The only surprise in Gov. Linda Lingle’s announcement that she would veto HB 444 was that there were no surprises.
She based the veto on her opinion that civil unions are same-sex marriage by another name, a view she telegraphed more than a month ago, and that the issue should be decided by voter referendum — an easy political out that shores up her standing with Republicans opponents of same-sex unions, while not bashing gay voters whose support she courted when she ran for governor.
Lingle said her decision wasn’t based on politics, but the political analysis I wrote more than two months ago stood up pretty well:
(Civil unions supporters) probably right that deep in her heart the governor has no philosophical problem with civil unions. But from the standpoint of 2010 politics, it would be a surprise if Lingle allowed HB 444 to become law.
The immediate political consequence is that it would set her at odds with her lieutenant governor, James “Duke” Aiona, the leading opponent of the measure, and undercut one of his major issues in his already uphill campaign to succeed Lingle.
Aiona has been Lingle’s loyal partner, and she wouldn’t likely do that to him unless she had strong personal feelings on the issue that surely would have surfaced before now.
Lingle also will have an eye to her own political interests.
For much of her term, her moderate views and efforts to reach accommodation with the Democratic Legislature created such tensions with GOP conservatives that many referred to her as a RINO — Republican in Name Only.
As her time as governor nears an end and she eyes a future in a Republican Party that has turned sharply to the right since losing the presidency and Congress to Barack Obama and the Democrats, Lingle has worked hard to shore up her conservative flank.
She turned jeers from the right into cheers by hedging her support for O’ahu rail transit and the Akaka bill for Native Hawaiian political recognition. She’s also won points in the party for stepping up her rhetoric against higher taxes and battling the public worker unions.
It’s difficult to imagine her undoing all the gains she’s made within the GOP by crossing the party on gay unions, one of the biggest conservative litmus tests.
What happens next on civil unions depends a lot on the outcome of the November election.
If opponents of HB 444 manage to take out a few Democratic lawmakers who voted for it, or if the issue has a measurable impact in statewide races, we won’t likely see this bill again for a few years.
But if all the legislators who voted for it easily survive any challenges, and if candidates friendly to HB 444 do well in statewide races, there’s no reason why Democratic lawmakers won’t pass it again next year — perhaps by a veto-proof majority.
Who is elected to succeed Lingle also matters, of course. Aiona would never sign a civil unions bill, while Neil Abercrombie would relish an opportunity to enact it into law. Mufi Hannemann has tap-danced around taking a stance on HB 444, apparently trying to position himself to the right of Abercrombie in the Democratic primary, but to the left of Aiona if he makes it to the general election.
The Democratic primary for lieutenant governor will also provide a read on voter sentiment on civil unions, with two prominent opponents of HB 444 — Robert Bunda and Norman Sakamoto — running against supporters Lyla Berg, Gary Hooser, Jon Riki Karamatsu and Brian Schatz.
Like this:
Like Loading...
Recent Comments