, “This is your last chance to bail out!”

In Europe, the two processes are completely bifurcated. You fill out the paperwork and pays your fee(s) at City Hall. Then, if (and only if) you feel the need, you go to clergyperson (or judge) of your choice and get whatever else needs to be said to make you feel better about what you’ve just done.

We should do the same here in the United States. Civil unions for all! Clergy-blessed weddings for those who want/need them.

“Muslims have a marriage contract–If we allow civil marriage equality why we’ve let the infidel heathen terrorists win!”

No problem. We’ll have them held indefinitely as another danger to traditional marriage and the American way of life.

Senator Whitehouse to the white courtesy phone please….

Oh and on a cheery note, Carrie Prejean, aka Mess Cali-phony will be on Fox & F*ckrs tomorrow at 3am west coast/6am east if you can stand to ruin your day.. I am only imagine the grotesquery of her hubristic preening

That last sentence was an impressive bit of vulgarity.:-)

hey sharkbabe

Are you saying that marriage and indefinite detention aren’t synonymous?

I wonder if in fact someone could get an absurdist piece of legislation placed on the ballot via the CA initiative process if only to see what would happen…

Yeah, I’ll make sure to buy cable for that. :-P

I take it you and sharkbabe haven’t met….

Dr. Puma,

The California Supreme Court has feared the Right Wing since Rose Bird was recalled for getting out ahead of the “Kill ‘em and let God sort ‘em out” reactionaries on capital punishment.

If I lived in California, I’d be pushing a recall on the six cowards who tried to split the difference with this insane decision. There is no common ground to be had between the forces of equality and the social reactionaries. They had to suck it up and pick one, and they whiffed it.

Recall the bastards and teach them the Left has to be feared too.

See my #8 . . . . .

we’ll have up on La Figa; it’s part of out economic stimulus package–we have cable so you can spend your ducats tipping barristas and barkeeps!

We’ve not been informally introduced.

Fortunately, I will be asleep at 4 AM MDT when Ms Dow-Corning Silicone of 2008 will be spewing her bullsh*t.

And the ridiculous piece of legislation has already happened: it was called Proposition 13.

Sharkbabe! Long time no see.

In 100 years, today’s ruling (on the the 55th anniversary of Brown v Board of Education) will be viewed as the Dred Scott decision of the 21st century, or Plessy v Ferguson, or something. Seriously, this is about as haunted-by-Rose-Bird-careerist a ruling as we could have imagined.

Oh, no, the people have spoken! — yeah, and what were the electorate’s numbers against interracial marriage in 1967 when Loving v. Virginia was decided? 60%? 70%? The idea that rights can be taken away by popular vote is what makes “Fidelity” such a powerful ad.

“Making a federal case out of it” on Wednesday also enables David Boies and Ted Olsen to ask for an injunction to stop the implementation of Prop 8. If granted (doubtful, but still….) that would make marriage equality the law in California immediately.

GayCityNews.com
New Yorkers Respond to Prop 8 Ruling With Their Feet
By: DUNCAN OSBORNE
05/26/2009

Responding to a decision by California’s Supreme Court that upheld a state constitutional amendment that banned gay marriage there, thousands took to the streets in Manhattan to object to that ruling and demand that New York’s State Senate pass a same-sex marriage bill this year.

“I have a message for our friends in the State Senate,” said Scott Stringer, the Manhattan borough president, to loud applause and cheering at a May 26 rally held at Union Square. “The time has come to pass marriage equality in the Senate.”

That lowest common denominator thing is pretty much the criticism directed at democracy.
It’s been a bad day, but there’s still some baby in that bathwater somewhere.

Are you saying that marriage and indefinite detention aren’t synonymous?

heh. It does seem only fair that if gay people cannot be allowed to marry, straight people should not be allowed to divorce….

“Making a federal case out of it” on Wednesday also enables David Boies and Ted Olsen to ask for an injunction to stop the implementation of Prop 8. If granted (doubtful, but still….) that would make marriage equality the law in California immediately.
wow, so if the injunction is granted, then I-and heaps of other “qualified” people could be signing wedding licenses again!

We should do the same here in the United States. Civil unions for all! Clergy-blessed weddings for those who want/need them.
That’s it. I spoke earlier today to a 90+ woman friend, who btw was my 2 year old sunday school teacher, and she said exactly the same thing.
And, the other thing people need to understand is denying the glt marriage equality doesn’t mean they are not going to have sex. Isn’t that part of the fundamentalist’s thinking? Maybe I’m wrong. ‘Course some people think that by getting married, there is a reduction of sex, but, I won’t go there.

