SAN FRANCISCO - From many perspectives, Mark Leno has been breaking barriers through much of his political life.

Leno, 57, started out in politics as a gay rights and community activist. He has served on the San Francisco Board of Supervisors and just completed three successful terms in the California Assembly, representing AD-13.

In the spring of this year Leno took the unusual step of taking on and beating incumbent state Senator Carole Migden and former state legislator Joe Nation for control of Migden's SD-03 seat, representing the heart of San Francisco.

While maintaining a full-time political life, Leno is also credited for running a small but successful sign company. When he takes the oath of office Monday, Leno will be the first openly gay male in the state Senate.

PolitickerCA.com caught up with Leno recently for an hour-long interview at his San Francisco district offices. While a harried staff has been was busily moving the senator-elect's files and belongings down the hallway to Migden's old offices, Leno has been busily focusing on his 2009 legislative agenda - one that no doubt will put him before the glare of TV cameras in Sacramento as he continues the fight for gay marriage and such issues as single-payer health care reform.

PolitickerCA.com: What are your thoughts on the significance of becoming the first gay male state senator in California?

Mark Leno: I am very proud. I am glad that I will be there in that capacity. Of course, I will be serving with Sen. Christine Kehoe and on the Assembly side, I will be serving with Assemblymen-elect John Perez and Tom Ammiano. Our first LGBT senator was (now termed out) Sen. Sheila Kuehl in 2000 and she was first in the California Legislature when she was elected the Assembly in 1994.

So, it has taken us an extra eight years to elect a gay male to the senate. It is what it is. Our relatively small LGBT legislative caucus has changed, too. First, it started with all women -- there were four women there before John Laird and I got to the Assembly in 2002 and now a number of these women have termed out and now were electing more men to succeed those caucus members. I don't know why this gender balance fluctuates, but it has.

Part of our job as caucus members is to keep ever greater focus in identifying LGBT candidates at the local level who could step forward. The good news is that I know there are some strong candidates who will be coming up in the next couple terms.

(Being the Senate's first openly gay male) is a responsibility. But I don't feel it to be a burden. I feel it to be a privilege and honor and I feel very comfortable with that.

I am often asked to do right-wing, shock-jock radio and right-wing television as well -- I've been on Bill O'Reilly four or five times. I do these interviews to debate the myths and because I can always hold my own on these shows. I do these interviews because I believe that as a gay elected official it is part of my responsibility to get our (LGBT) voices heard in parts of the state that otherwise may not hear such voices.

So, I was on the Armstrong & Getty show in Sacramento, which is moderate among those on the right-side. They asked me to come on their show to talk about the marriage equality bill when I first introduced it in 2004. I walked them through the entire bill. I told them about the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act -- that no rabbi, minister, priest or religious institution that does not recognize or wishes to solemnize gay marriage would be required to do. I walked them through it all. And at the very end one of them said, 'You know, Leno, some people may hate you because you're homosexual. Some people may hate you because you're Jewish. I hate you because you're so damned reasonable.'

PolitickerCA.com: What was your reaction to the passage of Prop. 8, the recently enacted state ballot measure that bans gay marriage?

Leno: I have a couple thoughts. First, I have seen some challenges brought up regarding the exit polls that put the African-American 'yes' vote at 72 percent. It looks like it was actually closer to 57 percent. I think one of the problems is that we swallowed these exit poll numbers immediately without any verification and then we built arguments around them when in fact they were unsubstantiated.

Do we have work to do within ethnic and faith communities on the issue of marriage equality? Without a doubt. But keep in mind the California Council of Churches, which is an umbrella organization of 10 different Christian denominations, has always supported marriage equality. I say this to point out that that there is a lot of faith support for marriage equality.

Moving forward, we must reach out to many of these very ardent faith leaders who were supporting Prop. 8. These faith folks need to understand that no one is challenging their view of the world. But they have to know themselves the threat that is presented to everyone's freedoms when we move in the direction of theocracy as opposed to a democracy.

For example, we have we have civil divorce in our society. The Catholic Church does not recognize it. That is their First Amendment right not to recognize civil divorce even though we have civil divorce.

We're talking about civil marriage for everybody. You don't want to recognize it? That's your right. You don't have to. But you don't deny to others who may disagree with you their right to civil marriage just like you wouldn't deny them their right to civil divorce.

But make no mistake, Prop. 8's passage was an unfortunate and outrageous bump in the road. For the first time in American history a recognized constitutional right has been repealed for certain tax-paying, law-abiding citizens by the voters. We're seeing, thankfully, a very peaceful demonstration of that disappointment and anger.

