IOWA CHRISTIAN ALLIANCE

LEGISLATIVE REPORT

March 12, 2007

Norm Pawlewski, Lobbyist

WHERE HAVE ALL THE BLUE DOGS GONE?

            A few days and weeks just after the 2006 election, a number of commentators were saying that the Democrats recruited moderate candidates who could compete with conservative to moderate Republicans in toss-up districts.  In my first Legislative Report, I told you I would let you know if some of these “Blue Dog Democrats” who supposedly were more conservative on social issues than the run of the mill, left of center, liberal (now referred to as secular progressive) Democrats, really were.  I said I’d let you know if they “legislate” like they “candidate.”  Well, the results are in and the news is not family friendly.

            Eight weeks into this session, not a “Blue Dog Democrat” has surfaced.  On legislation like the Bullying Bill, which gave special recognition to homosexual students, the Cloning Bill, which authorizes researchers at the University of Iowa to clone human embryos and then destroy them by removing their stem cells, Democrat legislators were in lock step with their leadership and the most liberal governor in recent Iowa history.  These were floor actions (a vote taken on the Senate and/or House floor). 

            There is more.  In sub-committee and full standing committee actions, the Democrats are pushing their agenda to make homosexuality a protected civil right (SF 427, formerly SF 224, and HF 603, HF 92) “granting the Civil Rights Commission additional subpoena power to investigate unfair or discriminatory practices,” SF 199 (to pursue complaints by homosexuals for any reason?).  HF 611 and SF 43 are bills “relating to human growth and development and health education under the educational standards, requiring school districts to provide curricular information to agencies and organizations upon request.”  Translation:  sex education curriculum developed by the Iowa Department of Education, allowing school districts to opt out but making it almost impossible to do so. For all practical purposes, this is a state mandated sex Ed program.   Planned Parenthood has proposed this legislation.  Our interpretation of the language is that Abstinence Only education could be eliminated if HF 611 becomes law.  For more information, contact the Iowa Right to Life Committee.  Go to www.IRLC.org.  Kim Lehman is taking the lead on HF 611.

            If you’re interested in “nanny state” legislation, you need look no further than SF 210, sponsored by Sen. Joe Bolkcom of the “people’s republic of Johnson County.”  This is “An act establishing a program for providing home visits for all families in the state with a newborn child.”  Former Governor Vilsack first proposed this newborn visitation program after returning from a visit to France, that great bastion of  “Liberty.”  HF 210 states, “The components of the home visit shall include but are not limited to assessing the child’s home environment, educating the families concerning newborn children and assisting families in accessing appropriate services.”  Proponents say the proposed home visits are “voluntary.”  However, that word never appears in the legislation.  The way it is written implies a mandatory visit.  If language to make the visit voluntary is added, unless parents of newborns are given an “opt in” as opposed to an “opt out,” it could be implied they have something to hide.  Keep an eye on this legislation. 

            Title of Clone and Kill Program at University of Iowa Changes

            The title of SF 115 that allows the University of Iowa to do research on stem cells extracted from human embryos created by a process referred to as a somatic cell nuclear transfer has a new title.  Instead of The Iowa Stem Cell Research and Cures Initiative, it is now The Institute for Bio-Medical Discovery.  I wonder why?  Could it be that a Cures Initiative would give Iowans the impression that they could expect some cures in the near future?  Even advocates of embryonic stem cell research say that any meaningful cures are 10 to 20 years away.  If you are looking for the appropriation, look for the new title.  It’s possible that no or little money will be appropriated for this pie in the sky program this legislative session. 

            Amendment to the Iowa Constitution Defining Marriage

            A House Joint Resolution has been drafted by House Republicans and will be introduced very soon.  Two years ago, when the Iowa House approved HJR-1, the amendment that defined marriage as between one man and one woman, a number of Democrat legislators who voted against it said they were sure that Iowa’s Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) would be upheld by Iowa courts.  If not, they would be first in line to support a constitutional amendment.  Last year, Democrat senators who kept HJR 1 from coming to a vote expressed the same eagerness to support traditional marriage.  The court has not yet decided the lawsuit by a gay rights advocacy group challenging Iowa’s DOMA.  When it does, we will be going back to these legislators if the ruling vacates Iowa’s DOMA.  I kept track of both senators and representatives who told me they would defend traditional marriage.  What are the odds that most of these legislators, especially senators who were re-elected to another four-year term, will remember their commitment? 

            When you go down the list of legislation that can be considered part of the liberal (secular progressive, secular humanist, far left) agenda, you may notice they are authored in the Senate by Senators Joe Bolkcom, Jack Hatch, Staci Appel, Michael Connolly, Robert Dvorsky or Bill Dotzler, or all of the above.  Come to think of it, there is only one senator, Tom Hancock of Epworth, who seems to vote his principles and the teachings of his faith.

            In the House, Representative Mary Mascher is joined by a whole slew of liberals.  Representatives Polly Butka, Ro Foege, Mary Gaskill, Lisa Heddens, Bruce Hunter, David Jacoby, Pam Jochum, Vicki Lensing, Rick Olson, Janet Petersen, Nathan Reichert, Mark Smith, Roger Wendt, Beth Wessel-Kroeschell and Wesley Whitead are the most visible on secular progressive legislation. 

            So far, this has been a frustrating legislative session.  The only encouragement we values voter representatives get is from the conservatives in each chamber that are fighting the good fight.  They are doing the best they can under very difficult circumstances.  If you know that your senator or representative is one of these, pray for them and let them know you appreciate their efforts.