That came up recently and somebody pointed out that people are endeavoring to make divorce more difficult to obtain in some backward part of the country (that doesn’t narrow it down much, does it?). Sorry, I can’t remember any details.

Whoa. Even Ted Olson is against the ruling and is taking it to federal court. I’m still trying to pick my jaw up off the floor.

what’s next? DIJON mustard on our burgers? Eating freedom fries with mayonnaise instead that dee-lishus vegetable ketchup?

they take away marriage. in some states, it is illegal to adopt or be a foster parent if gay. i guess the next proposition will either remove all gay from classrooms or will maybe go after those left handers upthread.

Teddy, what’s the vibe liek where you are? I am going to a protest in Hollywood right after Late Night?

I think the reason that the California Supreme Court decision made no sense is because it was not a judicial but a political decision by justices to return the issue to the political arena. In other words, they shirked their responsibility. The California Constitution as an equal protection clause in it. Same sex marriage is a classic equal protections case. It was all there for the court to act upon but they didn’t have the balls to do so but then they didn’t have the balls to invalidate the existing marriages either. It was a cop out pure and simple.

…people are endeavoring to make divorce more difficult to obtain in some backward part of the country…

I’m highly in favor of making it more difficult to divorce a spouse who was already a family member. It’s just, you know – twice as sad.

Sweet potato, crinkle cut (baked) fries with blue cheese dressing. *g*

I first heard the saying, “First babies can arrive anytime after the wedding. All other babies take nine months,” from a social conservative Sunday School teacher.

I could never quite figure out if she was being ironic or serious. I’ve never known any Southern Baptist clergy very well at all. The Lutheran and Catholic clergy I have known (and I’ve known a few pretty well) were very realistic about it. One Lutheran pastor I got to know quite well said that in pre-marital counseling he had two hot-button issues: sex and money. If a couple couldn’t discuss at least one with him he wouldn’t marry them. He also said he worried about those who could only discuss one of the two. Most of the Catholic/Lutheran clergy I’ve talked with have said that something like 2/3 of the couples they marry are already cohabiting.

I can’t imagine the numbers are very different for Southern Baptists and Saddlebackers and other social conservatives.

Yep. Being an SC justice is a great gig until people start trying to make you do work.

Powering down, nighters to all.

The vibe where I’m at (my house) is sad and getting a little drunk.

sad here, no drunk..we have to get to the protest.

It’s called ‘covenant marriage’, RF.

It basically outlaws divorce (but only in its jurisdiction of origin) except for cause. What’s cause, you ask? Spousal abuse, documented infidelity, desertion or nonsupport.

The movement is prominent in the South and Midwest.

Sincerest condolences.

One battle was lost but the war will continue until justice prevails.

If a man in the Deep South divorces his wife, are they still cousins?

175 arrested today in SF. Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence anointed demonstrators with glitter. A circle of ready-to-be-arrested demonstrators encircled by SFPD, with about 10 LGBT SFPD in the center of the circle, perhaps also demonstrating. Lots of ministers. Bigots seem to have gone home.

I think the Boies/Olsen pairing is the most unlikely same-sex couple to have come out of this, as they file their federal challenge, including a request for a federal injunction, in LA tomorrow. I mean, these were the guys on OPPOSITE sides in front of SCOTUS for Bush v Gore in 2000.

No fault divorce has been a blessing, though it did put a crimp in some private eyes’ business

“-are they still brother and sister?” is the way I’ve always heard it. Here in East-Central Illinois they use it in reference to Indiana residents (sorry jayt).

Ah, the Sisters are still around?

Does this mean I have to take some fraction of the bad thoughts I’ve had about Olsen over the past 8 years? If so, what is the appropriate fraction?

Have fun in Hollyweird, Lisa.
And, Teddy…I’m so sorry, man. You called it this morning, didn’t you? Door Number 2.

Boies/Olsen joining forces shows that tnis issue is of HUGE import for California and the nation

That it has. It’s reduced the ugliness surrounding divorces by several orders of magnitude.

