CHRISTIAN COALITION OF IOWA

LEGISLATIVE REPORT

Norm Pawlewski – Lobbyist

Feb. 28 – March 4

            The House Judiciary Committee voted 13 to 6 to move H.J.R.1 – the marriage amendment out of committee and on to the House calendar.  The resolution is now ready for debate by the 100 member House of Representatives. 

            The twelve Republicans and one Democrat voting for the resolution are:  Kraig Paulsen (R), Danny Carroll (R), Gene Maddox (R), Jim VonFossen (R), David Heaton (R), Jodi, Tymeson (R), Dwayne Alons (R), Richard Anderson (R), Carmine Boal (R), George Eichhorn (R), Joe Hutter (R), Jeff Kaufmann (R), and Kurt Swaim (D).

            The six legislators, all Democrats, who voted against the resolution are:  Ro Foege (D), Pam Jochum (D), Vicky Lensing (D), Rick Olson (D), Beth Wessel-Kroeschell (D), and Cindy Winckler (D).

            Two legislators, Deborah Berry (D) and Mark Smith (D) were absent and did not vote.

            Please consider sending a thank you by mail or e-mail to those legislators who voted for the resolution.  If you are a constituent or acquaintance of those who voted no, politely let them know you are disappointed with their vote and urge them to reconsider their position when the bill is brought up for debate and a vote on the floor of the House. 

            We will be working with other faith-based organizations to lobby all 100 members of the House of Representatives to determine if we have enough votes to pass H.J.R.1 out of the House. 

            We will urge leadership to put H.J.R.1 up for debate and vote once we have a favorable count of yes votes.

            The Governor proposed a bill in the House, H.S.B.220 and an identical companion bill in the Senate, S.S.B.1160 “relating to the establishment of state and school anti-harassment or anti-bullying policies, providing data collection and reporting requirements and providing for immunity and other related matters.”  Democrat legislators submitted two additional Acts which were based on the Governor’s bills.  We are opposed to all of them and have received assurances by both House and Senate Republicans, to whom these bills were assigned by their respective committees, that they are dead and will not be considered during this session. 

            We are not opposed to requiring schools to be pro-active in assuring “a safe and civil school environment” but one definition, “trait or characteristic of the student, which lists among other things, age color, creed, national origin, etc. also includes sexual orientation, gender identity.  Most schools already have anti-bullying and anti-harassment policies.  They need to enforce them.  In our opinion, the anti-bullying and anti-harassment Acts proposed, would be just as effective without the “trait or characteristic” definition.  It appears these bills are being used  as an attempt to codify sexual orientation and gender identity as protected classes akin to race or gender.  We are sure that your reading of the Acts, H.F.367, H.F.382, H.S.B.220 or S.S.B.1160 will lead you to the same conclusion.