California is known to be a land of golden beaches, snow-tipped mountains, vineyards and theme parks. Hollywood, sprawling golf greens, and hot springs in the southern desert (Find Yourself Here) all make their home in the western state. Politically, California is better known for being a hotbed of liberal social ideals; that being manifested in the past five presidential elections where the state has gone unquestionably ‘blue’ for the Democrats (Cummings & Wise, back over). Yet that is a simplification of California’s changing political realm.

   Californians are far more fiscally conservative in their spending and taxation policy (Baldassare, xii) than their social policy. Generally distrustful of government (Baldassare, xi), California voters recalled their Governor in 2003 and in a special election Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger was elected (Baldassare & Katz, 67). Although a Republican, Schwarzenegger’s political ideology lies more towards moderate than is traditional of members of the Republican Party, making him compatible with the state. California’s current two Senators are Barbra Boxer and Dianne Feinstein, both Democrats (U.S. Senate: Senators). The state is a blend of conservatism and liberal ideals, each applying to certain sectors of California, combined with highly volatile public opinion (Baldassare, xii). The state image portrayed nationally is not the same as the domestic reality California faces; it is a divided state becoming more polarized with each election that passes.

   There are large populations of minority groups living within the state, including Asian and Hispanic communities (Find Yourself Here). California’s border with Mexico has, especially in recent years, increased the Hispanic population in the state. The growing political polarization can be attributed in part to the immigrant groups whose values are changing the social fabric of the state. While there is a vast array of ethnic communities in the state, there are also an array of cultural and social groups that call the state home, including a large Gay, Lesbian, Bi-sexual and Transgender community. California has “100,000 households headed by gay couples” (Dolan) the 2000 U.S. Census stated, but there is thought to be quite a few more (Guerra).

   While citizens of all religions, ethnicities and orientations have coexisted in California for decades, the past ten years have seen an increase in tensions between certain communities over social issues. In 2005, the California Assembly voted in favor of allowing gay and lesbian couples to marry in the state (Dignan), the first such decision of any state in the country. It was hailed as a step forward for human rights and equality for all Americans, not just those in the state. The Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act changed the legal definition of marriage to “two persons” instead of the traditionally accepted “man and woman” (Dignan & Pomfret, A01). Conservative Republicans in the state, as well as religious leaders opposed the decision (Dignan & Pomfret, A01). Ultimately, the decision was vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger, who “supports domestic partnerships but opposes same-sex marriage” (Dignan & Pomfret, A01). In May of 2008 the issue was once again a topic of contention when California’s Supreme Court voted 4-3 to uphold the Constitution by giving all Californian’s “equal rights” (Dolan). The decision was surprising; many did not predict that a Republican-leaning court would take such a step forward for gay and lesbian rights, especially with Californian courts being seen as a leader in influencing other state courts (Dolan).

   The reaction was instantaneous from religious officials and opponents of gay marriage, who then turned to Proposition 8, which would be on the ballot in the November 2008 election. Proposition 8 was the response of the right-wing Californians who believed in keeping marriage between a man and a woman. It was preceded by Proposition 22 as a ballot initiative in the 2000 election, which stated that the only marriage recognized or valid in the state of California was between a man and a woman (California Proposition 22). Proposition 22 passed with 61.4 percent of the vote, and won fifty-two of the fifty-eight counties in California (California Proposition 22). At the same time California voters were putting their support firmly behind Democrat Al Gore, who later came to publically support gay rights (Al Gore: Gay Men and Women), they were also limiting the rights of citizens in their own state.

   Proposition 8 was put on the California ballot by “a broad-based coalition of California families, community leaders, religious leaders, pro-family organizations and individuals from all walks of life” (Yes on 8). Over one million signatures were needed to place the proposition on the ballot which was worded exactly the same as Proposition 22- “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid and recognized in California” (Yes on 8). The Proposition would not change the existing rights or benefits of homosexual individuals in California, but would prevent them from gaining the right to enter into marriage the same as a heterosexual couple (Yes on 8). The Proposition had nothing to do with the teaching of marriage in schools, the tax-exempt status of churches, or the right of parents to object to the content their children learn, unlike what many on the Pro-Proposition side claimed (Vote NO on Prop 8).

