Increasingly, the Republican Party and those in its Christianist/Tea Party base seem to support representative government and the U. S. Constitution only when they suit their purposes. Here in Virginia, the Republican Party of Virginia is pressing forward with an extremist agenda that is clearly opposed by most Virginians. But that's apparently fine and good with the extremists and they argue that the people voted them into office. But when elected bodies approve measures that conflict with the hate and prejudices of the far right and their puppets in the GOP, then suddenly legislative action is not enough. No, instead they want a referendum and an opportunity to stir up the haters and bigots so as to try to reverse legislative and judicial action. While doing this, of course, they claim that they are the true protectors of the Constitution even as their actions flout the framework drawn up by the Founding Fathers. Andrew Sullivan has commentary on this hypocrisy and effort to undermine the U. S. Constitution and representative government. Here are highlights:
As the GOP moves relentlessly off the far right cliff, the country is edging relentlessly toward accepting the humanity of gay couples and our marriages and relationships. But Chris Christie's veto - after New Jersey's legislature backed equality - and Maryland's upcoming referendum - after its legislature and governor passed a marriage equality law - form a sad last ditch.
To give some perspective, when we first started this push for marriage equality twenty three years ago or so . . . the opposition was adamant about one thing: the courts had nothing whatever to do with ensuring minority rights, if that minority were gay. . . . . I thought that public education and state legislative debate was the right way forward. If in the end, the courts reacted to a shift in public opinion, and we won the constitutional and legal arguments, great. But I thought state legislatures were the main way to go.
So we did. And guess what? They moved the goalposts on us. When we actually began to win in state legislatures, such as California (twice!), or New Hampshire, or now Maryland and New Jersey and Washington State, that process became suddenly unacceptable - and undemocratic! - as well. Even on an issue many hold to be a core civil right, we were told the courts were irrelevant and now that the legislatures were irrelevant. This was particularly odd coming from conservatives who at one point in time were strong believers in restraints on majority tyranny.
The polls are now increasingly on our side. But the way in which a tiny 2- 3 percent minority seeking basic civil equality has been forced now to be subject to state referendums, even after winning legislative victories, strikes me as revealing. It's basically an attack on representative government, a resort to the forms of decision-making which maximize the potential for anonymous bigotry and minimize the importance of representative government, a core achievement of Anglo-American democracy, that can help enhance reason of the accountable against the sometimes raw prejudice of the majority.
[Christie's veto] was an act of cowardice and unfairness and a misguided disregard for representative democracy. How many other duly enacted laws must now be sent to the referendum process for final judgment. Why have a legislature at all? And this from the party that claims to defend the Constitution.
