Some legislators just don’t get it!

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — Our state Legislature has deadlines; it has procedures, and it has rules. However, to some legislators these rules and deadlines have no meaning—not when they are determined to push their own personal agenda. For these narrow-minded individuals, thousands of telephone calls, letters, faxes, and e-mails aren’t enough to make them heed the will of the people. Even the angst of members of their own party isn’t enough to deter them.

This year, three legislators insist on trying to force their will on their fellow legislators and the people of this state. So deep is the cultural divide among California legislators that on many issues the Legislature’s votes are strictly along partisan lines. Not so this year when it comes to physician-assisted suicide (AB 654), and even homosexual marriage (AB 19).

Physician-assisted suicide
While all the Assembly Republicans indicated early on that they were universally opposed to physician-assisted suicide and would not support any effort to make the Oregon-inspired law legal in California, this issue caused a deep divide among Democrats.

The bill squeaked by the Assembly Judiciary Committee on a 5-4 vote, with Assemblywoman Cindy Montanez, a Democrat from Mission Hills, joining Republicans in opposition. It then passed the Assembly Appropriations Committee 11-6, but another Democrat, Leland Yee, from the liberal San Francisco Bay area, voted against it and Democrat Gene Mullin of San Mateo abstained.

Authors of the bill, Patty Berg, D-Santa Rosa, and Lloyd Levine, D-Van Nuys, knew they were in trouble when it came time for the bill to be voted on by the full Assembly. Rumors in the Capitol were that they had fewer than 20 votes—they needed 41.

By using a procedural ploy, called “gut and amend,” the authors avoided certain defeat during the last week of the mid-session deadline. Instead of placing the bill before the full Assembly for a vote, they pulled the bill and said they would take a bill that had already passed the Assembly, gut (remove) the language from that bill and replace it with language from AB 654. By using “gut and amend” the authors were able to send physician-assisted suicide to the Senate without a vote by the Assembly.

They were true to their word. They took a bill (AB 651) that had passed the Assembly and which sought to help low-income people with chronic health problems, such as diabetes and asthma, “gutted” it and amended it with AB 654 wording. So a measure that was designed to benefit the sick was instead turned into one that could eventually ease the way for euthanasia.

The only good news is that if the new bill passes the Senate, it will still need to be sent back to the Assembly for a vote by that house. However, Berg and Levine now claim that even if AB 651 fails in the Senate, or passes the Senate but fails when it goes back to the Assembly, they will not give up. They have kept AB 654 as a “two-year” bill, which means that they can keep it alive and an issue through January of next year.

The authors claim they need to perform all these procedural machinations in order to give them more time to counter the “misinformation” from opponents. They didn’t clarify what they consider “misinformation.”

Homosexual marriage
The ongoing homosexual marriage debate created another interesting buzz in the Capitol before the mid-session deadline. Homosexual couples, with their children in tow, lobbied outside the Assembly chambers catching members as they were entering and leaving the room. And while the author of the bill (AB 19), Assemblyman Mark Leno, D-San Francisco, was telling supporters and reporters that he was confident that his bill would pass, his fellow Democrats weren’t so sure.

When the vote was taken, five Democrats had joined Republicans in voting against same-sex marriage, giving the bill only 35 votes. It needed 41. Leno immediately requested and was given a “reconsideration” vote to give him and his supporters in the halls more time to lobby legislators.

The next day, another vote was taken. Only Alberto Torrico, D-Fremont, switched his vote. The final vote was 37-36.

Interestingly, Torrico is a born-again Christian who said his final decision came only after seeking help from the Bible. He said he was in conflict between his faith and his training as a civil-rights attorney. In the end, he said his decision rested on his belief that God allowed for separation of state and religion.

Leno was visibly angered at the failure of his latest attempt to redefine marriage. Over the weekend of June 11, media reports announced that Leno told participants in a Gay Pride event in Sacramento that he would reintroduce his bill this year in the Senate. If he makes good on his promise, he will have to avail himself of the same “gut and amend” ploy used by Berg and Levine.

If AB 19 resurfaces as a new bill number, you’ll hear about it here.

Karen Holgate is director of Legislative Affairs for California Family Alliance. CFA is a not-for-profit lobby promoting family, religious, and business friendly legislation and is affiliated with California Family Council.

Published, July 2005

Christian Examiner™, P.O. Box 2606 El Cajon, CA 92021 • 619-668-5100 • Fax 619-668-1115
Email: info@christianexaminer.com • Web site: www.christianexaminer.com