Prop 8: Can people agree to disagree?

Covering Proposition 8 – the proposition hoping to place an amendment in California’s Constitution making marriage exclusively between a man and a woman – one thing is very clear: people are passionate about it.

Both sides have strong feelings of support for their cause, which leads to vigorous discussions and debate on the subject of gay marriage. The problem is, since it is such a contentious issue, some are wondering if it is truly possible to have open, progressive discussion concerning the subject.

From all of the people I talked to concerning Prop 8 for stories, while having extreme differences, seemed to agree on one thing. The proposition’s public debate hasn’t been a healthy one.

Take a look at the comments on the stories on the Tribune’s website. Each story on Prop 8 is met with hoards of comments that sling mud back and forth, often filled with personal attacks or ugly words.

“It is causing a major divide among the people of California and it is, unfortunately, doing that. It is going to cause more problems within the society,” said Shawn Tanuvasa, the director of the Institute of Religion for a local chapter of the Church of Later Day Saints. .

“I don’t think the campaign has been structured right. There is a lot of confusion around it,” said Julie Tinney, a recently married lesbian.

“I think it can be a polarizing issue and what I am hearing a lot in the last week or two is that just as people in the presidential campaign are fed up with the politics as usual, and they want to talk about the issues, I am hearing some of that talk around Prop 8,” said Rev. Susan Russell of All Saints Church in Pasadena.

It is easy to see why problems arise in the debate over the issue. One sees it as a matter of civil rights and basic freedom. The other, along very similar lines, sees it as a matter of faith and religious freedom. Either way, it is a fundamental difference in belief that is not easily swayed.

Most issues, journalists know all to well, are not black and white but carry with them varying degrees of positives and negatives. They are clouded by the nature of existence that doesn’t usually allow something good without some element of unease, that doesn’t create evil without some level of humanity.

And that is what seems to be missing, by all acounts, from the debate surrounding Prop 8 and gay marriage. Both sides seem to have left out the humanity. While advocating there own side, some have forgotten they are arguing against the beliefs and way of life as others. And to argue against that, often enough, is to argue against that person on a very personal level.

People carry their religion with them, as a well fastened part of their being. For some people, their worth and existence revolves around their faith in God and the Bible. Arguing against that religion, and often, trying to discredit that religion can be intensely hurtful.

On the other side, gay and lesbian individuals believe this is who they are and they have accepted and embraced that, whether or nor they chose it or not. To separate them from a portion of society because of that lifestyle can leave them feeling alone and rejected.

Either way, when this issue is decided Tuesday, someone will be left out in the cold. What the effects of that will be remains to be seen. What I do know is that whoever “wins” this battle may celebrate that victory on Wednesday, but we should all be a little sad because no matter what, that victory will come at a cost at our neighbors expense, by punishing them for who they are and what the believe. We will have taken something from them, pass or fail. And with that, we all may have lost a little bit of our humanity.

“I think there is a possibility to agree to disagree,” Tanuvasa said.

On the issue of Prop 8, I am not so sure.

Ask and you shall receive

To address couple of comments made earlier about the campaign fundraising of Rosemead Mayor John Tran:

According to Roman Porter, spokesman for the Fair Political Practices Commission, a candidate can transfer funds from one committee to another if he were, for example, running for Rosemead City Council and later decided to run for the Assembly. But there are a couple of rules the candidate would have to follow.

1. The candidate would have apply for the proper paperwork.
2. The candidate would not be allowed to transfer contributions that exceed the state’s limit of $3,600 contribution per one individual or business. That would erase some of these contributions.

Also, $100,000 is a start to fundraising for the Assembly, but if Tran were actually considering it, which he hasn’t said and only commentors are speculating, he has about another $500,000 to collect.

OMG

Driving while texting will be the next thing that could be outlawed:

Los Angeles Times
By Patrick McGreevy, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
August 22, 2008

SACRAMENTO — Everyone knows not to get caught DWI, but tech-savvy drivers may soon be outlawed from engaging in DWT — driving while texting.

Trying to keep pace with advances in technology, a divided state Senate approved a measure Thursday that would outlaw text messaging by motorists in California.

… 

The measure now goes to the governor, who has said he will not sign any bills until the Legislature approves a budget. Read more.

Sales tax hike could be on the horizon

It looks like a 1 percent sales-tax hike isn’t just a theory…

SACRAMENTOGov. Arnold Schwarzenegger moved to end the stalemate over the state budget Wednesday by offering a compromise spending plan that calls for a temporary 1 percent sales-tax increase and additional cuts.

In the past, the governor has said he is against raising taxes. But with the budget nearly two months overdue, he said it is time to move beyond partisan ideology. He said Republicans and Democrats must find a middle ground between taxes and cuts to state programs.

California was supposed to have a budget in place by July 1, the start of the fiscal year, but lawmakers differ over how to close the $15.2 billion deficit.

“This compromise budget proposal puts our state on the road to fiscal sanity and will give California a budget that works,” Schwarzenegger said at a news conference.

The governor’s proposal has put him in the curious position of having Democrats as allies, and getting criticism from his own Republican party.

Senate majority leader Sen. Gloria Romero, D-Los Angeles, said she appreciated the governor taking a practical view of the budget.

“I applaud the governor for forgetting about campaign pledges and ideology and trying to do what is right for California,” said Romero. “We have to do cuts and we have to have new revenue … we can’t borrow our way out.”

But Assemblyman Bob Huff, R-Diamond Bar, said he expected there would be no compromise as long as new taxes were part of the plan.

