H.B. 630 Sexual Orientation & Gender-Bender Legislation

Scheduled for Representative Lane’s Judiciary Subcommittee Meeting
Tuesday, February 21, 2012, 1:00 p.m., State Capitol Room 132

H.B. 630 would require affirmative action in government jobs for almost two dozen sexual orientations and gender identities listed in the American Psychiatric Association and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders.  Also, it would legalize many sex acts that have always been crimes in Georgia and throughout the country.

• H.B. 630 gives “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” civil rights status without defining the terms.  So, two undefined behavioral groups, that include Peeping Toms, flashers, pedophiles and involvement in bestiality, necrophilia, etc., would get civil rights status and could avoid prosecution for sex crimes that could be blamed on gender ID.

• Webster’s Dictionary defines “gender-bender” as a person who assumes the appearance and demeanor of the opposite sex, i.e. transvestites and transsexuals.

• States with laws accommodating gender identity allow anyone claiming transgender status to use any public rest room or other public facility anywhere, including churches and religious establishments, unless local law allows religious exemptions.

• H.B. 630 affects at least nine state and local government employment laws in Georgia.  State and local governments would have to hire, fire, train, compensate and promote to attain workforce “balance” based on aberrant sexual behavior for jobs in public daycare, public schools, group homes, orphanages, foster care, juvenile detention, etc.

• H.B. 630 requires a culture change that must be defeated.

ACTION – Ask the following committee to vote NO on H.B. 630.
Representative Lane, Ch.      404 656-5087
Representative Allison                656-0188
Representative Crawford             656-0265
Representative Hatfield               656-0109
Representative Maddox               656-0152
Representative McKillip               656-0177
Representative Nix                     656-0177
Representative Oliver                  656-0265
Representative Stephenson           656-0126

Radio Commentary, 90.7, 91.7 New Life FM, February 17, 2012
By Sue Ella Deadwyler

Good morning, Jim. H.B. 630 would require affirmative action in government jobs for almost two dozen sexual orientations and gender identities listed in the American Psychiatric Association and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders and legalize many sex acts that have always been crimes in Georgia and throughout the country.

Unfortunately, most people have been conditioned to think the word “gender” is just another word for “sex,” but it’s not. Sexual identity is a biological fact that divides males and females by physical characteristics and reproductive functions. Gender identity is a self-determined rejection of natural sexual identity and assumption of opposite-sex actions and appearance, sometimes permanently, sometimes spasmodically.

“Gender-bender” is the word Webster’s New World College Dictionary uses for someone who assumes the appearance and demeanor of the opposite sex, such as transvestites and transsexuals. In states whose laws accommodate gender identity, anyone claiming transgender status may use any public rest room or other public facility anywhere, including churches and religious establishments, unless local law allows religious exemptions.

H.B. 630 classifies “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” as civil rights, without defining the terms. So, two broad undefined behavioral groups, that include Peeping Toms, flashers and those practicing pedophilia, bestiality, necrophilia, etc., would get civil rights status and special protection from prosecution for sex crimes, simply, by claiming civil rights status.

H.B. 630 affects at least nine government employment laws in Georgia. The state, its agencies, municipalities and counties would have to hire, fire, train, compensate and promote using affirmative action for workforce “balance” based on aberrant sexual behavior for jobs in such sensitive facilities as public daycare, public schools, group homes, orphanages, foster care and juvenile detention.

H.B. 630 is a dangerous bill that must be defeated. It’s on the agenda for Representative Roger Lane’s Judiciary Subcommittee at 1:00 p.m. Tuesday, February 21, in room 132 State Capitol. Before then, ask the following committee members to vote NO on H.B. 630.

Representative Lane, Ch. 404 656-5087
Representative Allison 656-0188
Representative Crawford 656-0265
Representative Hatfield 656-0109
Representative Maddox 656-0152
Representative McKillip 656-0177
Representative Nix 656-0177
Representative Oliver 656-0265
Representative Stephenson 656-0126

What did they know; when did they know it?

