Capitol Resource Family Impact and the California Republican Assembly both sent out alerts to their supporters this week, warning them that there are rumors in the capitol Republican assemblymembers may be considering voting for SB 572, Mark Leno’s bill that will make May 22 Harvey Milk Day in California. Governor Schwarzenegger vetoed identical legislation last year, citing the overly broad impact of declaring a statewide day of significance for a San Francisco County supervisor. The legislation calls for all schools and educational institutions to participate in “exercises remembering the life of Harvey Milk, recognizing his accomplishments, and familiarizing pupils with the contributions he made to this state.”
Apparently the wavering Republicans believe that because SB 572 doesn’t explicitly mandate schools to participate in Harvey Milk Day activities, they can vote in favor or simply abstain. However, legislators should know better than anyone else that “encouragement” from the government eventually turns into mandates. And the bill specifically states “It is the intent of the Legislature that the exercises encouraged in this section be integrated into the regular school program.” “Integration” sounds like more than just “encouragement.”
As the political party that purports to stand for traditional family values, Republicans should boldly stand for such values. Apparently the outpouring of opposition to the bill has been so strong that the governor’s office has dedicated a phone line to the issue. Why would any Republican ignore such vehement opposition from the public by supporting a government declaration honoring a man for his sexual behavior?
CRA President Ken Mettler made it very clear how concerned conservatives are about this bill: “This is unacceptable; this notion that Republicans would actually lend their support to a bill that paves the way for schools to learn about homosexual politicians and their sexual lifestyle,” said Mettler. “What these Republican legislators need to understand is that conservative, pro-family voters in this state expect them to vote against such bills, not aide in their passage or even avoid taking a moral stand altogether by abstaining or ‘laying off’ the bill,” Mettler added. “Republican legislators are our only line of defense and voice.”
Each of the 29 Republicans in the Assembly must vote NO on SB 572. Unified Republican opposition to SB 572 gives the governor another reason to veto the bill. In the Senate, the only Republican to support SB 572 was Abel “Benedict Arnold” Maldonado, and as I wrote about previously, he was rude to pro-family leaders when they testified on the bill. Republicans, stand firm on this issue and don’t let down the families of California.
Call the following Republicans and tell them to vote NO on SB 572:
Blakeslee, Sam
916 319 2033
Conway, Connie
916 319 2034
Cook, Paul
916 319 2065
Emmerson, Bill
916 319 2063
Fletcher, Nathan
916 319 2075
Harkey, Diane
916 319 2073
Nestande, Brian
916 319 2064
12:20 pm Update: I’ve received several calls about this post and the Republicans listed. All the Republican names I listed were taken directly from the CRA email alert sent out earlier today and a Traditional Values Coalition alert sent yesterday; I trust both sources. Assemblywomen Harkey and Conway and Assemblyman Nestande have committed that they will in fact vote NO on SB 572. Republicans need to do more than just take a pass and abstain on this bill; they need to be on the record opposing it. Thankfully, the members who reached out to me have assured me they will vote NO. No word from the other Republicans listed.
July 9th, 2009 at 12:00 am
Meredith,
Brian Nestande voted no in Education committee. Please check your sources befor you post. Calling out the calvary on Republicans who are on your side is counter productive.
July 9th, 2009 at 12:00 am
I just talked with Harkey. She is a solid No vote on SB 572
July 9th, 2009 at 12:00 am
Conway is a NO as well and never had any intention of supporting the bill.
July 9th, 2009 at 12:00 am
I am glad to hear they are voting NO!
July 9th, 2009 at 12:00 am
Paul Cook voted NO on this bill last year (AB 2567) and will vote NO this year.
This is absolutely irresponsible reporting in that no one checked with any of the respective Assemblymembmers.
This is a painful attempt by the CRA to bait elected officials into becoming reactionaries and thereby wage their campaign for them.
Cook is on record on the issue. In the future, check your facts and focus your outrage at appropriate parties, such as those advocating on the bill’s behalf.