Of course, there are those who believe that kids are better off with two parents who are (pick your favorite) constantly bickering or completely ignoring each other. So, hey presto, let’s bring back the auld days when divorce meant humiliating yourself (or your spouse) or both.

drive by0checking email and the threads on my way to bed…checking on the prop h8 and latina-gate…
i can’t imagine how torn apart people are feeling today, but i can say that i wish for the day when this is no longer an issue. it never has been for me. we knew many ‘unconventional’(the old word for gay and lesbian) people growing up. though we knew more gays. our whole family went to hang out and have dinner all the time. regular thing. never even knew anything was ‘different’ about it..really didn’t.
i was born white. i see other races, i think, they’re born same as me. can’t imagine waht it’s like going through life being black, cuz i’m white. but they are living breathing human. same as me. i am straight, i see gay/lesbian, i think, they’re born same as me. can’t imagine going through life being gay cuz i’m straight. but they are living breathing human. same as me. even in high school my friends in the art part of my world were gay and lesbian, i never once thought anything about hanging with them, why would i? i had jock friends, i had brainiac college prep friends, what’s the difference?didn’t realize how rare that was until i was older, that people didn’t want to be ‘tainted’ with teh gay.. never thought about it, cuz we are all human beings. my step-brother is with the same man he met in college, thirty years..my step-sister was with her partner 25 years, she has two beautiful sons-insemination…after all of these years i still have a hard time wrapping my brain around the fact that people do not see that others are the same as themselves-the same right to breathe air on this earth and have a right to live their lives with whomever they love. officially.

wanted to repost what i said earlier today—
good news is–
well, more people are now talking about it, more people are ‘coming out’, more people are asking questions on how this can happen, more people are invested in it, more people are understanding what is at issue here and relating to it more, more people are seeing this as an inequity, more people are understanding gays and what they are being denied–a hopefully lifelong marriage with all of the rights by law which a marriage certificate grants.

((((brighter day)))) ((((find a loophole in the ‘law’))))

in this talk of making divorce more difficult, is any distinction being made between those with children and those without?

There are so many paradigms for divorce, and ways to be positive within it. A friend who is a therapist told me that she has to ask couples “Do you love your kids more than you hate yourself?” Co-parenting is a wonderful idea… I think it is key for couples ot recognize how much they have learned and grown from each other, that there is still respect and appreciation, but like, the union is dissolving and reshaping into separate residences.

Fear–the foundation of anger keeps that from happening, in the same way fear is at the foundation of the vote that led to today’s ruling.

Seconded (in awe!)

Please, people, see my #8.

There’s a HUGE potential for this issue to go to civil issues, and align all the civil rights to LGTB’s, that come with domestic partnership issues . . .

SOMEone, please, find the light in this ruling . . . cuz as I read it early this day, it was huge.

The ruling sets the stage for HUGE LGBT recovery . . . . and the language opens the way for the civil righs, versus the MARRIAGE issue . . .

Someone, please . . . it’s there, find it . . . and stop the doom and gloom fer cryin out loud.

The phrellin door’s opened, with this ruling . . . . but IANAL. I just read it earlier today.

Sigh.

The ruling sets the stage for HUGE LGBT recovery . . . . and the language opens the way for the civil righs, versus the MARRIAGE issue . . .

I hope so!

Mike and Lurleen Huckabee have a covenant marriage.

OMG. Reminders of why I hate AT&T. They may have influenced the results of American Idol.

I’ve never watched the show, but still…

LOS ANGELES — AT&T, one of the biggest corporate sponsors of “American Idol,” might have influenced the outcome of this year’s competition by providing phones for free text-messaging services and lessons in casting blocks of votes at parties organized by fans of Kris Allen, the Arkansas singer who was the winner of the show last week.

The three justices who changed their minds about marriage equality from a year ago to today will be seen as threatened by the shadow of Rose Bird, forever. Whatever else they do on the bench, for however long their tenures are, they will be forever defined by this atrocity. It is sad, for some of them were distinguished jurists.

But they will now forever be known as craven careerists who sought not to be turned out of office.

A covenant marriage? Whatever it is, I’ll stay away.

I read that as convenient marriage…

I still do not understand how this happened. I know we have large pockets off repigs in California but how they got a majority of everyone to vote for this shit I don’t get. That means alot of the people who voted for Obama also voted for blatent discrimination.

There are people who wee mislead with robo-calls and political mailers; there are peole who are progressive/liberal on some issues and not others. I know pro-choice, pro-pot legalization republicans, and anti-choice dems…

late late nite is up – lisa, enjoy the hollywood protest – looking forward to reading your reporting about it.

nighty night! and thanks all!

Actually, we have had some pretty weird initiatives on the ballot. Last election, we had the one to name the Westside Water Treatment Plant after George W. Bush. It failed because we think much too highly of the plant and the dedicated civil servants who work there and would not want to sully the place that helps to keep our ocean and beaches clean.

But that did not mean that the wingers did not have a conniption that it was on the ballot and was an example of SF values.

