How Schwarzenegger should handle AB849

Governor Schwarzenegger has already decided to veto AB 849, which grants full marriage rights to same-sex couples. By conveniently citing the of “will of the people” clause, when the California elecorate passed Proposition 22, the governor is potentially missing one of those rare opportunities that afford an elected official to put aside the political downside in order to do what is right.

Proposition 22 states that "only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California." AB 849 would simply define marriage as a civil contract between “two persons.”

Here is what the governor could say should he decide to have a change of heart.

To the people of California:

I realize that back on September 7, I decided that I would veto AB 849. Originally, I felt that that the passing of Proposition 22 prevented me from signing such legislation.

As my press secretary, Margita Thompson stated, “We cannot have a system where the people vote and the Legislature derails that vote. Out of respect for the will of the people, the governor will veto (the bill).”

At the time, I felt that was the right position to take, but I am also reminded that my election also represents the will of the people. And it is in that spirit I have now decided to sign AB 849.

Opposition to this legislation comes down to fear and ignorance. This is not to suggest that those in opposition are mean-spirited individuals, but fear and ignorance has historically been the twin demons of benign evil that has served to justify the suppression of certain groups.

America has been far from perfect when it comes to living out the notion of equal protection under the law. We have seen over the centuries, groups fighting for rights that should have already been guaranteed through the ratification of the Constitution.

But what makes the America experiment so unique is it ability to eventually come around to the principles for which it stands.

As former Congresswoman Barbara Jordan so eloquently stated during the Watergate hearings: " We the people. It is a very eloquent beginning. But when that document was completed, on the seventeenth of September in 1787, I was not included in that We, the people. I felt somehow for many years that George Washington and Alexander Hamilton just left me out by mistake. But through the process of amendment, interpretation, and court decision I have finally been included in We, the people.”

Though Proposition 22 may indeed qualify as the “will of the people” it stands in stark opposition to “We the people.”

I understand and appreciate those who oppose this legislation on religious grounds. The question that is before us: Can one’s privately held notion of morality serve as public policy?

When AB 849 becomes law, no church would be forced to perform same-sex marriages. This legislation does not require religious institutions to modify its teachings on the subject.

With all due respect to the sacred marriage ceremony, no one is “legally married” in California until the proper paperwork has been completed and filed with the state.

Unless that changes, marriage remains the state’s business. How long should we require gay and lesbians to subsidize certain rights while denying them access?

By maintaining the status quo I, as governor, would be complicit in altering “We the people” to “We the people, except.”

There are those who feel that by signing AB 849, I risk alienating my conservative base. Perhaps.

I, however, draw on the courage of former president Lyndon Johnson who signed landmark civil rights legislation knowing that it would cost the Democratic Party the southern region of the United States.

Moreover, I am proud to be in the same party as Abraham Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, and Ronald Reagan. For they committed their lives to freedom and democracy, understanding that such terms could not be mere shibboleths at a campaign stump speech.

Freedom and democracy are the embodiment of “We the people.” And for this reason AB 849 must become law.