Arnold Schwarzenegger | California | Gavin Newsom | Harvey Milk | News

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger Vetoes 'Harvey Milk Day' Bill

Arnold Schwarzenegger has vetoed legislation that would have approved May 22 as "Harvey Milk Day" in California.

HarveymilkthumbSaid Schwarzenegger in a statement: "I respect the author's intent to designate May 22nd as 'Harvey Milk Day' and a day of special significance for California public schools and educational institutions to honor Harvey Milk as an important community leader and public official in the city and county of San Francisco. However, I believe his contributions should continue to be recognized at the local level by those who were most impacted by his contributions."

The bill was authored by Assemblyman Mark Leno.

The California Senate approved the measure along party lines in August. Not one Republican voted for it. Religious right wing activists had been lobbying Schwarzenegger's office for weeks to have the legislation quashed, upset that it would 'promote homosexuality' in schools. Looks like they won.

This is outrageous. Milk is a civil rights leader who deserves this recognition. Let's not let the right win on same-sex marriage as well. Schwarzenegger should be ashamed.

Milk's story is, of course the subject of a major feature film directed by Gus van Sant starring Sean Penn, to be released at the end of November. You can read all our Harvey Milk and our Milk coverage here.

Watch the film's trailer, AFTER THE JUMP...

Feed This post's comment feed


  1. This is why ALL Republicans must be voted out of office.




    Posted by: David Ehrenstein | Oct 1, 2008 8:21:54 AM

  2. Does this mean that, in California, only African Amercians can celebrate Martin Luther King Day?

    Posted by: bostonbeardad | Oct 1, 2008 8:37:35 AM

  3. If we need another reason why "Gay Pride" marches and other similar public demonstrations are still necessary, we were just handed one on a silver platter.

    Posted by: excy | Oct 1, 2008 8:46:12 AM

  4. "Gay Pride" is necessary as long as it is actually gay pride and not porn stars on floats and a ridiculous reason to strip down in the streets.

    Actually celebrating great gay individuals in all the fields (science, art, politics, etc.) would make the "Gay Pride" marches and parades really great and show the contributions to society, that many closedminded heteros take for granted.

    Posted by: what | Oct 1, 2008 9:08:16 AM

  5. How about waiting for some boost to arrive from the Movie?
    Democrats and their stubborn disbelief in the power of marketing, especially when talking to a movie star.

    Posted by: Fabrizio | Oct 1, 2008 9:16:33 AM

  6. Guess now we know why he vetoed the "dog on lap" bill. He can hide behind his "I will veto any 'nonessential' bill mantra".

    Posted by: dk | Oct 1, 2008 9:25:45 AM

  7. bostonbeardad: Right on. Arnie's rationale is utter bullshit and highly offensive.

    what: If you don't like the way pride parades are organized, and want to see scientists, artists, etc in them, have you marched lately? Have you gotten a group of like-minded friends together and entered a float / parade contingent? If so, I applaud you. If you haven't, you should consider it.

    WE are responsible for our pride parades. Not someone else. Not "them" or "those people," but US.

    That means get involved, make the change YOU want to see, and be proud of all members of our community, not just those in "science, art, politics, etc." You want to see politicians in a pride parade? Invite them. Or better yet, run for something and then march. Get your artist friends to march together. Many pride parades are after Memorial Day in the US, so it's okay for the scientists to wear their white lab coats while they march.

    Sorry for the minor thread-jack. It just really pisses me off when people complain about "our" institutions and then never DO anything about them (except whine).

    what: if you HAVE done something, that's awesome, and thanks.

    Posted by: tjc | Oct 1, 2008 10:05:10 AM

  8. This should be a before-the-end-credits note on the movie.

    Posted by: MATH | Oct 1, 2008 10:20:48 AM

  9. Hummmmmmm... maybe, just maybe there was a bit of political brinkmanship going on. Yes, I would have preferred the bill to pass... but do you think Arnold may have just been taking away some ammunition from the Pro 8 forces... although it would have been priceless to see the "gays over-running our schools... first marriage, now Milk..." da da dummmmmm... with the veto, they can't do this. Prop 8 will fail, the bill will be resubmitted next year and will be signed... my prediction.

    Posted by: Mike | Oct 1, 2008 10:29:31 AM

  10. I think I agree with Mike; not the right time - the focus in CA should be on defeating Prop 8. I live in NJ but donated a chunk of cash to the campaign - I think its something we all need to focus on.

    Please do whatever you can to defeat Prop 8. Even if you never want to get married, its defeat will be a watershed moment in the history of gay rights.

    Posted by: Ted | Oct 1, 2008 11:29:01 AM

  11. Thanks Mark Leno and Gavin Newsom for treating GLBT folks as equals. Fuck you Arnold and Diane Fienstien for taking our tax dollars and consistently fucking us over.

    Posted by: SFshawn | Oct 1, 2008 11:55:58 AM

  12. Say NO to a christian taliban!

    Posted by: lou | Oct 2, 2008 12:13:22 AM

  13. Yea Arnold. What a travisty it would have been to celebrate sin. We must pursue righteousness even inspite of the opposition. We must never let Satan and the GLBT movement take over this State or this Country. It is not too late we can make a difference.

    Posted by: Teri | Oct 2, 2008 4:37:10 PM

Post a comment


« «Sarah Palin: Homosexuality is a Choice« «