Georgia was the third state in the nation to enact charter schools legislation. S.B. 74 of 1993
defined a “charter” as a binding performance contract between the charter school, its local
board of education and the State Board of Education. A charter substitutes for state education
laws as well as state and local rules, policies, regulations and standards as governance for the
charter school. S.B. 74 authorized existing public schools to apply for three-year charters, if
approved by two-thirds of the school faculty and instructional staff, the parents of students
enrolled in the school, the local board of education and the State Board of Education.

• To read the rest of this newsletter in PDF format, please click here.

Radio Commentary, 90.7, 91.7 New Life FM, February 10, 2012
By Sue Ella Deadwyler

Good morning, Jim. Freshman Senator Ligon from South Georgia District 3 introduced S.B. 312 to require recipients of food stamps and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families to participate in personal growth activities. Current law already requires them to attend counseling on abstinence until marriage.

If those receiving food-stamps and Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) don’t have a full-time job and don’t have a high school diploma, they could choose from a list of government-recommended ways to improve themselves and work toward self-sufficiency. They could go back to school and get a general educational diploma or they could go to technical school or self-development classes or enroll in adult literacy classes.

If S.B. 312 becomes law, the Department of Health & Human Services would make the rules and regulate implementation. Please call Health and Human Services Chairman Unterman at 404 463-1368 and ask her to pass S.B. 312 out of her committee.

Twin bills were introduced January 23rd to protect consumers who buy articles of bedding, which is defined as any mattress, mattress pad, mattress protector, upholstered spring, comforter, quilted pad, quilt, cushion, or pillow that’s partly or entirely stuffed or filled with concealed material.

If either of these bills passes, manufacturers, renovators and reupholsterers that make, reupholster, or renovate articles of bedding would be required to obtain a numbered certificate of registration from the Department of Agriculture. That certificate would cost manufacturers an annual fee of $1,000 and renovators and reupholsterers would annually pay $250.

Manufacturers of new bedding items, reupholsterers and renovators of used bedding must appropriately tag the product with “Made of New Material” or “Made of Previously Used Material” or “Secondhand.” However, there’s an interesting exception to these requirements. Such standards and annual fees do not apply to bedding made by inmates for use by prisoners, detainees, or other government purposes.

These bills authorize Department of Agriculture inspectors to open a seam, if necessary, to determine whether the tag is accurate and penalize violators as much as a year in prison and $10,000.

You need to call two legislators on these bills. Call Senator Bulloch at 404 656-0040 and ask him to pass S.B. 314 out of his committee. Then, call Representative McCall at 404 656-5114 and ask him to pass H.B. 678 out of his committee. Sanitary bedding sounds good to me. For Georgia Insight I’m Sue Ella Deadwyler, your Capitol correspondent.

Radio Commentary, 90.7, 91.7 New Life FM, February 3, 2012
By Sue Ella Deadwyler

Good morning, Jim. 58 members of the Georgia House of Representatives signed H.R. 1137, introduced by Representative Welch January 23rd. They want Congress to call a constitutional convention to pass a balanced budget amendment to limit federal spending.

Also on January 23rd in the Senate an identical bill, S.R. 673, was introduced by Senator Cowsert. If either bill passes, Georgia would be the 19th state to pass such a resolution and a copy would be sent to Congress urging members to convene a constitutional convention. If 34 states (only 15 more) pass the same resolution, a constitutional convention must be called and, after it’s convened, there would be no limit on what it could do. In fact, a well-known member of Congress said he wants a con con, so he could introduce his 16 amendments.

Article V, the ONLY authority for convening a constitutional convention, refers to an “amendments convention.” Notice that the word “amendments” is in the plural, a good indication that more than one amendment could be considered in a con con. Those who say it can be restricted are relying on “dicta,” which is defined as an opinion made without argument or full consideration of the point. In other words, they’re not relying on the words of the Constitution.

Former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Warren Burger said in his June 22, 1988 letter to Eagle Forum President Phyllis Schlafly, “There is no effective way to limit or muzzle the actions of a Constitutional Convention. [It] could make its own rules and set its own agenda. Congress might try to limit the Convention to one amendment or to one issue, but there is no way to assure that the Convention would obey. After [it’s] convened, it will be too late to stop [it] if we don’t like its agenda.”

