Bill 274 Passed House, Senate and the President Signed Off Too!

Today was a busy day as well. Perhaps most importantly, Bill 274, which was previously approved by the Senate, today passed in the House. The vote was extremely close and at one point a tie seemed possible. Those in favor of the sexual orientation civil rights bill were as follows: Representatives Simon, Zarkasian, Unger, Hilton, Jackson, Zahn, Yarmolinski and Gomez. I should note that Rep. Nedwick was absent from House chambers today.
The vote happily electrified the Senate, who first passed the Bill before sending it on to the House Rules Committee. Within minutes, President Millworth signed the Bill.
For many who sided with the pro-Bill movement, today was an historic day of victory. However, those opposing the Bill are extremely upset with the Bill's passage. Rep. Kilpatrick was visibly shaken after the vote, having to leave chambers for a short period of time.
I asked Speaker Villary about the her vote and the outcome. She stated she had voted against the Bill because she was worried about it protecting gay marriage. Yet in the end, she said, "it came down to protecting our citizens." She was satisfied with the overall vote.
I would like to think that having Senator Meyers on today's program might have allayed some fears surrounding the Bill. The Bill is not about gay marriage or whether it is morally correct to be a homosexual. It simply defines sexual orientation as a part of civil rights legislation.
And on the topic of gay marriage, I showed a clip from this weekend's Miss USA pageant in which a contestant answered a controversial question in an un-politically correct manner in the eyes of the judges. Now, having been in a number of beauty pageants in my much younger days, I can assure you that your love of Jesus is throughly beat in your brain as a southern belle. So I don't really see the fuss about the religion part. All girls are supposed to talk about how moral they are and their desire for world peace. Her question might have been written in a different manner or she could have answered it in a different way. Her stance for her beliefs are admirable, but seems to have cost her the crown. You decide - here's the clip:

In other news, the Senate has been discussing Bill 208 regarding the Lottery. I spoke to Senator Dixon(D) regarding the talks. She felt some members believe the Bill will be a good idea "because it will help the economy and taxes." Dixon stated the Lottery will help with taxes and it is "on a voluntary basis." She noted that there were issues involved in gambling that she would like to investigate further with other members. If possible, she would like to have some sort of program, specifically social programs for gambling addicts, be paid for with the proceeds from the Lottery. Dixon said that both sides of the issue made their points clear. Some were caught in the middle, "(they) were torn between the moral and fiscal issues." She also added that she tried to look at the issues as if she were not a United States Senator, but back home as an "average citizen." It was clear that the issues have not been completely resolved; yet a vote is definitely close. Stay tuned to find out more on the Lottery Bill (previously the Casino Bill).

Tomorrow I'll fill you in on the Cuban recovery efforts, Nigerian situation and much more. Please send in any comments so that we might share your questions on the next broadcast.

Good night -
E.E.

Hate Crimes, Bill 274 and the House

What appeared to be a copy-cat killer is now looking more like an organized hate group. Last week a bomb went off in a homosexual community in Portland, Oregon. Three men were killed in the blast and 22 people were injured.

A few days prior, in New York’s East Side, two gay men were killed execution-style in a remote alleyway near a gay neighborhood. The two men were evidently returning to an apartment after a movie. Police say the perpetrators tied their hands behind each victim, made them kneel down and shot each of them in the back of the head with a .38 caliber pistol.

In both cases, a note was left near the crime scene with words written from scripture: “The wages of sin are death.” The FBI and CIA were testing the notes to look for any connection.

These actions seem to stem from the Senate’s approval of Bill 274 (Sexual Orientation and Discrimination). It was also recently passed in the House Rules Committee and is expected to be open for a vote of the full House as early as this next week. The Bill protects homosexuals as a class, similar to the way race and gender are handled in civil rights legislation. If passed in the House, the Bill will take effect one year after passage.

As expected, there are very strong opinions on both sides of this issue. A website called StopSexualPerversion.org informs visitors that homosexuality is unnatural and should be removed from American society. The home page of this site contends that “homosexuality is a cancer that must be treated through moral reform or other drastic measures.” The site quotes scripture, reports confessions of reformed homosexuals and provides a chat room for those who want to end homosexuality in America. The website is the work of Wendel Lemly, a retired dentist, and his wife. The Lemlys are “dedicating the rest of our lives to the task of saving those homosexuals who can be saved, and exposing the evil in those who defy the laws of nature.”

And in an odd turn of events, leaders of a group called Fight Back have expressed frustration with a Cleveland, Ohio U.S. District Court decision by appealing the decision regarding “freedom of speech” for anti-homosexual websites. Traditionally, homosexual groups have used freedom of speech for their rallies and promotional literature. Now Fight Back, an organization designed to protect the rights of homosexuals, intends to turn the tables and contest the constitutionality of the site, citing their frustration and anticipating a long appeal. The leader of Fight Back, Brian Jefferies, stated the Lemlys’ anti-homosexual site “provides a gathering place for hate groups, and subtly encourages violence against homosexuals.”

