Marriage Initiative Authors Challenge Its Renaming

Sponsors of an initiative that would bar legal recognition of gay marriage in California went to court Monday to challenge the title state officials gave their measure on the March ballot.

Proponents of Proposition 22 say the title, “Limit on Marriage,” is misleading and gives the initiative an unpleasant image.

“That word--limit--just has a negative connotation, and research has shown that it turns people off,” said Rob Stutzman, manager of the Protection of Marriage Committee, the lead advocate group for Proposition 22. “Besides that, we don’t think it’s an accurate description at all.”

The spat over the controversial measure’s title has been simmering for months, sparked by protests from foes of the initiative who disliked its original name, “‘Definition of Marriage.” That title was assigned to the measure more than a year ago and used on petitions circulated to place it on the ballot.

After considering opponents’ arguments, state Atty. Gen. Bill Lockyer last month changed the name to “Limit on Marriage.” That title will be used on the official ballot and also in official materials sent to voters’ homes before the election.

Supporters of Proposition 22 say the new name violates an election law requiring that the title be an impartial statement that is unlikely to “create prejudice for or against the proposed measure.” In its court papers, the Protection of Marriage Committee argues that the new title “panders to people’s prejudices against limits and restrictions.”

In a harshly worded news release, proponents also accused Lockyer of political motivations, charging that he is “trying to placate opponents of Proposition 22 by putting a misleading political spin on the title.”

Lockyer’s spokesman, Nathan Barankin, said politics had nothing to do with the name change and defended the new title.

“Our job is to accurately describe what the initiative does, not what the proponents would hope it does, not what the opponents would have you believe,” Barankin said. “The word ‘limit’ defines what the initiative does.”

While the Protection of Marriage Committee described Lockyer’s action as extraordinary, in fact a change in the title or summary description of an initiative on the eve of the ballot printing is not unusual. When a proposed initiative is cleared for the signature-gathering phase, the attorney general’s office gives it a preliminary title and short description for use on petitions. If a measure ultimately qualifies for the ballot, it is given closer scrutiny and the title is reassessed.

On the March 2000 primary ballot, Proposition 22 is one of six measures whose titles were changed, the secretary of state’s office said. Most of it was minor tinkering that would seem to have little bearing on how an initiative is perceived. But analysts say the title can sometimes be a vital source of information--especially for voters who come to the polls unprepared.

“For some voters, the title--and the proposition number--may be the only thing they connect up with” on election day, said Gale Kaufman, a veteran Democratic campaign consultant who believes that the “limit” description is a fair one. “It can definitely influence a certain number of voters.”

Wayne Johnson, a Republican political consultant, said that is especially true for ballots laden with a long list of initiatives. In March, California voters may be asked to decide as many as 21 measures--some of them complicated--and will weigh in on the presidential and U.S. Senate races as well.

“When they’re wading through all that,” Johnson said, “the title in some cases may be as far as they go.”

Johnson said that’s why it’s vital that the title be an accurate synopsis of what the measure is about. In his view, “Limit on Marriage” fails the test.

“It implies that the institution of marriage in California today would somehow change if this passes, and that’s not the case,” Johnson said. “It’s also pejorative language.”

Sponsored by state Sen. William J. “Pete” Knight (R-Palmdale), Proposition 22 would bar the state from legally recognizing marriages between people of the same sex, thereby denying such couples marital benefits.

Although legal same-sex marriage is now banned everywhere in the United States, court cases pending in several states could make it a reality soon. Proposition 22 is aimed at preventing gay couples who might wed in one of those states from relocating to California and having their unions recognized here.

Barankin said that is why the term “limit” is accurate: “If this passes, it would limit [those marriages] from other states that our state now recognizes.”

Although it’s one of the shortest initiatives in state history at just 14 words, the measure is expected to generate the most emotional campaign of the political season. It has divided the religious community and sparked a massive grass-roots opposition effort in the gay and lesbian community.

A hearing on the title challenge may be held as early as Wednesday in Sacramento Superior Court.