The first constitutional convention ignored instructions from the Confederation Congress, discarded the Articles of Confederation and created the Constitution of the United States, which governs us today. In that letter 24 years ago Chief Justice Burger said, “A Constitutional Convention today would be a free-for-all for special interest groups, television coverage, and press speculation.” Just think what a circus it would be today!

H.R. 1137 and S.R. 673 must be defeated. Call Senator Judson Hill at 404 656-0150* and ask him to keep S.R. 673 in committee. Then, call Representative Hatfield at 404 656-5132* and ask him to keep H.R. 1137 in his committee. If they do, our constitution will be protected. For Georgia Insight I’m Sue Ella Deadwyler, your Capitol correspondent.

H.B. 667 Would By-Pass Electoral College; Elect President by National Popular Vote was introduced by Representative Benfield January 9, 2012 to by-pass the Electoral College, which is, ironically, the only function of national government performed outside of D.C. If 34 states pass identical bills, presidential candidates would campaign in densely populated areas only and ignore other locations. Georgia’s 15 members of the Electoral College (2 U.S. senators, 13 U.S. representatives) will become 16 when an additional representative is elected in November.

ACTION – Oppose. Contact the House Governmental Affairs Committee Representatives Hamilton, Ch., 404 656-5132; Purcell, 656-5139; Hatfield, 656-0109; Brockway, 656-0188; Brooks, 656-6372; Floyd, 656-0250; Kidd, 656-0202; Meadows, 656-5141; Morgan, 656-0109; Mosby, 656-0287; Oliver, 656-0265; O’Neal, 656-5052; Powell, J., 656-7856; Powell, A., 656-0202; and Williamson, 656-7859.

Two Con Con Bills introduced in Georgia General Assembly

H.R. 1137 Application to Congress for a Constitutional Convention1 introduced by Representative Welch January 23, 2012 joins other states in asking Congress to convene a Con Con for the purpose of passing an amendment to the U.S. Constitution to require a balanced federal budget. It covers the same subject as applications from Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Maryland, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Texas. If two-thirds of the states apply on the same subject, a con-con would be called by or before January 1, 2020.

ACTION – Oppose. These 58 co-signed H.R.1137. Ask your representative and others to remove their names. Representatives Welch, 404 656-0109; England, 463-2245; Meadows, 656-5141; Lindsey, 656-5024; Josh Clark, 656- 0325; Atwood, 656-0152; Yates, 656-5126; Teasley, 656-0177; Williamson, 656-7859; Dudgeon, 656-0298; Hightower, 656-0152; Jasperse, 656-0188; Coomer, 656-0109; Peake, 656-5025; Shaw, 656-0213; Dutton, 656-0188; Dickey, 656- 0287; Benton, 656-0213; Willard, 656-5125; Brockway, 656-0188; Rogers, 656-0325; Riley, 656-0188; Byrd, 656-0298; Davis, 656-7857; Bryant, 656-0298; Manning, 656-7857; McBrayer, 656-0126; Purcell, 656-5139; Parrish, 463-2247; McKillip, 656-0177; Casas, 656-0254; Dickson, 463-2247; Powell, A., 656-0202; Cooke, 656-0325; Black, 656-0287; Setzler, 656-0177; McCall, 656-5115; Braddock, 656-0177; Rogers 656-5146; Dunahoo, 656-0126; Hembree, 656-6801; Lynn Smith, 656-7149; Battles, 656-0152; Jerguson, 656-0188; Knight, 656-7855; Lane, 656-5087; Harden, 656-0188; Maddox, 656-3947; Wilkerson, 463-8143; Ron Stephens, 656-5115; C. Williams, 656-0254; Weldon, 656-0152; Dollar, 656-0254; Pak, 656-0254; Rynders, 463-2247; Parsons, 656-9198; R. Smith, 656-6831; Collins, 656-7737; and Sheldon, 656-5025.

