Question about trans-gender protections bill?

The bill was mendaciously (4.00 / 2)

framed by John H. Sununu and the Union Leader as the "bathroom bill," which is a total lie.  There is existing law which addresses those bogus concerns unconnected to this bill.

The media, shamefully, mostly allowed "bathroom bill" to stand as a term.

Our party, unless I am missing something (which is possible, given my focus on HB436, did not officially fight back on that term.  Equally bad.

When a not-as-political-as-I friend asked me "what was the deal with the bathroom bill?" I knew it was ruined.

By the time it reached the senate, the meme destroyed the reality.  They in fact openly state that their votes were affected by how the issue was portrayed.  I don't agree with that tactic, but there we are.

It was a home run for Papa Sununu.  

And one of the mot vulnerable constituencies in society will remain so for the moment in New Hampshire as a result.

---

by: Dean Barker @ Fri May 01, 2009 at 20:56:17 PM CDT

Adding: (4.00 / 2)

Terie Norelli is literally Superwoman for rallying this bill to passage.

And Senator Cilley has words on it here.

---

by: Dean Barker @ Fri May 01, 2009 at 21:09:54 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Although you read the words Dean... (0.00 / 0)

You don't seem to get the point Jackie was making.

Calling it a home run for Sununu is wrong. And your last remark is uncalled for and insulting.


Democrats solve problems, Republicans sit and say no.

---

by: Ray Buckley @ Fri May 01, 2009 at 21:42:43 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

You don't seem to get the point I am making, Ray. (4.00 / 4)

Sununu pushed a meme that the media picked up on and defined for the public.

By the time the bill reached the Senate, it was irrevocably poisoned by that meme.

That's what much of what Senator Cilley's focus is in her remarks.

I don't fault the senate for not voting for it.

I will further add that I regret not giving the bill more attention on this site than one or two posts.

---

by: Dean Barker @ Fri May 01, 2009 at 22:04:56 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Plenty of blame to go around on this one... (4.00 / 7)

The original question posed here is what went wrong with this bill, so let me offer a few observations.  These are only my own thoughts and not intended to reflect the Senate caucus as a whole.  

There are only so many hours in a day and so many days in a legislative session.  When a high number of divisive bills comes through the pipeline at the same time as they did this year (i.e., repeal of the death penalty, marriage equality, etc.), during an economic crisis I might add, it is difficult to focus the attention that each deserves.  It is easy to see from the posts on this site that much (if not the majority) of the attention was focused on the marriage equality bill, for example.  

Legislators can only do so much to bring attention and tell the story of any one piece of legislation.  Speaker Norelli, Rep. Butler and Sen. Fuller-Clark tried to break through the sound bites to explain the transgender bill to the public.  In my opinion, they needed help from those who knew the truth of this bill best.  Just as folks were writing letters to the editor, for instance, on marriage equality there should have been LTE's on the transgender bill.  Maybe I missed them, but I didn't see one.

There are times, and obviously by my vote I believe this was one of them, where a bill becomes so damaged that it may do more harm than good.  Times that it may be better to seek other alternatives or begin anew with a well-crafted argument that gets out ahead of naysayers.  Many of us would have preferred that it was otherwise.

However, I would also submit that one battle is not the war.  There were several heartening signs immediately after the floor remarks on HB 415.  For example, every media source that I reviewed that evening (that had previously used "the bathroom bill" in its title or lead-in) stopped using that ignominious term and referred to the bill by its actual title or a portion thereof.  Additionally, there were a very large number of people who said to me "I had no idea that this was a problem," or "I hadn't thought about this before now," and so on.  This has clearly raised the level of awareness of discrimination and abuse of our transgendered population and there are now far more people who will speak to the issue as we move forward.

---

by: jcilley @ Sat May 02, 2009 at 06:47:50 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Thank you (0.00 / 0)

for engaging here on this topic.

---

by: Dean Barker @ Sat May 02, 2009 at 07:08:00 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Terie Norelli (4.00 / 3)

 deserves a great deal of praise for standing up for people on the floor of the House and also her op-ed in the Union Leader. It goes with her long standing commitment to the rights of women. She gets the connections. When anyone is discriminated against because of gender issues, no matter what those issues are, it demeans the gains others have made over the years, most notably women. That's a fact.

Jackie Cilley's remarks are great as well. I linked to them on my FB page and got positive feedback from as far away as Texas.

---

by: Jennifer Daler @ Sat May 02, 2009 at 06:23:51 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Terri Norelli, Jackie Cillley and Martha Fuller Clark showed leadership and courage. (0.00 / 0)

I think Jackie's commments, both in the Senate and here, are right on target-- some people engaged in despicable targeting of a vulnerable population and we all let them get away with it.

That said, we learn from mistakes and this type of benighted discrimination is one step closer to eradication.  

"But, in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope." Si se puede. Yes we can.  

---

by: Paul Twomey @ Sat May 02, 2009 at 10:13:21 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

To the extent the people I know were aware of the bill.. (4.00 / 3)

... it was "the bathroom bill". So Sununu won that round.

To overcome this, there should have been an amendment that specifically dealt with the use of public restrooms, taking it off the table. Surely that was an insignificant aspect of the overall bill, and dropping that protection for the sake of the rest of the bill made sense?

Then the Rs couldn't make it a potty issue, and would have had to deal with it as a pure civil rights debate.  And the Senate wouldn't so easily have ignored it.

---

by: Michael Marsh @ Sat May 02, 2009 at 08:24:32 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

untrue (4.00 / 1)

The senate did not "easily ignore it".

Democrats solve problems, Republicans sit and say no.

---

by: Ray Buckley @ Sat May 02, 2009 at 08:49:21 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

so: where do we go from here? (0.00 / 0)

Is it possible that there might be a motion to reconsider? If not, when is the earliest the bill can be reintroduced?

=Health care for all now!=

---

by: beverlywoods @ Sat May 02, 2009 at 09:33:15 AM CDT

Once a bill (0.00 / 0)

 has been determined "Inexpedient to Legislate", it cannot be reintroduced until the following biennium.

Perhaps there can be some changes in the rules  and transgendered people could be covered under existing civil rights statutes until another bill can be brought forward.

---

by: Jennifer Daler @ Sat May 02, 2009 at 09:53:34 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I don't think it is that easy (0.00 / 0)

That's why this law is needed in the first place.

=Health care for all now!=

---

by: beverlywoods @ Sat May 02, 2009 at 11:04:38 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Contrarian to the last (0.00 / 0)

I think that the only way to deal with this omnipresent Republican smear approach is to use their terms and jamb them down their throats. I try always to refer to Barach Hussein Obama, Bush's War and I am going to try and remember to call it the bathroom bill. When included as part of an explanation of its obvious merits it is the only kind of rebuttal for this garbage. Hammer home the stupidity of these obvious flim flams and Republicans will get to be known as the party of no sense. The party of WMDs, The party of banker bail outs. The party of Abramoff and K street. The party of phone jamming. The party of crony capitalism and offshoring of jobs. Tiptoe away from it and they will continue to heap on the subterfuge. Anyone convinced of these falsities is not capable of changing their minds. Kerry didn't shoot himself to get purple hearts. Hang it around their necks.

---

by: xteeth @ Sat May 02, 2009 at 17:03:58 PM CDT