Gordon Dillow gets it right again! I wonder why he is not recognized and praised as much as he should be.

http://www.ocregister.com/articles/vote ... nia-passed

BE SURE TO GO TO THE LINK AND GIVE GORDON SOME PRAISE FOR ALWAYS SPEAKING THE TRUTH.

Sunday, May 18, 2008
Vote counts don't always count
Time and again, the wishes of the majority get the bum's rush.

GORDON DILLOW
Register columnist
GLDillow@aol.com
Comments 1 | Recommend 0

No matter how you feel about the California Supreme Court overturning the voter-approved state ban on same-sex marriages, you probably shouldn't be too surprised.
Because as history shows us, while the voters of California often speak, they don't necessarily get the last word.
As you probably know, the ban on same-sex marriages was passed by California voters by a 61 percent margin in March 2000. According to the Secretary of State's office, 2,909,370 voters had voted against the proposition, while 4,618,673 voters voted for it. But those votes were rendered irrelevant last week when four out of seven California Supreme Court justices agreed that the ban was contrary to the state constitution.
True, a proposed state constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriages that may be on the ballot this fall could trump the Supreme Court decision. But for now at least, the vote on the gay marriage ban stands at 4,618,673 to four – and the four votes prevail.
Again, that's not all that unusual. Since 1980, Californians have voted on more than 350 ballot measures, of which more than two thirds have been approved. But time and again, the wishes of a majority of voters have gotten the bum's rush.
Of course, most of the ballot measures we've voted on have involved pretty obscure stuff. I mean, how many people remember Prop. 111, the Traffic Congestion Relief and Spending Limitation Act of 1990? (It passed.) Or Prop. 74, the Deddeh Transportation Bond Act of 1988? (It failed.)
Or how about 1998's Prop. 6, which banned the sale for human consumption of horse, pony, burro and mule meat? Despite opposition from a group called "Just Say NEIGH on Prop. 6," it passed by a bare majority – and though you may not realize it, it remains illegal to sell a mule steak or a burro burrito in the state of California.
And sometimes a ballot issue we vote on isn't really intended to become law; it's more of a suggestion. For example, 1984's Prop. 38, which urged the U.S. Congress to require that voting materials be printed solely in English, was approved by 71 percent of the state's voters. If you want to see how persuasive that was, next time you go to the polls in Orange County, ask for a ballot in Chinese. You'll get one.
Sometimes we pass laws or constitutional amendments that actually go on the books but are simply forgotten. For example, 73 percent of California voters approved a 1986 amendment to the state constitution which stated in plain English that "English is the official language of the State of California." It's still there in the constitution, Article 3, Section 6, along with a provision directing the state legislature to "enforce this section by appropriate legislation." But the legislature never has.
Of course, the will of the voters isn't always ignored – the Prop. 184 "three strikes" law on criminal sentencing being a case in point. Passed by a 72 percent vote in 1994, and criticized by many as being too harsh, it was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2003.
But often it's not that clear cut. For example, Prop. 209, passed by a 54 percent margin in 1996, constitutionally banned preferential treatment by public agencies based on race, sex or ethnicity. Despite that, some public agencies still find loopholes to award contracts or benefits based on so-called "affirmative action." On the other hand, Prop. 209 has successfully been used to prevent race-based assignments or transfers of students in certain school districts, including the Huntington Beach Union High School District.
And sometimes the courts and the politicians put the all-out kibosh on voter-passed California laws. Perhaps the most famous example, until last week anyway, was 1994's Prop. 187, which would have denied health, education and other public benefits to illegal immigrants. It passed with 59 percent of the vote, but a federal court put a hold on it, and later the issue was dropped by Gov. Gray Davis – the will of the majority of voters notwithstanding.
Now, I'm not suggesting that the concept of "majority rule" should prevail in every case. The beauty of our system is that while it grants rights to the majority, it also protects the fundamental rights of the minority. The recurring problem is figuring out exactly what those fundamental rights are.
So yes, we have a right to vote on the great issues of the day. And when we go to the polls, we can be pretty sure that the votes will be counted.
But that doesn't always mean that our votes are going to count.
Contact the writer: CONTACT THE WRITER 714-796-7953 or GLDillow@aol.com