“It’s a non-starter for us. … it is the wrong thing to do to people in this kind of economy,” said Huff. “Sadly, the governor has lost credibility on both sides of the aisle… he has not been the strong rudder he was earlier in his term.”

Read more.

The fight in the conservative district

There are some fighting words in Fred Ortega’s article about the open Senate seat in the 29th District. State Sen. Bob Margett is vacating the seat, and now Bob Huff and Dennis Mountjoy are going to duke it out to represent the convservative district.

“Bob Huff has no name ID and Margett’s endorsement doesn’t mean much,” said Mountjoy, whose father served in the Assembly from 1978 to 1995 and authored Proposition 187, the controversial measure that would have denied state services to illegal aliens. “The Mountjoy name has been on the ballot for 30 years and is still good and strong. It stands for principle.”

Bustamante dethroned

Cruz Bustamante, former Lt. Governor and possible consultant for the city of Irwindale, lost his throne today as the “King of the Highest FPPC Fine” to Sen. Carole Migden, the Sacramento Bee reported. Bustamante was fined $263,000 in April 2004 for a variety of FPPC violations

Commission approves Migden fine
By Aurelio Rojas – arojas@sacbee.com
Thursday, March 20, 2008

California’s political watchdog agency today approved an agreement under which state Sen. Carole Migden will pay a record $350,000 fine for 89 campaign spending and disclosure violations, including illegal personal use of campaign funds.

The fine is the largest against a single state official in the Fair Political Practices Commission’s three decades of existence and comes as the San Francisco Democrat is battling to retain her seat in a June primary election against Assemblyman Mark Leno and former Assemblyman Joe Nation.

Migden was campaigning in the Bay Area today and did not attend the FPPC hearing.

But her attorney, James Harrison, told reporters the violations occurred because of inadequate record keeping by Migden’s former campaign treasurer and his assistant.

Harrison said the senator delegated authority because she was battling cancer at the time and her energy was focused on her duties as an officeholder.

“She’s not pointing the finger at anyone,” Harrison said. “At the end of the day, she’s the candidate and she’s responsible.”

Readers respond to illegal immigration bills

Interesting comments, such as “Get the ILLEGALS out of this country,” to “screw u bob huff”  made in response to Bethania Palma’s story that ran today about Assemblyman Bob Huff, R-Diamond Bar, who is proposing a package of bills aimed at discouraging illegal immigration. Here’s a clip of the story. Read more.

5-bill package targets illegals
Huff’s legislation aimed at migrants said unlikely to pass
By Bethania Palma, Staff Writer
Article Launched: 03/15/2008 10:06:00 PM PDT

A package of Assembly bills aimed at discouraging illegal immigration is circulating the Assembly, though none of the five measures is likely to become legislation.

The bills, authored by Assemblyman Bob Huff, R-Diamond Bar, aim to revoke the constitutional birthright to citizenship for children whose parents are not U.S. citizens and eliminate other rights for undocumented immigrants.

“Most people don’t think that just because you happen to be in this country and have a baby, it should be a citizen,” Huff said. “What is it that inherently entitles that person to all the rights that belong to people here legitimately?”

Harry Pachon, professor of public policy at USC, said the bills are too extreme and not well thought-out.

“It’s posturing to a certain ideology that believes unauthorized immigrants are the root of all problems,” he said. “Drafting draconian proposals on them is easy, because who speaks for the unauthorized immigrant?”

‘I never look at who my donors are…’

Reporter Dan Abendschein wrote this story today about a bill proposed by Sen. Ron Calderon that would open medical records to pharmaceutical companies. Oh, and by the way, Calderon got $15,000 in contributions from these companies, Abendschein wrote.

In 2007, Calderon received more than $15,000 in contributions from pharmaceutical companies and retail pharmacies, records show. Two of his contributors, Rite Aid and the National Association of Chain Drug Stores, are supporters of the bill. The sponsor of the bill is a drug company, Adheris, which is a for-profit company that works to keep patients taking their medications.

Company officials did not return phone calls Friday. Calderon says the bill would help companies like Adheris carry out their mission. He added that his concern is for patients, and it is irrelevant whether drug companies and pharmacies benefit or not.

But don’t worry. It doesn’t have any impact on Calderon’s decision, Abendschein reported.

“I never look at who my donors are before I decide to sponsor a bill,” said Calderon. “My idea is to help people get their medications.”

Bunch of ‘hypocrites’

The Sacramento Bee reported on Sunday that the Legilslature “plays by its own rules” when it comes to open government.

Legislature’s secrecy puts cloud over Sunshine Week, critics say
By John Hill – jhill@sacbee.com
Published 12:00 am PDT Sunday, March 16, 2008
Story appeared in MAIN NEWS section, Page A1

After years as a county supervisor, Todd Spitzer believed in open government and wanted to bring a dose of it to his new home in the California Legislature.

He was about to learn a hard lesson: When it comes to open government, the Legislature plays by its own rules.

A bill Spitzer carried in 2004 would have made the Legislature subject to the same public records law that applies to everyone from the governor to Galt City Council members.

Spitzer’s Assembly Bill 2714 sparked a rare instance of bipartisanship. No one on the committee, Democrat or Republican, made a motion to consider it.

“I didn’t even get a courtesy vote,” Spitzer recalls.

The Orange County Republican had just run up against the Legislative Open Records Act a state law with a name that some, including Spitzer, find ironic.

“We’re great about telling everyone else about having open government,” Spitzer said. “When it comes to ourselves, we’re complete hypocrites.”