• To read the rest of this newsletter in PDF format, please click here.

Radio Commentary, 90.7, 91.7 New Life FM, January 27, 2012
By Sue Ella Deadwyler

Good morning, Jim. Twice in recent years a bill has been introduced to eliminate the Electoral College and elect the President of the United States by national popular vote. While that may seem like a good idea, the Electoral College was part of the great compromise that made a constitutional republic out of a bunch of rival colonies. It brought together big states and little states through a national Congress based on equal representation of the states in the Senate, regardless of population, and unequal representation in the House of Representatives, based on unequal populations in the states.

If it weren’t for the Electoral College, presidential candidates wouldn’t bother to campaign in sparsely populated areas. They would spend all their time wooing voters in the most densely populated places that could propel them into the White House. They wouldn’t need votes from outlying areas or small towns or rural communities.

Actually, the Electoral College is the only function of national government that’s performed outside of Washington, D.C. This is how it works. No senator, representative or other federal official is permitted to be an elector in the Electoral College, but the president is elected by electors chosen in their states according to their own state election laws. After electors are chosen, they meet and cast their ballots in their own state capitals. Therefore, all states, regardless of size, participate equally in the process of electing our president.

But, the Electoral College has been targeted for extinction. H.B. 667 was introduced January 9th, but was put “in the hopper” the last day of the 2011 session to be handled this year. If/when the cumulative electoral votes reach a majority in states (and D.C.) that pass legislation identical to H.B. 667, a popular vote election for the U.S. President and Vice President could be forced, to totally change the election process for the two most powerful officials in the U.S.

If identical bills were to pass, each member state would conduct a state-wide popular election for President and Vice President of the United States and the most populous states would control the offices of president and vice president. That’s NOT the American way. H.B. 667 must be defeated! Please call the House Governmental Affairs Committee chairman at 404 656-5132* and ask him to hold that bill in his committee. For Georgia Insight I’m Sue Ella Deadwyler, your Capitol correspondent.

Radio Commentary, 90.7, 91.7 New Life FM, January 20, 2012
By Sue Ella Deadwyler

Good morning, Jim. Left in limbo until this session was S.B. 184 that was introduced March 1st last year and passed both House and Senate, but in different versions. S.B. 184 is very important. It addresses the termination, suspension, non-renewal, demotion or reprimand of teachers and other personnel in public schools K – 12.

S.B. 184 passed the Senate on March 16, 2011, but did not get to the House floor for a vote until April 11th, just three days from the end of last year’s session. Because amendments were made in the House, the Senate had to vote again. That vote was delayed until the first day of this session, when it finally passed January 9th. If the governor chooses to sign it, it immediately becomes law. If he does not sign it and does not veto it, it will become law July 1st this year.

When S.B. 184 takes effect, it will require a local school board to primarily consider a teacher’s effectiveness in advancing student achievements when considering which personnel to lay-off, if the workforce must be reduced. The amount of time a teacher has been employed cannot be the primary or determining factor. The bill also creates the Professional Learning Rules Task Force to review current professional learning rules for educators and suggest ways to improve the rules.

Also introduced in 2011 but held over until this session is H.B. 661 concerning the operation, control and management of charter schools. If H.B. 661 passes as written, professional personnel in charter schools would have to comply with the same certification requirements required of professional personnel in other public schools in Georgia. That means, professionals could not be employed in charter schools unless the Professional Standards Commission has issued them a document certifying that their qualifications and classification meet Georgia regulations.

H.B. 661 is extremely important, considering the number of publicly funded charter schools that have been founded and staffed by personnel from outside the United States. Please call the House Education Committee Chairman at 404 656-9210* and ask him to pass H.B. 661 out of his committee. For Georgia Insight I’m Sue Ella Deadwyler, your Capitol correspondent.

Radio Commentary, 90.7, 91.7 New Life FM, January 13, 2012
By Sue Ella Deadwyler

Good morning, Jim. The first Senate bill introduced this session was Senator Heath’s S.B. 293 that requires “In God We Trust” to be printed on every new Georgia license plate where the county name is printed now. A decal would be available to those who prefer to put a county name in that space.