Prop 13 was not ridiculous. Go back and look at the situation that homeowners were in at the time and how many would have lost their homes, especially those on fixed incomes. The biggest problem with Prop 13 was that commercial property was treated the same way as residential property. The largest businesses have found ways to escape paying their share of property taxes and it still ends up falling too heavily on residential homeowners.

Prop 13 has been amended a number of times and it can still be amended to make it more fair. But to undo it would put many more people out of their homes and exacerbate all our economic problems and inequalities.

There are very good reasons to have the kind of direct democracy we have with the initiative process. Like any good thing, it can be misused and abused. It does not mean we would be better off without it.

Here is a link to the inaugural speech of Hiram Johnson in 1911. He was the governor of California…a noted progressive…that is credited for getting this system in place. He gives the reasons for it in his speech (which sounds a lot like one we would hear now). The big business of the day was Southern Pacific. They more or less ran the show and the legislature. There was very little democracy and he was trying to give some power back to the little people.

I would really hate to see us give up that bit of direct democracy and hand it over to the best legislatures money can buy.

http://www.californiagovernors…..al_23.html

Here’s a link with the history of Prop 13. There were many reasons why it was necessary at that time. If you understand the historical context, you might see why it was passed. Having most of the senior citizens priced and taxed out of their homes would have been a disaster….worse than what we are seeing now with the subprime mess.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C…..sition_13_(1978)

The entire point of Prop 13 was to wrap the commercial property into the residential property “crisis” — just as the recall of Rose Bird for being “soft on crime” was because she was leading the court close to overturning the inclusion of commercial property in Prop 13.

Think about it: if corporate person never die, commercial property will never, ever be subject to re-assessment. It will always be taxed at 1978 rates and assessments. Tell me PG&E, the railroads, and the timber companies wouldn’t do anything — including lie about the number and extent of old people affected by escalating taxes on their homes — to get a sweet deal like that.

I beg to differ. Prop 13 was a scam fomented by Howard Jarvis and the Southern California Landlords Association.

I was an undergrad in SoCal at the time Prop 13 passed. The problem was recognized by the State Legislature, there was a referendum on the ballot in the same election that passed 13. It would have taken care of the problem of people on fixed incomes being taxed out of their homes, without shifting the primary property tax burden onto homeowners.

The results of Prop 13 were completely forseeable, and indeed were predicted at the time. Private homes turn over (on the average) about every 5 years. Commercial property changes hands much less frequently, not even every 20 years. Often when commercial property changes hands, it is shifted by one corporate entity buying another corporate entity. The property never changes ownership as far as the county assessor is concerned.

Changes in corporate structuring (the rise of Limited Liability Corporations, LLCs) have exacerbated the problem. I don’t know about things in California, but here we have corporations that are an organization of lots of little LLCs. I would expect that large landlords have reorganized their business as a separate LLC for each property. If you want to sell the property, you sell the LLC, and hey-presto, there’s a new owner but the transaction is transparent to the county assessor, because the same corporate entity owns the property.

Wouldn’t you love to be able to inherit your parent’s home in Palo Alto that way? Ain’t happening, sport. You aren’t an LLC and you can’t play that game.

I got the same indoctrination in the Bakersfield City Schools that you got, esseff44. The citizen initiative is wonnerful, wonnerful, wonnerful, it’s what makes the California Constitution superior to all others. The ability to recall miscreants in government is another wonnerful, wonnerful, wonnerful thing.

Well, look what the citizen initiative has gotten you. You have a legislature run by a small minority. You can’t get a budget passed, because it requires a 2/3 supermajority to pass a budget. You can’t rationalize your tax structure (which is increasingly shifting onto the poor and the middle class, by the way) because it takes a 2/3 supermajority to pass a tax increase.

You once had a K to Doctorate education system that was the envy of the world. Because I had the grades and the test scores and I came from a middle class family, had I chosen to go a private school in California as an undergrad, a California State Scholarship would have paid most of my tuition. If I were applying to college today with the same grades and test scores I couldn’t get into the University of California at anyplace.

California by itself has one of the world’s largest economies. There is no excuse for the current budget crisis in the State, except that the citizens of the State have so hamstrung their government that it cannot govern.

