The difference between the two for me, fundamentally, is that the Senate and the governor want to do it the way it's always been done, and the House wants to see if there's a better way to do things, if there's a way to change the structure of how we provide services.

We now have the Senate of the largest state in the nation endorsing marriage equality. This undermines President Bush's claim that this effort is being undertaken by a few activist judges.

This is one of the worst things the Senate has ever done. On the back of a cocktail napkin they have tossed aside protections of individual liberty that have been in existence for centuries.

My preference is that we eliminate the Senate.

It's good to have a new face [in the Senate] as opposed to someone who's already been around.

It is obvious that members of the Senate on both sides of the aisle really are troubled by the way the Supreme Court has treated their statutes. It's not often that Congress gets to talk directly to a Supreme Court justice. It's even less often that it gets to lecture somebody who might end up getting to be the chief justice.