No one, regardless of sexual orientation, should be deprived of the ability to marry the person they love.

That might seem like a fundamental and bedrock idea, but for California and the nation, it’s relatively new. And, unfortunately, there is no assurance the U.S. Supreme Court will remain on board.

That’s why voters in California’s Nov. 5 election must pass Proposition 3, which would update the state Constitution to match the mores of the 21st century.

The growth in national public support and legal protections for gay marriage over the past quarter century has been monumental.

Just 24 years ago, 62% of state voters approved Proposition 22, which affirmed in state law that only marriage between a man and a woman would be valid or recognized in California.

That was upended in May 2008, when the California Supreme Court ruled that same-sex couples had a fundamental right under the state Constitution to marry.

But later that year, 52% of California voters supported an initiative, Proposition 8, that added a ban on same-sex marriage to the state Constitution.

That was overturned with U.S. Supreme Court rulings in 2013 and 2015 that cleared the way for gay marriage in California and established a federal constitutional right nationwide.

Regrettably, that might not be the final word. The narrow 5-4 ruling in 2015 could be in danger with the conservative shift of the high court. Of the five justices in the majority nine years ago, only two, Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor, remain on the court today.

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., who today is considered one of the more moderate members of the court, dissented in the 2015 ruling. And, in the court’s 2022 ruling overturning constitutional protections for abortion rights, Justice Clarence Thomas issued a concurring opinion arguing that gay rights should also be subject to state-by-state review.

Thus, there is no guarantee that gay-marriage protections would survive review of the current U.S. Supreme Court any better than abortion rights did. Once again, a key issue of personal liberty could be relegated to each state to decide.

Making matters worse, right now in California, the 2008 wording of Proposition 8, even though struck down by the courts, remains in the state Constitution. Proposition 3 would fix that, repealing Proposition 8 and recognizing the fundamental right to marry, regardless of race or sex.

Proposition 3 would ensure California’s Constitution keeps up with changing public sentiment. In 2000, 38% of likely voters surveyed by the Public Policy Institute of California said they supported gay marriage. By last year that support had doubled, to 75%.

In polling this year for the Los Angeles Times, 71% of adults nationwide and 72% of Californians said that the 2015 U.S. Supreme Court ruling legalizing same-sex marriage in all states should be left intact.

There’s no guarantee that will happen. Californians should inoculate the state against a federal reversal of same-sex marriage rights by passing Proposition 3.

Originally Published: August 9, 2024 at 5:35 a.m.

In recognition of 20 years of its vital role in supporting rehabilitation and reducing recidivism for individuals in the state of California, Assemblyman Gregg Hart, on behalf of the California State Assembly, formally honored the Freedom to Choose Project (FTC) with a resolution acknowledging the organization’s impact on transforming lives. 

For over 20 years, the Freedom to Choose Project has been a beacon of hope, empowering nearly 10,000 incarcerated people through its programs. The Santa Barbara-based non-profit has delivered over 218,700 hours of in-person education and engaged nearly 1,000 volunteers who have collectively contributed over 100,000 hours of volunteer service. Their curriculum has been pivotal in fostering rehabilitation in every state prison across California.

Forrest Leichtberg, Executive Director, expressed his gratitude for this recognition: “Receiving this resolution is an honor and a testament to the dedication of our founders, alumni, volunteers, and staff. For over 20 years, we have witnessed the power of our programs. This formal acknowledgment affirms our commitment to continue supporting even more individuals on their journey of healing and rehabilitation.”

The Freedom to Choose Project equips participants with essential life skills, including conflict resolution, nonviolent communication, emotional intelligence, social intelligence, positive choice-making, and self-awareness. These programs significantly reduce recidivism rates and support participants in overcoming challenges such as educational deficits, substance abuse, and emotional health issues.

Assembly Member Gregg Hart, who sponsored the resolution, states: “Our entire community is proud to recognize Freedom to Choose for their outstanding work in helping incarcerated individuals become better neighbors through education, mentorship, and support. Freedom to Choose transforms lives.”

FTC founders, Drs. Bonnie and David Paul, state: “We are delighted by this recognition from the State of California, acknowledging our 20 years of impact, and excited to expand into additional prisons and new sectors as we foster a more compassionate society.”

The curriculum is delivered through three impactful program areas: 1. In-person workshops; 2. Small study groups to facilitate self-directed learning and peer mentorship; 3. A correspondence program that extends educational opportunities through written assignments.               

As the Freedom to Choose Project celebrates this milestone, it is poised to expand to additional facilities across California and into other states and countries.

