ARTICLES

LETTERS

NEWS

ROAMIN' CATHOLIC

Contents © 2006
by Jim Holman.
All rights reserved.

No Politics Here

"Triple Threat" Homosexual Bills Before State Legislature

BY MARIA KENNEDY

Although the governor publicly said on May 24 that he would veto a homosexual education bill (Senate Bill 1437) if it came to his desk, some Republicans are not convinced this is not an election year ploy. They are vowing to pull their support for Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's re-election if he fails to stop what Capitol Resource Institute, a family rights lobby, is calling a "triple threat."

Currently winding their way through the state legislature are three bills that pro-family activists say radically further the homosexual rights movement in California. Given the pro-homosexual Democratic majority in the California legislature, pro-family forces are relying on the governor to veto the bills if they come to his desk for signing. When asked if the governor would veto a similar bill next year when he would not be up for re-election, Katherine McLane, spokeswoman for the governor, replied, "the governor's primary concern is for the welfare of the children of the state of California. Politics does not play into this."

Most of the focus is on Senate Bill 1437, "School Instruction: Prohibition of Discriminatory Content," sponsored by California state senator Shelia Kuehl (D-Santa Monica). The bill mandates that by 2012 social studies courses must include "an age-appropriate study" of the "role and contributions" of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people to the "economic, political, and social development" of California and the United States. The bill's purported goal is to help end the "hostile environment for kids who are gay or lesbian -- or even thought to be gay or lesbian" -- in schools, according to Kuehl. Part of this harassment, she said, "stems from the fact that nobody reads about any positive examples." The bill could have national ramifications, according to the May 12 Los Angeles Times, since California, which provides a large portion of the textbook market, is a trendsetter.

After hearing the news that Governor Schwarzenegger would veto her bill if it came to his desk, Kuehl asserted, "he hasn't made up his mind, I don't care what some underling might have said," according to the May 25 Sacramento Bee. But it was Adam Mendelsohn, the governor's communications director, who announced on May 24, "the governor believes that school curriculum should include all important historical figures, regardless of orientation. However, he does not support the Legislature micromanaging curriculum." Kuehl's disbelief stemmed in part from the governor's customary reticence on bills that had not yet reached him. When it went to the assembly, said Kuehl, she would speak to Schwarzenegger, who, she said, would support the bill when he "understands how small a change it is."

The other two pro-homosexual bills have not received as much focus. The first bill, AB 1056, "Intergroup Relations and Tolerance Education" (sponsored by Assemblywoman Judy Chu, D-Alhambra), is in the education committee's suspense file. Although currently dormant, Karen England of Capital Resource Institute cautions against becoming complacent. "It can be brought out at any time. It's made it through the [legislative] process. We are fighting all three." The bill would establish a pilot program at ten Los Angeles County schools, which would use school materials to "integrate instruction on tolerance." The other bill that is part of the "triple threat" is AB 606 (sponsored by Assemblyman Lloyd Levine, D-Van Nuys). According to England, AB 606 "was left over from last year." This bill would, according to a February 17 legislative counsel's digest, "require a school district to take specified actions related to increasing awareness of, preventing, and ensuring appropriate responses to, incidences of discrimination and harassment" of anyone on account of sexual orientation or perceived gender. The bill would allow the state superintendent of instruction to withhold funds from any non-compliant school district, based on the superintendent's opinion.

This bill is still in the senate education committee, with a hearing that was scheduled for June 21. The senate education committee consists of Democrats Jack Scott (Pasadena), Elaine Alquist (San Jose), Alan Lowenthal (Long Beach), Gloria Romero (Los Angeles), Joe Simitian (Santa Cruz), Nell Soto (Ontario), Jackie Speier (San Francisco), and Tom Torlakson (Antioch). On the Republican side are Senator Jeff Denham (Merced) and Senator Abel Maldonado (Santa Maria). Soto, whose district includes Ontario, has not felt any effects from her support of any of the three bills, including Kuehl's bill. When asked if Kuehl's bill was a factor in Soto's campaign, her consultant, Mike Louis, said, "no not really." As of press time Maldonado, did not return a call for comment.

