Trifecta–All 3 Branches of Government Vs. The Voice of the People
Internal Rot in California’s Political System Causes Alarm
In a day that is rife with the riotous angst, protests and sometimes violence, supporters of the marriage amendment are being targeted not only by their political opponents, but also by their elected leadership.
At first it seemed that only the State Judiciary had hijacked the will of the people, a mere four “activist judges”, we were told. But this week has shown us that this is now an effort from all three branches of government. Where are the systems of checks and balances if every voice is against the people? The government is supposed to represent the voice of the people. Why is it that all three branches of California’s government are in open rebellion to the will of the majority of Californians regarding marriage?
On November 4th, Californians voiced their vote on the definition of marriage clearly. In an election that boasts an incredible voter turnout, a clear majority of the voters reaffirmed their declaration in 2000 that
“only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.”
As it stands today, all three branches of government have come out against the will of the people as expressed in not only this election, but TWO general elections.
1. Executive— Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who is sworn by his oath of office to uphold the rule of law and the constitution in protecting the will of the people, on Sunday expressed hope that the California Supreme Court would overturn Proposition 8, the ballot initiative that outlawed same-sex marriage. He also predicted that the 18,000 gay and lesbian couples who have already wed would not see their marriages nullified by the initiative.
“It’s unfortunate, obviously, but it’s not the end,” Schwarzenegger said in an interview Sunday on CNN. “I think that we will again maybe undo that, if the court is willing to do that, and then move forward from there and again lead in that area.”
2. Legislative–44 State Legislators, elected by the voice of the people, have filed an amicus brief in an effort to overturn the will of the people before the California State Supreme Court. These elected representatives have also sworn to uphold the law and the will of the people. These are the names of the 44 State Legislators who signed the brief in open rebellion against 52% of California’s voters:
1. Senate President Pro Tempore Don Perata
2. Senate President Pro Tempore-elect Darrell Steinberg
3. Speaker of the Assembly Karen Bass,
4. Assembly Speaker Emeritus Fabian Nunez
5. Senator Ron Calderon
6. Senator Gilbert Cedillo
7. Senator Ellen Corbett
8. Senator Christine Kehoe
9. Senator Sheila Kuehl
10. Senator Alan S. Lowenthal
11. Senator Carole Migden
12. Senator Alex Padilla
13. Senator Mark Ridley-Thomas
14. Senator Gloria Romero
15. Senator Patricia Wiggins
16. Assemblymember Jim Beall, Jr.
17. Assemblymember Patty Berg
18. Assemblymember Julia Brownley
19. Assemblymember Anna M. Caballero
20. Assemblymember Charles Calderon
21. Assemblymember Joe Coto
22. Assemblymember Kevin de Leon
23. Assemblymember MarkDeSaulnier
24. Assemblymember Mike Eng
25. Assemblymember Noreen Evans
26. Assemblymember Mike Feuer
27. Assemblymember Felipe Fuentes
28. Assemblymember Loni Hancock
29. Assemblymember Mary Hayashi
30. Assemblymember Edward P. Hernandez
31. Assemblymember Jared Huffman
32. Assemblymember Dave Jones
33. Assemblymember Betty Karnette
34. Assemblymember Paul Krekorian
35. Assemblymember John Laird
36. Assemblymember Mark Leno
37. Assemblymember Lloyd E. Levine
38. Assemblymember Sally J. Lieber
39. Assemblymember Fiona Ma
40. Assemblymember Anthony J. Portantino
41. Assemblymember Lori Saldana
42. Assemblymember Jose Solorio
43. Assemblymember Sandre R. Swanson
44. Assemblymember Lois Wolk
3. Judicial–4 activist judges, Ronald George, Joyce Kennard, Kathryn Werdegar and Carlos Moreno, overturned the will of the people that marriage was between a man and a woman, voiced in 2000. Their decision allowed same sex couples to be married. Now that Proposition 8 has passed, with the same wording as back in 2000, these same judges will hear the case again and have the chance to again determine whether or not the will of the people will be heard.
November 11, 2008
The California Supreme Court’s surprising announcement that it will quickly review the legality of Proposition 8, banning gay marriage, has prompted growing speculation that the four judges who found a right to gay marriage in the state Constitution in a May ruling will quickly throw Prop. 8 out. If that happens, watch out for a “barn-burner of an election — the biggest thing this state has ever seen,” says recall election guru Ted Costa.
Costa says he’s already been contacted by some of the folks who would seek to recall Ronald George, Joyce Kennard, Kathryn Werdegar and Carlos Moreno if Prop. 8 is scrapped. He thinks it’s premature and risky because talk of a recall “would just (bleep) off the judges.”
Costa also doesn’t sound like he’s too thrilled about such a recall, saying it wouldn’t be “healthy.” Citing all the financial turmoil in California, he said, “If someone’s going to do some recalling, that should be the focus.”
But Costa sounds certain such a recall would happen and agreed that it would be no problem at all for gay marriage opponents to quickly gather the signatures of 12 percent of the electorate to force a recall election targeting George, Kennard, Werdegar and Moreno. He said supporters of Prop. 8 such as the Knights of Columbus, the Mormon Church and other traditional religious groups all had “massive” resources to bring to bear.
He doesn’t think the state Supreme Court will overturn Prop. 8. “I gotta believe they’ll uphold the initiative process.” But if the four justices do, Costa says expect an amazing spectacle.
I agree. I think literally hundreds of millions of dollars would be spent on the recall. Gay marriage opponents see Prop. 8 as akin to a last stand preventing a global movement toward acceptance of gay marriage and will go all out. Gay marriage supporters, for their part, will no longer accept incremental progress or “civil unions.”
This rot in the system, this open disregard for the will of the people must be rooted out. Many of these people are serving the people in elected positions of power, granted to them in trust. When leaders come to power that cannot be trusted, they must be removed.
Call to action:
Tell Gov. Schwarzenegger to Defend Prop 8 Marriage Decision, Urge Him to Fulfill His Oath of Office by Defending the People’s Decision on Marriage
Since Election Day, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R) has made statements supporting demonstrations against Proposition 8, and urging California ‘s Supreme Court to block the amendment’s enforcement.
The governor’s post-election behavior has been completely inappropriate for the State’s highest official. He has acted contrary to the rule of law and has helped foment an environment of lawlessness (one protest produced 15 arrests), intimidation, and racism. Condoning street protests and supporting judicial activist scams to overturn a popularly approved state constitutional amendment approaches advocacy of anarchy. Gov. Schwarzenegger is playing a dangerous game, and it needs to stop. Now.
Please express the following concerns when you contact Gov. Schwarzenegger directly:
- He is required to fulfill his oath of office which demands that he “support and defend” and “bear true faith and allegiance” to the California Constitution – which now defines marriage traditionally.
- He needs to publicly accept the results of the ballot initiative as the will of the people even as he reminds Proposition 8 opponents that they can seek another outcome in the future by electoral means.
- The governor needs to publicly recant any suggestion that the California courts manipulate the law to reach his desired political outcome.
- Finally, Gov. Schwarzenegger condemn the recent assault on the First Amendment rights of California’s churchgoers – most notably Mormons, Catholics, and evangelicals – and use his law enforcement powers to protect parishioners and church facilities from trespassing, disruption, and violence.”