What hath our initiative process wrought?

[canis_lupus]

From The L.A. Times:

Hoping to put a dent in the county's crushing traffic, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority board is considering asking for a new half-cent sales tax on November's ballot. The money could help dig subways, lay track for light rail, buy clean-air buses and fund improvements to our crumbling freeways.

Meanwhile, a bunch of evangelicals have their own plan for your autumnal ballot. They're offering up a constitutional amendment that could snatch away the marriage certificates that gays and lesbians will start getting on June 17.

Guess which measure has better odds of passing? If you said "the anti-gay initiative," you would be correct. That outcome is not based on an assumption that most Californians are homophobic, but the fact that it will take just 51% of the electorate to write discrimination into our Constitution and a whopping 67% to invest in our infrastructure and environment.

The supermajority required for transit funding -- or to pass most taxes since Proposition 13 and siblings 62 and 218 -- is frustrating but not completely imprudent. Gobs of taxpayer money shouldn't be tossed around without heavy scrutiny, especially in a state perpetually in the red. What is irrational is that any group with an agenda can fan out and gather about 690,000 signatures, and then change the California Constitution with a simple majority.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-broverman6-2008jun06,0,4046123.story

[Kerrytravelers]

1. And then, like last time, this will go to court and be overturned.

Eventually, civil rights will win out. I just can't believe we have to keep going through the same song and dance with the same dance partners time and time and time again over basic human civil rights.

[dsc]

2. NO IT WON'T

Sorry to shout but this point is very important. If this referendum wins the California Supreme Court can't do diddly about it. This referendum is the ballgame.

[Kerrytravelers]

3. Ok, clearly I am confused by this. I thought if this horrible thing passes, it could

be taken to court and then the court could over turn it, just like they have other biggotted discriminatory measures in the past.

Please, tell me where I am wrong. This is honest. I really thought this was just another dance with the biggotted devils. I am so sorry that I had it wrong.


(Please don't shout!!!)

[Creideiki]

4. Only federal court

Colorado's Amendment 2 was stayed by the Colorado Supreme Court, but the overturning came from the USSC.

[dsc]

5. The ruling was based on the California constitution

which would be altered by the initiative. Once that happens the court can't change it back. The initiative would end the marriages permanently (or at least until a new initiative is passed).

[Igel]

7. There's a way that the Cal. SC can overturn an initiative.

I don't like seeing it done, but it's doable. And that's to find that it should never have qualified for the ballot because it broke some rule--if it covered two disparate matters, for example.

If the consultants that advised them concerning the language of the initiative were competent, the court has nothing to say about it unless it conflicts with the US Constitution.

[TechBear_Seattle]

10. Not this time

This is not a legislative initiative that will create a new law. This is a proposed constitutional amendment. The state courts are obligated to hold to the state constitution. If the state constitution is amended to mandate bigotry, the court has absolutely no choice but to enforce that mandate. The ONLY possible way the courts could overturn it would be for the federal courts to get involved, and they have adamantly refused to hear claims against the several other states with similar constitutional amendments.

[MNBrewer]

6. the anti's are fighting an uphill battle.

Equality under the law is inevitable. IMO.

[Smarmie Doofus]

8. Inevitable, yes. Not necessarily imminent. nt

[Q3JR4]

9. Think about it from this perspective....

If the amendment as written passes you can simply wait a few years for people to really get used to the idea, start an initiative process yourself and amend the constitution to get rid of this amendment and bring back the right of same-sex couples to marry.

Unlike my home state of Idaho, it's easier to amend California's constitution. Sure it might take a bit more time, but that's okay too me thinks.

Q3JR4.

[dickthegrouch]

11. It is NOT OK for my equality to bandied about

I get really tired of that kind of attitude.
I demand what the law and the constitution purport to guarantee me.
EQUALITY
Nothing more, nothing less.
It should not be up for a vote
That it is is just one more example of what failures lawmakers are.
Engineers have to build things that don't fail.
Drug companies are expected not to kill a single person with their products.
Cities get sued because idiots can't walk properly and trip
Lawmakers build this incredibly complex set of catch-22 situations and call themselves good at their jobs. And then apologists come along and say it's ok to take time to fix it.
Never!

/rant off

[xchrom]

12. i hate the intitiative process -- and this is one prime example of why.