Should The Elected Follow The Will Of The People?

Calif. Gay Marriage Bill Clears One Hurdle

By LISA LEFF
Associated Press Writer

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) -- A bill to legalize same-sex marriage in California cleared an Assembly committee Tuesday despite arguments that it violates a gay marriage ban approved by voters five years ago.

The 6-3 vote by the Assembly Judiciary Committee marked the first test for the measure, which would amend the state family code to define marriage as between "two persons" instead of between a man and a woman.

In 2000, more than 61 percent of California voters passed a proposition that said the state would only recognize marriages as between a man and a woman. The state Constitution prohibits the Legislature from amending statutes enacted by voters.

The bill's lead author, Assemblyman Mark Leno (Dem.), ... acknowledged, though, that a court would ultimately have to decide which interpretation was correct.

http://ap.washingtontimes.com/dynamic/stor...MS&SECTION=HOME

---

So in 2000 a majority of the people of California said they didn't want same-sex marriages.

But this week an elected representative authored a bill to recognize same-sex marriages.

Leno made history in November 2002 when he was elected as one of the first openly gay men to the California State Assembly, representing District 13, the eastern portion of San Francisco. So this guy certainly has a strong interest in this legislation, and it's good that an elected official has a passion for their beliefs.

- Does the elected representative have an obligation to follow the will of the people?
- Did the people elect this representative to represent their will?
- Does the elected representative follow their own will, even when it is in opposition to the will of the people?
- Should elected representatives amend statutes enacted by voters?
- Will this be another case of legislating through the courts?

We elect them to represent the will of the prople, and in trust that their actions will represent the wishes of the greater populace. It would be wrong for him to knowingly act in direct opposition to that. I see it as letting personal motivations get in the way of his job. However, it's not like there's no reason for people saying you can't trust a politician. Also, I understand that the will of the greater populace is often an unknown (for which I have an idea of a fix), but here, apparently, it is known what people want. Sounds from what I read here, like it was already decided not to recognise them. it would be wrong to change that without going through the general populace again, in the exact same way.

I think Mr Leno is representing his constituency. If I read Shama's post correctly Leno represents a predominately gay district hence the move to legalize gay marriage. If a majority of his colleges vote with him you could say they did not represent the will of their constituents.

Which, with the way the California Legislature is populated, is a very good possibility.

unfortunately, the same could be said for our federal level officials, Mac.