Founded in 2004 in Santa Barbara, California, by Drs. Bonnie and David Paul, the Freedom to Choose Project’s mission is to transform the lives of individuals impacted by incarceration through compassionate experiential education. For more information, visit www.freedomtochooseproject.org or contact info@freedomtochooseproject.org.

Freedom to Choose Project

Falling mortgage rates should come with a warning label stating: “Be careful what you wish for!”

This summer’s cheaper home loans ignited real estate buzz suggesting California’s two-year homebuying slump may be nearing its end.

The Federal Reserve’s lengthy battle against inflation – fueled by higher interest rates – helped make California homebuying nearly impossible for most house hunters. But mid-2024’s moderating cost of living, plus overall economic lethargy, has already trimmed mortgage rates off 20-year highs. Come September, the Fed is expected to begin cutting its benchmark rates.

Yes, lower rates mildly prune California’s huge affordability challenges. Some industry insiders even speculate these savings could create a rush to buy, forcing California prices even higher.

But the same cheaper mortgages that lead to a “buy now” narrative are often signals of economic trouble. Remember, interest rates typically fall when the business climate cools.

By the numbers

To contemplate the mix of rates and pricing, I filled my trusty spreadsheet with these stats dating to 1977: the average 30-year mortgage from Freddie Mac, California home price data from the Federal Housing Finance Agency, and what you may think is an odd number: the state’s unemployment rate from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Consider what we learn when slicing history into 12-month periods, simply based on whether mortgage rates got pricier or cheaper over the past 47 years.

When mortgage rates grew over a year’s time, California home prices averaged 10%-a-year gains.

Then look at what happens when mortgage rates fell. California prices gained only 4.4% on average. Yes, less than half.

Now, let’s not blindly cheer rising rates. Think about a theoretical buyer’s house payment using math that combines these pricing patterns and rate swings.

When rates rise over a year, estimated California house payments jumped 21% on average. Pricier homes plus pricier loans is a painful bite to the wallet. But buyers seem willing to pay up.

Conversely, payments in times of falling rates dropped by 2.6% a year on average. So it’s the cheaper money that creates whatever meager affordability exists in California.

Now, these results may seem illogical as pictured through a traditional real estate lens. But take a broader view of the economy and ponder the cyclical health of California’s job market.

When mortgage rates rose during the past half century, the statewide unemployment was falling by 0.7 percentage points per year on average. Basically, interest rates rise when times are good and bosses are hiring.

Unfortunately, when the economy gets too hot – such we saw in 2021 to 2023 – the bond market and/or the Fed may play Grinch, pushing up interest rates, and spoiling the economic party.

Contrast that pattern to how the economy performs when loan rates decline during the past half century: California joblessness was increasing by 0.3 percentage points. So fewer jobs, less demand for all sorts of goods and services – and a Fed more willing to help.

Bottom line

Don’t overthink housing’s sometimes myopic data. It’s really about real estate’s three pillars: “Jobs. Jobs. Jobs.”

In the past 47 years, when jobs are scarce and unemployment rises in a year, California home prices average 2% gains. When unemployment drops, prices rise 9%.

Please note that California joblessness has been above 5% for 10 months, after reaching an all-time low of 3.8% in August 2022.

You see, successful house hunting requires not only a paycheck – but confidence that you’ll remain employed. And cheaper mortgages frequently come with a weaker business climate and depressed consumer confidence.

That can make California house hunters think twice about paying top dollar for housing. It’s a key reason why you see weaker pricing when rates are down.

Of course, every cycle is different. Maybe the odd post-pandemic real estate market will act unlike the statistical norms shown by this math.

Ponder history’s extremes. Prices jumped 29% with lower rates in the year ended in September 2004. But cheaper mortgages did not prevent a 23% drop in the 12 months ended September 2008.

So summer 2024 might be a “buy now” moment with tumbling rates helping to push California home prices skyward. But the true catalyst would be an economy that nails an Olympic-quality soft landing with few job losses.

My spreadsheet also tells me that since 1977 when mortgages got cheaper in a year, California home prices rose 67% of the time. Not bad odds.

But when rates were rising, price gains came 85% of the time.

Postscript

The economic fallout of cheaper mortgages has modestly varied in the past half century, depending on the size of the rate drops. Ponder these California examples of one-year dips …

Rates down half-percentage-point or more: Home prices rose 3.6% in 12 months on average in these situations. Again, a weak economy, as California’s unemployment rate averaged a 0.9-point increase in a year.

Off three-quarters-point or more: Prices up 2.5%. Unemployment up 1.1 points.

Off 1 point or more: Prices rise 4.2%. Unemployment up 0.6 points.

Jonathan Lansner is the business columnist for the Southern California News Group. He can be reached at jlansner@scng.com

Originally Published: August 8, 2024 at 8:08 a.m.