California Gay Marriage Bill Announced

[David__77]

(Sacramento, California) A California assembly member Monday announced legislation to allow same-sex couples to obtain marriage licenses.

“The time has come for California to honor its commitment to equality for all Californians,” stated Assembly Member Mark Leno (D-San Francisco), the author of the legislation.

...

Presently, California couples can register with the State of California as domestic partners. Registered couples in California currently are granted approximately sixteen rights and responsibilities under state law. In 2005, when the Domestic Partner Rights & Responsibilities Act takes effect, registered domestic couples will be entitled to hundreds of additional protections. It does not, however, grant all of the rights of marriage under state law, and it does not make couples and their children eligible for over a thousand federal protections offered married couples and their children.

Leno said his bill would rectify that.

http://www.365gay.com/newscon04/01/011204calMarriage.htm

(I'm so proud of Assemblyman Leno and the CA LGBT Legislative Caucus! It shows great wisdom to keep on the offensive for civil rights and equality.)

[Sapphocrat]

1. Holy sacred cow!

I'm stunned!

I also know it'll never get very far, but I am SO pleased and proud of our queer legislators!

Thanks for reminding why I still love California. :)

[David__77]

2. Don't be so sure it won't go somewhere...

We are lucky to have some very good, progressive lawmakers. Public opinion is pretty divided on the matter, but there is potential. I don't think this is a "vanity bill." I think that, although the bill may not pass to out of the legislature on its first attempt, this begins a new phase in this state in the struggle for LGBT rights: fighting for TOTAL civil equality. It's important to maintain some strategic initiative in this fight. Importantly, it could also help to consolidate support in the Democratic Party for full equality. This is a key concern.

[Sapphocrat]

4. I'll tell ya, David...

If there's any chance whatsoever, I will personally drive to Sacto and lobby for it. Sincerely.

It wouldn't fix the immigration problem, but it would strike such a huge blow in our favor, I'm willing to fight tooth and nail for the folks who can take advantage of it.

I think it's time I get over to http://www.marriageequality.org/ and see what they're doing on this front, and what they need in the way of help. (I hope it's not money. LOL)

[foreigncorrespondent]

3. If by some small margin...

...this bill doesn't pass, what are the chances of getting a court ruling, like the one we saw in Mass.?

[David__77]

5. The bill is for same-sex marriage, not against it.

There will be no court rulings here providing for same-sex marriage--in this state, we must accomplish that through the legislature or via initiative.

[foreigncorrespondent]

7. David, I know it is for gay marriage.

I am asking if by some small margin the bill DOESN'T pass, could couples take it through the court system, like what happened in Mass?

[David__77]

8. oh...

No that wouldn't be possible.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

6. SWEET!

GO GAY MARRIAGE ADVOCATES!!!

God, I love California!

DTH

[PennyLane]

9. Congrat!

I hope this goes somewhere! Best of Luck with it!:bounce:

[yellowcanine]

10. This will put Arnold on the spot

Good.

[Stuckinthebush]

11. He'll sign it

He's not really a conservative anyway. He's certainly not a bible thumper. He will realize that he could get more mileage from signing than not.

[GinaMaria]

12. I believe he said as much

during his 'campaign'. He supports same sex unions. He's not a real conservative, just a minion to serve up CA's electoral votes in November.

Feeling a little cynical this AM, probably need some coffee.

[yellowcanine]

16. but it will be good for him to get heat from the Bible thumpers

It divides the pubbie party in Calli-fornya over Arnie. This is a good thing.

[trent21]

13. Isn't this prohibited under

a proposition? Prop 22 or 23 (or whatever the number is)? The language of that Prop explicitly prohibits marriage recognition to any group other than one man and on woman..so how does this work?

We don't have Propositions in my state so I'm not sure how they work exactly, but I was under the impression that they supersede legislative law? Anyone know?

*edited for spelling correction

[trent21]

14. Well it would behoove me to read the article first

It says in the article that

"The bill is not a violation of Prop 22 says Leno, who is the Chair of California’s LGBT Legislative Caucus."