   Both sides of the Proposition 8 ticket campaigned intently for and against the measure. Those against the proposition raised almost forty million dollars, and gained the support of California news outlets, universities, school boards and celebrities alike, including Governor Schwarzenegger’s wife Maria Schriver (Vote NO on Prop 8). Those who opposed the measure created a grassroots movement, similar to that of Senator Obama’s presidential campaign, across the state to bring their side to the public (Vote NO on Prop 8). Record numbers of volunteers donated their time and money, and popular Latin American stars filmed television ads to help the cause (Kravitz). The ‘yes’ side rallied the support of the religious and religious organizations in and outside of the state, playing to the more traditional values that have been building in communities, especially with the uptake in recent immigration. Early on, it looked like the proposition would fail, but the ‘yes’ side hoped the ‘Bradley Effect’ would help them in the long run. Similar in theory to what may apply to the national presidential race, the Bradley Effect occurs when polled citizens respond differently than they intend to vote, as to not appear racist, or in this case, homophobic (Rojas). The Yes On 8 Campaign believed that since “the media portrays gay marriages as being politically correct, people don’t want to be seen by pollsters as being intolerant” (Rojas), and this would cause many of the early polls to be incorrect.

   The vote was expected to be narrow, and on election night it was close, but 52 percent of Californian’s voted in favor of Proposition 8 (Local Ballot Measures). On November 6th, the front page of the No On Prop 8 website stated that “fueled by misinformation, distortion and lies, millions of voters went to the polls yesterday and said YES to bigotry, YES to discrimination, [and] YES to second-class status for same-sex couples” (Vote NO on Prop 8). The vote followed similar results in Arizona and Florida, as well as a measure in Arkansas to ban gay couples from adopting children (Local Ballot Measures). What was a huge step forward for ethnic equality with the election of Barack Obama was, as a whole across the country, a defeat of equal rights for everyone.

   In the weeks that have followed, Californians have taken to the streets to protest the decision “boisterous[ly] but peacefully” (Church told 'obvious lies,' gay activists allege), and have been preparing lawsuits (Emotional Board of Supervisors backs Prop. 8 challenge) in hopes that the Californian Supreme Court can once again overturn the decision based on the constitution. Yet the bigger issue at hand is not whether or not the proposition will stand up, it is why it passed at all. Why in California, a leader for equality and marriage rights, did the proposition pass?

   Much of the answer can be found within the changing social values in the state that have finally gained momentum within the state. When Proposition 22 was passed in 2000, gay rights were still considered a taboo subject and both Democrats and Republicans assumed the ballot wouldn’t pass. Eight years later, however, Proposition 8’s failing is a sign of the true nature of California’s electorate. California’s Hispanic population makes up 32 percent of all Californians in the state (Profile of California), and Mexicans make up 25 percent of that number (Profile of California). Traditionally Catholic, the Hispanic community plays a growing role in the values exhibited in California, especially in the southern area in and around San Diego and Orange counties. The Hispanic population in California more closely aligns with the Republican Party on issues of a social nature- abortion, gay rights, marriage and the death penalty. They are more moderate on issues of public and fiscal policy, but it is with the Democrats that the immigration policy secures their votes. While many in the Hispanic community may have voted for Barack Obama, they also voted for Proposition 8 (Blair), in face of being heavily courted by the ‘no’ side in messages in both English and Spanish (Haro). The Hispanic influence was most heavily seen in the counties of a more rural nature; however they were the swing vote in urban centers such as Los Angeles that had very close margins (Blair).

   While the Hispanic community may make up a large potion of California’s minority voters, large Asian and African-American populations were also necessary in the passing of Proposition 8. Both groups have strong traditional values; many of which stem from religion. From exit polls, seventy percent or more of African-American voters cast their ballot in favor of the measure (Blair). Before the election, several church congregations became angry when their reverends reminded them of the continuing discrimination and oppression that still faces African-Americans and other minority groups (Blair), and the similarities the Gay, Lesbian, Bi-sexual and Transgendered community face as well. In 2000, or in 2004, the voting percentage of these minority groups was small enough in the state that this added moral stance on social issues wouldn’t have had such an impact. Yet with increased immigration, especially by Hispanics, into the state there has been an increase in ideals and voters. Views aside, if the minority populations had voted in numbers similar to those in the past elections, Proposition 8 would have been much closer, and possibly failed. Yet in the outpouring of support for Senator Barack Obama, the percentage of minority voters drastically increased in 2008 (Haro).