A lot of our younger voters -- gay or straight -- have never had to fight for the legal protections we now have for the LGBT community. If Prop. 8 had been defeated a whole generation of folks who have never had any rights denied them or any experience of political loss would have gone on their happy way and would have continued to be complacent about having to fight for those rights and protections they enjoy.

But because Prop. 8 was passed, young people rightfully are outraged. They're saying 'How dare you?' Now, these folks are in streets and they're activated like they've never been before or would have if the measure had been defeated.

The last point I would make on Prop. 8 is that for as many things that went wrong, keep in mind the things went right. We picked up 18 points of support for marriage equality on Nov. 4. (Supporters) lost 18 points support. The identical 14 words that were on Prop. 8, were on the ballot in Prop. 22 in 2000. We lost by 22 points in 2000.

So, in just eight years we've turned the dial so that we lost by just four percentage points. Our success is in that 18 points and they're never getting that back. It's only moving in the right direction. And again, if you look at the demographics, those under the age of 35 support us more than those over the age of 65 don't. As the shift occurs the debate essentially evaporates. It's over. We're trying to speed this up because there are too many people -- too many families -- that are suffering. There will be marriage equality in California. There's no doubt in my mind about that. What an uncommon phenomenon to be battling this war and to know without a doubt or debate that we will win. We just don't know when that last battle will be.

PolitickerCA.com: Looking ahead to 2009, what are your expectations in making the move from the Assembly to the Senate?

Leno: I suspect it will be subtle and dramatic shift all at the same time. There are different cultures in the two houses. But what's interesting is that due to term limits we will see a total turnover of membership by 2010. So, when I get there, I will have served with about 90 percent of the senators as assembly members. So, we are they. Nonetheless, I can tell that everyone from the Assembly side say that senators all become some other kind of people. So, everyone is telling me, ‘Please, please -- don't become one of those guys.' And I kid them back by saying, 'That's so Assembly of you to say.'

Seriously, there is no need for unnecessary tension between the strong Democratic majority caucuses in both houses. Think of what we could do if we worked together. Unfortunately, for many and varied reasons, there has been tension in the past. Some of that can attributed to tradition and some being more recent occurrences.

Speaker Bass and incoming Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg are very talented, sincere and committed individuals. I think we're going to see a new day of cooperation between the houses and I'm looking forward to that.

PolitickerCA.com: What is your relationship with Senate President Pro Tem-elect Darrell Steinberg?

Leno: Well, we served together for two years in the Assembly when I came in as a freshman and he was in third term. Our politics and policies are very much alike. He has been a huge supporter of many of the issues that I've been fighting for and I respect all of the issues that he's been fighting for. We also share a great interest in California's foster children issues. For some time Darrell has been one of the lone voices for providing better funding and services to the state's 85,000 foster children.

Of course, this is an issue that Speaker Bass cares a great deal about, too. Suddenly, the issue has really taken on some steam which has been great.

How strange was it for you to take on fellow Democrat and incumbent Sen. Carole Migden for SD-03 seat?

Leno: Clearly, there were some ruffled feathers at first. But we were very clear about how we were going to run our campaign. It was an exercise in democracy. You could say that the severity of my crime came in offering the district's voters an option. In these one party districts where there is no competition in the November general election if we also were to say that there will be no competition in the spring primary, the question becomes, 'Where is the democracy?' The answer is that there is none. So, I presented myself as a choice and that was that.

PolitickerCA.com: Have you had the undoubtedly awkward experience of riding in the same elevator car with Sen. Migden to your office yet?

Leno: No, Carole has not been in the building a lot. Actually, we crossed paths for the first time about two weeks ago. It was a respectful exchange.

During the campaign when I would see certain nervous characters in the Capitol and in the district. I reminded them that not only would we get through this but we'll soon forget about it. Sometimes I would ask them if they remembered how (now retired) Sen. Art Torres became a senator. They'd give me a blank look. I would remind them that Torres (currently chairman of the California Democratic Party) challenged and beat his own incumbent Democrat Sen. Alex Garcia in SD-24 in 1982 and no one even remembers that now.

During the race I learned some interesting things about California Democratic Party rules that I wasn't familiar with. One of those has to deal with what I would term a lack of a democratic process within the CDP. For example, when I was vying for the CDP's nomination at the convention the incumbent (Migden) needed a floor vote of 50 percent plus 1 to get the nomination. As a non-incumbent I needed to secure 70 percent plus 1. As the vote happened (Migden) only got 29 percent on the first motion which meant she did not get the nomination. Then we put my name up on the second motion and I got 60 percent or twice as much, but, I still did not get the party's endorsement because I didn't get 70 percent. I think this system needs to be re-evaluated.

Now that I am the incumbent, I would suggest that if an incumbent cannot win on a level playing field that he or she should not be re-elected.