"Proposition 22, an initiative passed by California voters in 2000, was designed to prevent California from being forced to recognize the marriages of same-sex couples who were married outside of California. However, that initiative did not change the criteria for the issuance of marriage licenses in California, which is what the new bill will do," said Equality California executive director Geoffrey Kors in a statement."

But then if you read the proposition it isn't very clear:
"SECTION 1. This act may be cited as the "California Defense of Marriage Act."
SECTION 2. Section 308.5 is added to the Family Code, to read:
308.5. Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California."
http://primary2000.ss.ca.gov/VoterGuide/Propositions/22text.htm

If it only says that "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California" where is he getting that this doesn't violate that?

Maybe he's right,but regardless you know this is going to end up in court if it is passed.

[slackmaster]

17. Text of Leno's bill is not posted on Legislature's Web site yet

It will be a neat trick if he can get around FC 308.5 without changing it outright.

Here's the official CA legislative info page: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/ - It's not always up-to-date and not always accurate, but it's pretty useful.

[Terran]

15. Wow! There's a tidal wave crashing down on the fundies!

I don't know if this is being nationally orchestrated or not, but the impression is that there are too many pro-gay marriage initiatives happening for the rightwingers to prevent them from happening! Sort of the opposite of the Bush Admin's strategy of "dazzle 'em with scandals". I think the fundies are used to focusing on maybe one progressive movement at a time in their war against gay people, but now they're fighting a war with half a dozen fronts!

[cally]

18. Great news!

I'll think I'll call my legislators and ask for quick, immediate passage. Why wait for the fundies to organize.

[slackmaster]

19. I'm going to hold off and read the actual bill before I comment on it

A lot of well-intentioned but flawed bills get submitted to the CA legislature. Some of them even get passed in the heat of a political season, e.g. SB 60 (driver licenses for undocumented aliens). It was a good idea but poorly implemented.

[Endangered Specie]

20. What does der GroppenFuhrer have to say?

[David__77]

23. He really said "Gay marriage ought to be between a man and a woman."

It was a humorous quote. He was on the Sean Hannity right-wing radio show and was quizzed on a holy trinity of right-wing litmus tests. His handlers made him declare against late-term abortion and marriage equality, while he voiced lip service for abortion rights and domestic partnerships. I know he really does not want to deal with this issue. I was hoping the legislature would send him many bills dealing with sexual orientation, abortion rights and so forth. It's important to split him from the right-wing GOP grassroots.

[David__77]

21. From San Diego Tribune article...

Leno characterized the legislation as a civil rights issue. "The time has come for California to honor its commitment to equality for all Californians," he said in a statement.

But opponents say the proposal would violate Proposition 22, the 2000 ballot measure that stated marriage should only be between a man and a woman in California.

...

But Leno said his bill would not conflict with Proposition 22 because that measure was aimed at preventing California from being forced to recognize same-sex marriages in other states. Proposition 22 did not change the part of the code section that lists the criteria for issuing marriage licenses within California, Leno said.

Plescia also said he believed the bill will cause election-year difficulties for some Democratic legislators, who would be forced to choose between alienating either gay voters or moderate/conservative voters who oppose same-sex marriage.

"This bill will probably put some of Mark Leno's colleagues at risk because it would go against will of the voters," he said. "It probably helps Mark in San Francisco, but it could hurt Democrats in the Central Valley."

...

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/uniontrib/tue/news/news_1n13marriage.html
(end article excerpts)

I do not think that these "Democrats in the Central Valley" will vote for marriage equality, since they also opposed domestic partnership rights by and large. There is a progressive core in CA that will do the right thing though. I thought about it and don't think it will harm Democratic interests electorally. It may, perhaps though, provoke rightist bigotry that will run counter to the phony facade of "inclusion" among the current GOPers around the governor.

[davidinalameda]

22. go Mark!

I'm going to be writing letters and sending emails!

on edit--I was wrong about what Prop 22 did

"Proposition 22, an initiative passed by California voters in 2000, was designed to prevent California from being forced to recognize the marriages of same-sex couples who were married outside of California. However, that initiative did not change the criteria for the issuance of marriage licenses in California, which is what the new bill will do," said Equality California executive director Geoffrey Kors in a statement.

[arwalden]

24. See This Big Smile On My Face??

This news put it there.

-- Allen