   Registration drives took place all across the country in an attempt by both national parties to garner votes in November. For the 2008 election, the goal both nationally and state-wide of registration groups was simply to “make the voting process accessible to a growing electorate” (Vela). In California, specific drives took place targeting Hispanic (Vela) and African-American citizens who until now had never been registered to vote. These were very successful, and the Democrats benefited greatly. At the same time, state-wide ballot measures across the country were impacted by a larger minority vote leaning towards traditional values.

   It is not easy to pinpoint one factor that was the overwhelming influence on the outcome of Proposition 8 in California. However, a larger view of the American electorate can be taken from the outcome and factors of California’s vote. Over the past eight years Americans have lived under a Republican government that many see as a mistake. With a crumbling economy, two wars, rising unemployment and dwindling international allies, the American electorate was looking for a drastic change of direction for the country. They elected the first African-American president, a Democrat, and sent a clear message to the Republican Party through Senate, Governor and Congressional contests. California voted for a Democratic president, and gave more of their Congress seats to Democrats as well. But with all conditions pointing towards a change of direction, there is a definitive limit as to how ‘left’ Americans are willing to move (Giannuzzi). In California, arguably the most liberal state in the country, the chance to give homosexual couples the right to marry was denied because that would be crossing into a “socialist utopia” (Giannuozzi). The measures dealing with gay marriage, abortion and the end of affirmative action that passed across the country (Local Ballot Measures) were a way for citizens to establish an amount of balance to the shift left in the 2008 election. Americans are ready for change, but not that much change.

   As in California, states known for their unquestionable ideologies are being changed by incoming immigrant’s traditional belief and cultural values, especially in the more southern states. This is strengthening the religious sector of the population, and introducing new challenges to the separation of church and state (Giannuzzi). America’s changing demographic will continue to ensure that individual states and the whole nation do not move too far left in the future.

   Yet above all, the approval of Proposition 8 and similar measures show that there is still discrimination across the country, in many forms. The very populations that have been discriminated against are now turning to a new, more accepted target. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Simkin) passed during the Civil Rights Movement paved the way for equality for all colors of Americans under the Constitution. Yet many are unwilling to have the same Constitution provide equality for men and women who work hard, pay their taxes, and many of whom are good parents. Discrimination against gay, lesbian, bi-sexual and transgendered individuals may be the last accepted form of discrimination in the country, now.

   Proposition 8, just like other similar measures, are contentious moral issues. They question citizen’s values and fundamental beliefs, many of which are founded in religion. California is a state where there has always been a blend of more liberal ideals and groups (Baldassare, xii), such as the gay, lesbian, bi-sexual and transgender community, as well as the more traditional African-American and Hispanic groups. Within the past ten years the pronouncement between left and right in California has grown, fueled in part by the added immigration into the state (Profile of California). While nationally Californian’s may be known for adding their electoral votes to the Democratic candidate (Cummings & Wise, back cover), state politics are not as clear-cut. Proposition 8’s passing in the 2008 election proved unquestionably that there is a changing social undercurrent in California that has begun to affect larger issues. Those against the measure poured thousands of volunteers and over forty million dollars (Vote NO on Prop 8) into campaigning against the discrimination that the proposition would bring to California. Similarly, those who had brought the measure forward campaigned on the ideas of preserving marriage as being between only a man and a woman (Yes on 8). With the proposition passed, attention turned as to why in California, a very liberal state in the nation, could pass such a measure. The growing traditional immigrant population influences California’s social ideology, but the number of voters in the Asian, African-American and Hispanic community were the real influence. Turning out to vote for Senator Barack Obama, their votes in favor of Proposition made a large difference in the total count, when 70 percent of African-Americans voted in favor (Blair).

   The biggest message that can be taken from the passing of Proposition 8 is that the American population still has a far ways to go in removing inequality for all. In 2000, when Californian’s voted on Proposition 22, 61.4 percent of the vote went in favor of upholding a traditional view of marriage (California Proposition 22). Great gains were made in the past eight years, but much of the acceptance and understanding was overridden by a segment of the population that voted to discriminate as it was discriminated against not so long ago (Simkin). This election was a turning point for the American public towards the Democratic Party, and hope, and change, for the future. Yet no matter the change they wanted and needed, American’s are still unwilling to venture too far ‘left’, and reaffirming the traditional definition of marriage was a way to help keep a balance (Giannuzzi). No matter the reasons, though, it is clear from the past two weeks (Church told 'obvious lies,' gay activists allege) that the gay, lesbian, bi-sexual, and transgendered communities in California and across the country are not willing to give up their fight for equality for all.