The sides are not drawn as simply as pro-homosexuality and anti-homosexuality. According to recent polls, many Americans are in favor of civil unions for homosexuals. The idea of the class as a whole being protected as a civil rights group may bring more controversy. In some cases, hiring individuals based not based on sexual orientation might prove morally challenging to religious work environments. However, the same ideal holds true for persons of color or minorities. The religious right and far right conservatives are not moving their position. The far-lefters feel they have been silent for too long and will push the issue until the Bill is adopted. We are set for a volatile situation unless Congress comes up with a plan quickly. Even then (and either way), I would expect riots and some Congresspersons to lose their seat come next election.

To add a punch for the pro-Bill 274 side, just this weekend a press release from the Human Rights Campaign (an interest group supporting gay rights), publicly stated their appreciation to Senator Meyers (D) for his years of hard work on behalf of the gay and lesbian community for passing 274. The group also implored to the House to pass Bill 274, noting the public is generally in favor of protecting homosexuals from discrimination (and similar issues), and that Republicans should be reaching out to new demographics and younger voters.

I was granted a short interview with Senator Meyers last week (prior to the Human Rights Campaign announcement). He was very pleased that 274 passed the Rules Committee, stating that is was even more significant for him as he is an openly gay Senator from Michigan. He stated, “It is a great time to be an American. Ending bigotry based on sexual orientation – This is the last frontier of civil rights.” He noted Senate success would not have been possible without the bipartisan effort. He added that he has spoken with the House Speaker (Villary) and they expect to receive similar support within the House.

In the works for next week’s show – I hope to have an interview lined up with an expert on Bill 274 to discuss the current hate crime situations and discuss the possibility of the Bill’s passage. Please leave comments and questions and we may be able to have them on the air. Until then –

E.E.

Multi-Lingual Education Bill (156)

In an effort to strengthen America's primary and secondary education, the National Language Education Association (NLEA) intends to broaden school children's language skills by a factor of two. For example, a child who speaks English in her home could be offered to learn two additional languages at a participating school with the financial support of the U.S. Government (no dollar amounts given).
The NLEA believes that in order for Americans to become more competitive in the global market, they must learn additional languages. Increasing the verbal strength of the next generation seems to be their key issue. They also cite immigration as a reason to institute such a plan as it would allow Americans to "prepare our society for social change." Really - "preparing" for immigration? That almost sounds like we are getting ready for an invasion. Are we?
And what "change," you may ask? The NLEA states: "The traditional picture of America as being white, Anglo-Saxon and English speaking will change as immigrants from Asia, Africa, Latin America and Eastern Europe increase in numbers. Eventually, the number of non-English speakers may be greater than the number of English speakers." I'm afraid this isn't a good selling point for a significant portion of the country. I can already hear the boos and roars from the pro-English speaking groups. Just as the pro-English Pledge of Allegiance and National Anthem folks were just quieting down, too...
In many ways, this could be a valuable Bill for children. But the pro-English groups would argue that if such a plan was what America needed to be better at their jobs, wouldn't they have done it already? Many of them see America as the dominant country and, more importantly, the premiere language of the world. To agree to such a bill would be to admit defeat for their long-fought battle over having the English-version of the National Anthem sung at baseball games in English only. To others, it is a matter of history as the first permanent European settlers were English speakers, to which it has remained the prominent language, culture and quite frankly, propagation until recently. This could also have the anti-immigration groups wondering if the Government is sending an invitation to illegals - "Come here, we'll teach not only your kids, but we'll teach our kids your language in our federally funded public schools with taxpayers' money." As I talked to other people about this issue, one lady responded, "No, I didn't know English wasn't the official language of the United States. What is it then?" Her friend rebutted that the official language is English and had been since the founding fathers. So, it appears current Americans have a bit of educating to do, preferably before trying such an experiment on children.
If you are not aware (and you really should know this by now if you have email), there is a grass-roots group listing figures of how much the Government spends on educating illegal immigrant children, particularly those who were born in America to illegal immigrant parents. This will definitely be fuel to their fire, as they feel much of their hard-earned money is going to help people they don't consider to be "true Americans."
You may be wondering - what if the primary language in the child's home is Spanish? The NLEA would supplement Spanish with English and perhaps French, Portugese or German. They insist English would be taught in the three-language set, no matter the native language.
As the Bill had been discussed with the Internal Matters Committee of the House recently, I received a hand-written letter from the Internal Matters Committe, with the following well-meaning, if not watered-down, sentiment: "The Internal Matters Committee is working on a bipartisan effort to encourage and promote diversity in young Americans by providing funding for the education of foreign language education. This is part of a continuing effort by the Committee to work across party lines. At a time when the county is highly polarized, the Committee is heading the fight for a more cohesive house.
Signed - Rep. Gomez, Chair (and members Villary, Nedwick, DeWitt, Zahn and Yarmolinski, listed separately)
Again, the promise of better education, broadening horizons and a more linguistic generation sounds wonderful. The Committee's letter glossed over the controversial aspects of the Bill, perhaps in an effort to gain that bipartisan reach they have extended.
The future of this Bill seems to lie in the marketing. If the NLEA can continue to spin this as a true need for the next generation, it may still have life. My prediction, however, is that the pro-English-speaking groups will loudly protest the cost of the programs and implications it might have on immigration.
The future of this Bill - Does someone have a coin?
E.E.