I had hopes that when Schwarzenagger became Governor that he’d tell the people of California the truth. He might have done it, because he didn’t need the job and there is no place for him to after he leaves Sacramento. The truth is this: there are high tax, high service governments (think the upper midwest, Minnesota, Wisconsin), and there are low tax, low service governments (think Texas and Mississippi). I suppose it’s possible to have a high tax, low service government but you can’t have a low tax, high service government unless it’s based on a extractive economy and you tax the hell out of the extractive industries (think Alaska, although I think of Alaska is a better example of a high tax, low service government.) You don’t want a tax system based on an extractive economy — they seem to be invariably corrupt, and the government ends up being owned by the extractive industry. Look at Alaska, Montana, California in the late 19th C, Nevada, the African nation of your choice, Siberia…

There Aint No Such Thing As A Free Lunch. If you want it, you’ll have to pay for it somehow. If you want to operate four world-class universities, you’ll have to pay for them. If you want a social safety net, you’ll have to pay for it.

That little bit of direct democracy that you think you have left is gone, because the monied interests have figured out how to game the system. Jarvis and Gann were just the first shot in that game. If you want to keep the citizen initiative (I think you should, but it needs to be revised — not amended, revised) you have to take the monied interests out of the game:

1. Ban paid signature collectors.
2. Require all signature collectors to be registered voters in the county where they are collecting signatures.
3. Increase the signature requirement. Currently it stands at 8% of the voters in the last gubernatorial election. That should be raised to 16%.
4. Rather than passing an initiative with a simple majority, require a 3/5 supermajority. Initiatives do not go through the legislative hearing process, and plenty of bad ideas come before the voters.

Perhaps I’ve become jaded after 8 years of BushCo and watching Prop 8 pass last November, but I’ve decided that generally speaking voters are stupid. Making it more difficult for demagogues to convince them to make silly changes in the Constitution and statutory law is a Good Thing in my book.

Your mileage may vary, of course.

Nope. You get to make a choice when you sign up at the County Clerk, regular marriage or HiTest marriage (i.e., covenant marriage.) Presence or absence of children has naught to do with it.

The oddest thing about the whole covenant marriage thing is that as nearly as I can tell, the extra-sticky glue only works in the State that issued the license.

I predict that if covenant marriages become very popular, Las Vegas and Reno will regain their cottage divorce industries. I think that’s a bad thing, myself.

Aha. I knew there had to be some other reason Rose Bird lost that retention election. But all I could find out at the time was what was hitting the Kansas City Star, and that was the cap-pun, never met a criminal she didn’t like meme.

Moving commercial property out from under the Prop 13 shelter would have been enough to do it, for sure.

Power in the hands of the people via the initiative process is scary, because things like Prop H8 can happen, but I agree with esseff44 that it shouldn’t be taken away. (Courts and constitutions are supposed to protect people from the tyranny of the majority.)

Here’s an article by Ralph Nader arguing in favor of an initiative process at the national level:

National Initiative (http://www.votenader.org/issues/national-initiative)

As I posted in an earlier entry, the saviors of marriage have now rendered my heterosexual marriage an institution of hatred, division and bigotry. If I say I am married, I am claiming to be morally and biologically superior to loving couples born with bookend genitalia. If there is a simple way, all heterosexual “married” couples should dissolve their marriage and opt instead for a “civil union”, as that is now the only untainted institution representing a loving, compassionate, life-long commitment devoid of hatred, self-superiority and religious political manipulations.

Heterosexuals: boycott marriage. Opt for Civil Union, instead.

BargainCountertenor, you make a lot of good points. I agree the initiative process needs the kind of changes you suggest, just as we need the same kind of changes in electing officials. There’s been a movement here to get publicly financed elections, but the recession has almost killed it. Direct democracy is a good tool but the voters have to do their part and do their homework. So many of the initiatives have been impossible to understand and that has resulted in an almost reflexive ‘no’ vote. There has been a big attitude shift since I came to California in ‘71. Now, I look very carefully before I sign an petition for an initiative. I have to know who the sponsors are and whose paying for it. We have too much spent on misleading ads and too little informed discussions of the issues. In the ’70’s and ‘80, we used to have dinner at a neighbor’s house and go over the voter information booklets sharing views and information. It was fun and felt good. People don’t do that anymore that I know of. I think we would get better government if that kind of thing was encouraged.

And yes, the legislature has been hamstrung with too many mandates that leaves little room for providing for anything not mandated. I think it’s up to about 80% of the budget which does not leave much wiggle room. With the crisis at hand, the sickest and the weakest will have their services cut as usual.

Arnold has not lived up to his billing. The recall of Grey Davis was a waste and an abuse of the process. In the end, nothing is going to get better until the voters take their responsibilities seriously and make an effort to inform themselves.

You are also right that nothing is going to improve as long as there is an attitude of cutting taxes and expanding expectations of services.