PolitickerCA.com: As a new state senator you will be returning to Sacramento to face what has now been estimated at a near $30 billion budget deficit. Will you favor the creation or restoration of taxes to balance the budget?

Leno: In regard to the latter, it's of course a horrible time to be talking about taxes. People are losing their homes. They're losing their jobs and increasingly having trouble putting food on the table. But at the same time -- and I've been saying this my entire six years in Sacramento -- we have not been honest with voters. Everyone wants to tip-toe around the issue of taxes and taxation. We've now must have that honest conversation.

In my opinion, (Gov.) Arnold Schwarzenegger's policies are at the heart of this crisis. This situation does go back to his first action as governor when he rescinded the restoration of the vehicle license fee.

Thankfully in the days ahead we will be hearing more and more about the VLF and voters need to be educated on what it means to the state. This is not about the tripling of the so-called car tax. (Former Gov.) Gray Davis did not triple the car tax. He restored the VLF which had been in place in California for over 50 years.

The VLF has served us well. With it we built the best public education system the world had ever seen, the best higher education system had ever seen, we had the best prison system, the best roads and bridges.

(Doing away with the VLF) was Schwarzenegger's biggest crime. His second biggest crime was not only interrupting (the VLF) which had served the state so well for a half-century but also then publicly denigrating it by renaming it the ‘Car tax.' As a result, people despise it now. Politically, he's made the whole VLF issue toxic.

So for five years now the governor has been unequivocal in saying that we had a spending problem and not a revenue problem. Now, just this summer, he announces 'Guess what, folks? We do have a revenue problem.'"

PolitickerCA.com: One of the issues to emerge from this year's protracted budget battle was the requirement that the spending blueprint be passed by a two-thirds margin. Will you be looking to do away with this seemingly arcane rule during your first term in the Senate?

Leno: Yes. California is just of three states in the nation to have a two-thirds budget vote requirement. And if that weren't a high-enough hurdle, every one of my Republican colleagues in both houses with one exception has signed the pledge to Grover Norquist (the national anti-tax advocate.) Norquist of course is famous for saying he doesn't oppose government, he just wants to reduce it to a size where it can be drowned in the bathtub. That's who these Republicans have abrogated their legislative responsibilities to and clearly, that's formula for disaster in our state.

In 2009, perhaps in June, I'm hoping that we'll see propositions on the ballot seeking to reduce the two-thirds budget vote to a simple majority along with some kind of viable revenue measure. We will need both if we're going to have a chance in cleaning up the economic mess we're in.

And, the governor has a responsibility for restoring the VLF's fee since he was responsible for destroying it in the first place.

PolitickerCA.com: We understand that in addition to battling the giant fiscal issues facing the state in 2009, you have been asked to carry the Democratic health care reform flag. What are your plans?

Leno: First, it's my honor to have been asked to carry on Sen. (Sheila) Kuehl's efforts in this arena. Second, I believe that health care has very much become a civil rights issue in California and our nation.

The California Legislature was the only state legislature in the country to place a single-payer health care reform bill on the governor's desk.

[Editor's note: Single-payer health care is when all physician, hospital and other medical costs are paid out of one government-controlled fund, thus theoretically bringing about cost-containment and money-saving efficiencies in billing.]

This is not conjecture. It works. One-third of every dollar the state spends on health care goes to administrative costs related to medical billing. This must change. We are on a downward spiral -- if we can't change this, Californians will continue to see higher premiums and higher deductibles and higher out of pocket expenses.

When you think about it, when a business provides better service to its customers, its own bottom line improves. The opposite is true for the medical insurance companies. They increase their bottom line when they refuse or slow service. And when you refuse service in the healthcare realm you are hurting real people. It's a crazy situation.

Sen. Kuehl did extraordinary work in passing SB 840 twice. Gov. Schwarzenegger vetoed the bill twice saying he could not support ‘socialized medicine.' Well, this is not socialized medicine but that's what the opponents will say.

Our plan is to keep the issue alive and the debate alive in 2009. To do that we will commence an educational campaign on this issue. We will also resubmit single-payer in bill form and take it to the governor's desk as many times as is necessary.

The goal, of course, is to elect a Democratic governor in 2010 who will hopefully sign the bill into law in 2011. We also anticipate that the insurance industry would place an initiative on the ballot to overturn the law in 2012. So, the way I look at it is that we have from today until 2012's ballot to educate our fellow Californians about what single-payer is and what it is not.

PolitickerCA.com: Who will you have at your side when you are sworn-in as a new Senator?

Leno: I have parents in their late 80s who will be traveling to join me, two sisters and a lot friends from San Francisco and across the state. I'm sure it will be a big celebration. I'm looking forward to it.