There are candidates who deserve to lose this Tuesday. Candidates who didn't run a good campaign; candidates who didn't have a strong message; candidates who made stupid mistakes. And even candidates who failed in all these ways. There are candidates who deserve to win, but will lose anyway -- people caught up in ruin that is our economy despite their best efforts to do something about it.
And then there are three non-candidates who, according to a respected polling form, are likely to lose their jobs for no other reasons than the ignorance of the electorate and the ability of a small group of people to whip up animus.
Justices David Baker, Michael Streit and Chief Justice Marsha Ternus, three of the seven members of the Iowa Supreme Court who voted unanimously in favor of equal marriage rights, are each up for retention votes in Iowa on Tuesday. And according to a poll taken by the respected Seltzer & Co outfit
37 percent of likely voters intend to vote to remove all three justices and 34 percent say they will vote to retain all the judges. Another 10 percent plan to retain only some justices, 11 percent don't intend on vote on the judges and 8 percent aren't sure how they'll vote.
You can help them out here.
If they are in fact dismissed, what effect will this have on marriage equality in Iowa? None. The decision, Varnum v. Brien, will stand. The Constitution of the State of Iowa will still demand equality for its citizens. Marriages will not be voided (nor will a vengeful God forestall His plague of locusts -- scheduled to descend on the Iowa corn fields this coming summer in retribution for such hubris).
The only thing that will happen is that three people who have served on the Iowa Supreme Court for seventeen years (!) (in Judge Ternus' case), nine years (in Judge Streit's case) and two years (Judge Baker) will be tossed into the electoral dumpster.
Who's backing this campaign? The National Organization Against for Marriage (NOM).
((NOM has)) already spent more than $500,000 on what is usually a sleepy retention election and may spend even more before election day.
NOM wants to send a message to other judges:
NOM President Brian Brown told the AP, "I cannot overstate the significance of what is about to happen in Iowa."
NOM has vast experience in figuring out how to make the average heterosexual feel, shall we say, uncomfortable about the idea of two people of the same sex loving each other. And in implying that such love, if recognized, would infect 'the children'. (C.f. California and Maine). Worse, they are very good at it, and they seem poised to indeed make their message heard, putting another notch in their bigotry belt in two days time.
And what of the people they are trying to influence? True, it is the peoples' right according to the laws and Constitution of Iowa to vote to retain or not retain these judges. For whatever reason. Unfortunately, it's looking like the people of Iowa are best exemplified by the reasoning of one Raymond Curran...
"I have no problem with gay rights, but it just seems like it's being rammed down our throats," said the 46-year-old Curran. "The judges are supposed to follow the will of the people."
It's a shame Mr. Curran isn't being graded on his response. Your high school civics teacher would not be happy, Raymond.
Judges are not supposed to follow the will of the people. That's the whole point. The Legislature is supposed to represent the will of the people, and the Courts are supposed to protect the rights of individuals against overzealous exercise thereof. It's why the Iowa Constitution has an equal protection clause to begin with.
If you want to vote on the real issue, then vote this person out:
He's the one who, heroically or reprehensibly, depending on your point of view, is standing in the way of your vote. Once you've gotten rid of him and like-minded people in your Legislature, you can change the Iowa Constitution to reflect the will prejudices of the people. (Or maybe not! See Perry v. Schwarzenegger).
Still, Ray, I'm going to bet that even if you don't have a problem with gay rights, you wouldn't want your sister to marry one.
================
Postscript: Even thought the Judges in question are not campaigning themselves, it is possible to help them via Act Blue. You can find information on the judges here (PDF).