In 1861, a small-town Pennsylvania minister suggested In God We Trust as the national motto. That one suggestion led the Secretary of the Treasury to write this letter to the Philadelphia Mint director: “Dear Sir: No nation can be strong except in the strength of God, or safe except in His defense. The trust of our people in God should be declared on our national coins.”

The Treasury Secretary got busy and, in 1864, the two-cent coin was imprinted with “In God We Trust.” Then, on March 3, 1865 Congress passed a law authorizing all gold and silver coins to be imprinted with “In God We Trust.” Those coins were the gold double-eagle ($20), the gold eagle ($10), and the gold half-eagle ($5), the silver dollar, the half-dollar, the quarter-dollar, the nickel and the three-cent coin.

As a result of that one suggestion in 1861 from a minister in a small Pennsylvania town, all U.S. coins were imprinted with “In God We Trust” in five years. But for some reason, the motto was left off U.S. coins in 1907. So, the next year, Congress required all U.S. coins to be imprinted with the motto and on July 11, 1955, it became mandatory for U.S. paper money, as well.

On July 30, 1956, “In God We Trust” became our national motto and was unchallenged for 22 years, until lawsuits were filed against it in 1970 and 1978. But in that situation, the court ruled against Madalyn Murray O’Hair, who had said the motto violated the First Amendment. Too bad the court didn’t rule against her previous lawsuits.

Last year Georgia motorists began displaying “In God We Trust” decals on their license plates in place of the county name. When S.B. 293 passes, “In God We Trust” will be permanently imprinted on Georgia tags as they are manufactured. That’s a wonderful reminder that we are a “nation under God!” Maybe that’s the reason some folks want to destroy U. S. currency. Please call Senate Finance Committee Chairman Heath at 404 656-3943* and ask him to pass S.B. 293 out of committee. For Georgia Insight I’m Sue Ella Deadwyler, your Capitol correspondent.

Radio Commentary, 90.7, 91.7 New Life FM, January, 2012
By Sue Ella Deadwyler

Good morning, Jim. Students trying to enter Georgia colleges this year will have to prove they’re covered by a health insurance policy. Until now, University System students paid a fee to use health clinics, but the federal government is implementing a mandatory Student Health Insurance Program (SHIP) for applicants not covered by policies that meet university standards.

Last February 9th the federal Department of Health and Human Services proposed the SHIP regulation under authority of Obamacare, which was authorized in two federal laws that passed in 2010 – the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act. The federal government allowed public comment on the new SHIP regulations until April 12th last year.

A December 14th press release from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) said the percentage of adults 19 through 25 years of age covered by private health insurance had increased 2.5 million since September 2010, probably due to young adults that were added to their parents’ polcies. That number will increase even more under this new HHS federal mandate at colleges and universities.

During last year’s legislative session, H.B. 476 was introduced to establish the Georgia Health Exchange Authority and it passed a House subcommittee before opposition caused the governor to pull it from the process. But it was held over for action in the 2012 session and, if it passes this year, it will put the state into the health insurance business to comply with Obamacare, which is currently before the U.S. Supreme Court. So this is the situation. Nine Supreme Court justices will decide whether citizens of the United States can be forced to buy health insurance.

If H.B. 476 should become law and the Supreme Court should strike down Obamacare, the federal mandate would be gone, but Georgians could be faced with state-mandated medical coverage that would put state bureaucrats between the patient and the doctor. On the other hand, if the Court upholds Obamacare, it wouldn’t take effect until 2014 and states have until 2013 to present a solid plan.

So, H.B. 476 is premature. It could put the state into the health insurance business before it’s necessary. The Obama administration, could interpret passage of H.B. 476 as a sign of political weakness in the state of Georgia. Call Representative Richard Smith’s Insurance Committee at 404 463-1673* and ask him to keep H.B. 476 in his committee. For Georgia Insight I’m Sue Ella Deadwyler, your Capitol correspondent.