Works Cited

(2008, 01, 24). Al Gore: Gay Men and Women Ought To Have Marriage Rights .
Retrieved November 14, 2008, from The Advocate Web site: http://www.advocate.com/news_detail_ektid51780.asp

Baldassare, M. (2002). A California State of Mind. Los Angeles, CA: University of
California Press Ltd.

Baldassare, M. & Katz, C. (2008). The Coming Age of Direct Democracy:
California’s Recall and Beyond. USA: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.

Blair, E. (2008, 11, 06). Latin and Black Voters Instrumental to the Success of
Proposition 8. Retrieved November 14, 2008, from eFlux Media Web site: http://www.efluxmedia.com/news_Latin_and_Black_Voters_Instrumental_to_the_Success_of_Proposition_8_28299.html

(2000). Profile of California. Retrieved November 14, 2008, from Centstats Web
site: http://censtats.census.gov/data/CA/04006.pdf

(2008, 11, 13). Local Ballot Measures. Retrieved November 14, 2008, from CNN
Web site: http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/ballot.measures/

(2008). Church told 'obvious lies,' gay activists allege. Retrieved November 14,
2008, from CNN Web site: http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/11/10/gay. marriage.protests.ap/index.html?iref=newssearch

Cummings Jr., M. C. & Wise, D. (2007). Democracy Under Pressure: An
Introduction to the American Political System. U.S.A: Thomson Wadsworth.

Dignan, J. & Pomfret, J. (2005, 09, 07). California Legislature Approves Gay
Marriage. The Washington Post, p. A01. http://www.washingtonpost. com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/06/AR2005090602076.html

Dolan, M. (2008, 05, 16). California Supreme Court overturns gay marriage ban.
Los Angeles Times.

Giannuzzi, T. (2008, 11, 13). Sad irony behind U.S. voters who opposed gay
marriage. Calgary Herald.

Guerra, E. 2000 Census Information on Gay and Lesbian Couples. Retrieved
November 14, 2008, from Gay Demographics Web site: http://www.gaydemographics.org/USA/2000_Census_Total.htm

Haro, J. (2008, 11, 07). Prop. 8 and the Hispanic Vote. Retrieved November 14,
2008, from Hispanic Business Web site: http://www.hispanicbusiness. com/news/2008/11/7/prop_8_and_the_hispanic_vote.htm

Kravitz, R. (2008, 10, 26). "Ugly Betty" Stars Urge the Latino Community to Vote
"No" on Prop 8. Retrieved November 14, 2008, from Gay TV Blog Web site: http://www.gaytvblog.com/2008/10/ugly-betty-star.html

(2008, 11, 12). Emotional Board of Supervisors backs Prop. 8 challenge.
Retrieved November 14, 2008, from Los Angeles Times Web site: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2008/11/the-los-angeles.html

(2001). California Proposition 22. Retrieved November 14, 2008, from Marriage
Watch Web site: http://www.marriagewatch.org/media/prop22.htm

(2008). Vote NO on Prop 8. Retrieved November 14, 2008, from No on 8 Web
site: http://www.noonprop8.com/

(2008). Yes on 8. Retrieved November 14, 2008, from Protect Marriage Web site:
http://www.protectmarriage.com/

Rojas, A. (2008, 10, 09). California poll on Prop. 8 could show 'Bradley effect;.
Sacramento Bee.

Simkin, J. 1964 Civil Rights Act. Retrieved November 14, 2008, from Sparticus
Educational Web site: http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USAcivil 64.htm

(2007). U.S. Senate: Senators. Retrieved November 14, 2008, from United
States Senate Web site: http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_ information/senators_cfm.cfm

(2008). Find Yourself Here. Retrieved November 14, 2008, from Visit California
Web site: http://www.visitcalifornia.com/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Home

Vela, R. (2008, 09, 28). Largest Latino Voting Drive in History Starts This
Weekend. Retrieved November 14, 2008, from The Hispanic Institute Web site: http://thehispanicinstitute.net/node/951