Randy Thomasson of the Campaign for Children and Families pointed out that the makeup of the senate judiciary committee is more favorable to pro-family forces. The committee is comprised of three Democrats: Chairman Joe Dunn (Garden Grove), Martha Escutia (Montebello), and Shelia Kuehl (Los Angeles). On the Republican side are Senators Bill Morrow (Carlsbad) and Dick Ackerman (Tustin). According to Thomasson, Dunn is the deciding vote on the bill when it comes up later this summer. Thomasson pointed out that, although recently Dunn has readily voted on behalf of homosexual unions, in July of 1999, Dunn, who in June lost his bid for state controller, wrote to a constituent stating that he would not support homosexual marriage. "I will vote against legal recognition of gay marriages and any bill that legislates the teaching of homosexual sex in the public schools. I also oppose the granting of special rights to any group, including gays and lesbians."

Jim Evans of Dunn's capital office dismissed the letter, saying it "could be bogus." In an interview with this reporter, Evans said the letter could have been fabricated; "it's seven years old," he said. The letterhead sported an embossed Seal of California. "This was not part of a mass mailing," one capital operative said. "Someone had to sit down and write this," he said on the condition of anonymity.

Jonathan Snowden of Senator Kuehl's office provided me with materials that were put out in response to the firestorm of criticism unleashed by pro-family groups against her bill. One "Question and Answer" document provided says the legislation would merely be used to highlight the achievements of gays and lesbians but would not attack heterosexuals. "SB 1437 does not disparage heterosexual people or families with heterosexual parents," it reads. "By adding sexual orientation and gender identity to nondiscrimination policies regarding instructional materials, SB 1437 prevents negative portrayals of people of all sexual orientations and gender identities. The bill does not prevent discussion of the many contributions of heterosexual people and families to California history, it simply ensures that the curriculum also include a discussion of the contributions of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people to the state."

Ben Lopez, legislative analyst and lobbyist for Traditional Values Coalition, said that his group was opposing all three bills. Speaking about the Kuehl bill, Lopez told me, "schools should not be in the business of changing the beliefs in children that parents have instilled. This bill allows for the blatant teaching and promotion of the homosexual lifestyle in the classroom. This is something parents find objectionable." Lopez said that he testified at the May 3 Senate hearing, warning that the bill was strongly opposed by families; but his testimony, he said, was too no avail.

When asked if he thought the governor would veto the bill if it made it to his desk, Lopez replied, "the governor would be committing political suicide if he signs this bill." Lopez pointed out that the bill is carrying support from Latino Democrats who live in socially conservative districts. "Assemblywoman Nell Soto was at the hearing," he said. "Her explanation for supporting the bill was that she had once known a boy who was a loner. It turned out that he was gay and later committed suicide. This was the reason for her supporting this bill. Nell Soto has caved into the goals of her party and doesn't represent the values of her constituents. She slaps the Latino community in the face every time she votes for these radical bills."

Chino Hills pro-family activist Gina Gleeson said she was very concerned about Kuehl's bill. "It's a cause for concern when children as young as kindergarten would be subject to state mandated teaching regarding homosexuals, lesbians, bisexuals, and trans-gender individuals. Parents are motivated to actively oppose these bills because they believe it is a clear violation of their right to determine who will speak to their children and when they will speak to them about this controversial sexual issue. And the broad language of the bill will leave children in the hands of pro-homosexual educators who will push the limits when it comes to curriculum design -- which of course will be without parental involvement. This should be a concern of every parent."

Although support for the bill is strong amongst Democrats in Sacramento, Senator Dean Flores (D-Shafter) quietly voted against the bill.

Some say Dunn's 1999 letter could have proven damaging to the senator's bid for controller, which is why his aide disputed its authenticity. Thomasson rejects any backpedaling by Dunn. "SB 1437 absolutely teaches schoolchildren that transexuality, bisexuality, and homosexuality are good and natural -- and, maybe, even for them. Dunn has voted to teach impressionable children to experiment sexually with alternative lifestyles that go against the natural family."

TOP