Friday, August 21, 2009

AG Statement

While I agree with the reasoning behind this, a second grader could have written Attorney General Van Hollen's statement- and probably without the gramatical issues in the first paragraph.
In November 2006, Wisconsin voters amended our State Constitution to declare that marriage was between one man and one woman. The amendment prohibits our government from recognizing any other legal status substantially similar to marriage. But the general domestic partnership provisions contained in Act 28 do just that recognize a legal status that is substantially similar to the legal status of marriage.

That is why I cannot represent the state in this case.

My decision isn't based on a policy disagreement. As Attorney General, I prosecute and defend laws that I wouldn't have voted for if I were a policymaker. That is what I believe the job entails.

But I will not ignore the Constitution. My oath isn't to the legislature or the governor. My duty is to the people of the State of Wisconsin and the highest expression of their will -- the Constitution of the State of Wisconsin. When the people have spoken by amending our Constitution, I will abide by their command. When policymakers have ignored their words, I will not.

To defend the law would require me to ignore the command of the voters when they passed the recent marriage amendment or to ignore the expressly stated intent of the legislature in enacting Chapter 770. I am unwilling to do either.
It seems informal and of an immature voice.

It angers me when our highest elected statewide Republican office holder puts something out to the media like this. It's crap. Do better.

But good decision- at least now maybe South East Wisconsin conservative talk radio can say something nice about him.

No comments: