Last year your colleague Max Wise introduced SB 138, a bill created out of phony CRT fears. He defended the law saying that it would help promote civics education, calling current civics education lacking. Perhaps Max Wise is right.
I had civics in 6th grade. I remember a deep discussion about government, public service, the importance of debate in creating and refining laws, and the concept that our elected officials would represent the will of the people. There and in classes I had in government and political science in Oldham County in my later years, we discussed the seemingly uncontroversial idea that there was a duty to protect the rights of those in the minority, that our Constitution was a living document whose interpretation should be balanced with the times, and that our elected officials should work for the important issues of their constituents. I also grew up in a school system where teachers and public schools were valued, embraced, and supported.
Needless to say, in watching the past several years of legislation in Frankfort, these concepts seem to be more wishful thinking than reality. Can any of you honestly say that the process of drafting, considering, and voting on SB 150 represents the best a civic-minded body can do? For that matter, can you say it for legislation passed in the past several years
Every year I think things can’t possibly get worse in Frankfort, and every year I’m wrong. The “debate” on SB 150 somehow managed to sink to lows I didn’t think were possible.
I watched as several people whose lives are shaped by legislation like SB 150 gave passionate testimony about how the law and laws like it have a negative impact on their lives. I saw nobody testify in support of the bill. Like your sports bill last year, you heard from parents and students who expressed the negative impacts such laws have. These weren’t paid lobbyists, but real people with real impacts who have experienced what happens when their lives or the lives of their loved ones are diminished. And yet their cries fell on deaf ears.
One of those people is Chris Hartman. Chris has devoted over a decade to issues in support of the LGBTQ community. It is personal to him. He’s seen the impacts of hate, discrimination, and fear aimed at the LGBTQ community. His anger yesterday was justified, and he rightfully pointed out that your continued push on SB150 and bills like it were disrespectful and showed a lack of compassion toward Karen Berg.
Rather than accept legitimate criticism, or give some thought to the very obvious thoughts and emotions of Senator Berg during this process or Mr. Hartman’s personal connection, I watched as Senator Tichenor got indignant at the idea that her support of this bill DIDN’T reflect caring or concern for her colleague. Senator Tichenor shook her head at Mr. Hartman as though his own personal experiences and knowledge were not valid. Did she feel that somehow her own actions and rhetoric during her short time in office reflects a compassion or caring for Senator Berg and her son than Mr. Hartman lacked? Maybe she can explain how.
I then watched as the bill hit the floor, and Damon Thayer pretended to be indignant at the idea that Senator Berg would propose suspension of the rules to introduce an amendment to the bill. As Senator Berg and others pointed out, it’s hard to follow those rules when the process is gamed to keep you from doing so. How do you amend a bill that nobody has seen, much less introduce it in a timely manner for consideration. While Damon Thayer pretended to be outraged that the public would not have a chance to see the amendment, he failed to note that the very bill that was being voted on was not yet available to the public on their website, a not uncommon occurrence. He also failed to mention that the rules of the Senate include the ability to suspend the rules, giving the ability for the Senate to consider an exception on its own merits. Damon Thayer couldn’t provide a decent reason why Senator Berg’s amendment shouldn’t be heard except for “the rules”. Does he feel that gaming those rules is good government? If Damon Thayer doesn’t agree that there are instances where a rule suspension should be considered on its own merits, why did he agree to that rule? The fact that almost every one of you voted against suspending the rules shows that your focus isn’t on being civically minded, but rather in playing games for your own advantage. What was the danger at considering the amendment and then voting on it? Is anything harmed by doing so?
I’d also like to mention Max Wise, a guy who constantly complains about his bills being misrepresented, but has no problems misrepresenting the views, thoughts, and actions of the Kentucky Department of Education when defending his legislation. It was telling that Max complained about this bills being misrepresented and not reflecting the version being voted on. Perhaps that’s because what he introduces tends to have lots of problematic language within it and in this case, few people had a copy of the changes from which they could adequately discuss it. Perhaps if Max paid more attention to his own civic duty toward drafting his bills and communicating changes in a timely fashion to the widest audience, he wouldn’t find himself with the self inflicted wounds of “misrepresented” legislation.
Of course, your lack of listening or attention to the damage your bill could do was reflected in how most of you acted on the floor. I watched as Senator Berg and others testified about the problems within SB 150. Senators Shickel and Wheeler stared down at their desks focusing on everything but their colleague who had a very deep and personal impact from what was being voted on. Gex Williams and Stephen West were laughing as others talked about the harm this bill would cause. As Olivia Krauth pointed out, the only Republicans who looked at Senator Berg were Senator Givens and Senator Funk Frohmeyer.
I suppose I shouldn’t be shocked. I was in the room when Senator Stivers and Senator Shickel paid no attention while women testified about the impact abortion legislation would have. I guess having your mind made up, regardless of what the impacts may be to the people of Kentucky, represents civic minded government to most of you.
One bright note in a terrible day was Stephen Meredith, who was the only one among GOP senators to say that there needed to be more discussion and consideration before trying to pass 150. I’ve criticized Senator Meredith in the past, but his comments were what I would expect from every Senator, especially on sensitive issues that can lead to pain and injury to their constituents. So I thank him for having the decency to make that opinion known and changing his vote in committee.
The people of Kentucky have learned to expect little from Frankfort, and many of you have lived up to that expectation. For those among us who hold slim optimism that one day we’ll have leaders who care about doing the right thing, this is truly unfortunate. When people throughout the Commonwealth are suffering from disasters, inadequate food and housing, poverty, job loss, and other very real issues that impact a majority, you seem to have an unhealthy focus on trying to make life worse for a minority while doing nothing to help anyone else. You should be ashamed about that. There’s little to suggest you will be. I’m just thankful that there are still a few of you who can hold compassion in their heart for others and focus on helping.
Sincerely,
Rob Mattheu
Louisville, KY.