July 9th, 2009 at 12:00 am
To Sam and others who have commented or contacted Meredith or myself — I am not sure what information the Traditional Values Coalition or the California Republican Assembly used it determining which legislators they wanted to focus on in their alerts. I suppose Meredith’s original post should have made it clear (which she did with her update) that these are their “list” — not ours. That said, it’s GREAT to hear that, frankly, TVC and CRA worried over nothing (or its starting to look that way).
I do appreciate those who have contacted us though to make it clear that they are opposing the bill. Many thousands of activists read this site daily, and it is good they they be correctly informed.
I would be sure to contact TVC and CRA — as it is their outreach efforts that were posted up on this site.
Our apologies for any angst, but understand that while this legislation is relatively minor in the scheme of things, it has become very important symbolically.
Let me close, Sam, by sharing that I have the highest regard and respect for Assemblyman Cook.
July 9th, 2009 at 12:00 am
Jon and Meredith you miss the point. As a Legislative Liaison you can’t rely on second hand missives. You should have contact with the legislators themselves, or staff, before you send out a caustic blog like above. It’s a courtesy that is rapidly disappearing around the capitol…
July 11th, 2009 at 12:00 am
To all interested parties…allow me to weigh in on this matter. I have been in direct contact with legislative staff to gage the landscape as to where Republicans stand on the Harvey Milk bill. I have also been called (I didnt seek their input) from others with information expressing concern about what they heard, thought, etc about where certain members stand. What led to this concern was the lack of courage by Republicans to simply vote NO on a non-binding resolution that celebrated LGBT history/Stonewall riots. That started the talk that in turn led to calls to me. Traditional Values Coalition, CRA, and CRI simply took the information we were given and decided to offer calls of “encouragement” to our fellow Republicans. You can check TVC’s email alert for itself. I specifically called for calls of encouragement to Republicans and asked our supporters to simply ask for a NO vote. There is nothing wrong with our ranks making our position known. We did not attack, and frankly Meredith Turney or CRI did not attack you. Trust me, we have all been a lot more harsh in our demands made to Democrats on this bill.
What I must also share is that there are emails from gay groups that have expressed their perceived “hope” of cracks in the Republican caucus on this bill and the LGBT resolution. Their email alerts to their members specifically cite the fact that “we are surprised and encouraged by the large numbers of Republican Assembly members who chose to abstain or leave the floor” on their resolution. What was their call to their members on the Harvey Milk Bill? The were instructed to call all Reeps and encourage them to either abstain or vote yes. After hearing of this and getting calls I simply chose to make sure we closed the ranks and no one fell off the wagon. That is all. By the way, some of their targets we heard are Reeps we listed in our alert. We simply wanted to make sure that while you may be getting calls from gay groups harassing you, that you also got calls from people who make up the majority of our party’s grass roots base encouraging you.
Additionally, if any Republican thinks that this bill is a harmless one because it has no specific mandate to teach about Harvey Milk in schools, then you are simply foolish. Remember, Leno’s initial attempt was to have this as a state holiday but only removed that as such due to budget ramifications of adding another holiday to rap sheet of them already in place. But you must remember, especially those freshman who werent in the building the past 9 years when all the other gay education provisions have been enacted, provisions in law are triggered when it comes to instruction, events, activities, etc in the schools. For schools that choose to celebrate Harvey Milk they must do in a positive, nondiscriminatory light that is favorable to sexual orientation. Its in current law. So SB 572 is not harmless. Don’t be fooled.
Democrats work incrementally. They will tell you today that this bill is not a mandate on what is taught. But they work to get language in law that they can then change later to ensure that it is mandated, and they will do so especially when they find money for it. You can bet a state holiday celebrating this unworthy political activist is next on their list.
Dont misunderstand us folks, we are on the same side. There are times when us pro-family leaders simply need to counter the gay’s actions and close our ranks. We really do not want you to be another Maldo and sell us out now on social issues. That’s company I do not think you want to lumped in.
July 12th, 2009 at 12:00 am
Quit trying to sugar coat this stuff, Ben. The email we are referncing above has nothing of encouragement in it. This was a case of “blogger gone wild”. Simple as that!