New Haven Register, CT, USA
How Good Bills Die Unnatural Deaths
Gregory B. Hladky, Capitol Bureau Chief
06/11/2007
During the chaotic final hours of General Assembly's 2007 regular session, a bill calling for more openness in Connecticut's court system died in the House. Meanwhile, a "cyber stalking" measure designed to prevent sexual predators from using the Internet to troll for young victims expired without a vote in the Senate.
The superficial explanation for the legislature's failure to pass those bills is that lawmakers ran out of time....
....The story of the demise of the cyber stalking bill is equally convoluted and involved a threatened GOP filibuster over the rights of transgender people.
The House passed the cyber stalking measure in late May and sent it to the Senate for action. The Senate also passed a bill to guarantee people who change their genders the same protections against job discrimination and other abuses that other minorities have.
But when the transgender rights bill came up in the House, Republican lawmakers opposed to the measure triggered a debate that lasted for hours, ending only when Democratic leaders withdrew the bill.
The failure of House lawmakers to take a vote on the transgender bill angered state Sen. Andrew McDonald, D-Stamford, the co-chairman of the legislature's Judiciary Committee. So McDonald put the cyber stalking bill on hold until the House acted on the transgender rights legislation.
That never happened, and so both bills died. And it was the poor old clock that got the blame.
As I wrote before, Politics at its Worst or how a small hand full of politicians can holdup important legislation for their own pet projects. So two good bills didn’t get passed because of three Representatives who did not want us to be treated equally and be able to work and live our lives. Was McDonald right in holding up the Cyber Stalking bill to use as leverage? I cannot answer because I am biased, but I will say that I would have liked to see both the bills passed.
Thanks for the insight into what really happened. It is usually you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours in politics so the "retribution" might be to remind the Republican three of that fact.
ReplyDeleteThe article bothers me Diana. I doubt the cyber stalking bill was the only one held up, and I'm betting that there is at least a chance that there were other problems with the cyber stalking bill. e.g.funding for the implementation of it, intrusion on public civil rights, there may already be an active law that covers the same stuff, oye, the games they play! ect. I am very worried that the author is trying to slight NOT ONLY the Senator himself but those who support the transgender bill. The reader is left wondering; Do people who support the transgender bill not care about outlawing cyber stalkers? I would consider writing up a short editorial in response to this article. The author had no right to assume why Senator McDonald held up the cyber stalking bill. The New Haven Register and the Waterbury Republican have been known to seek the "conservative" mind set the Hartford Courant turns away. I find politics interesting, there's always another layer of information to be had.
ReplyDeleteIt's easy to get caught up in it too, the same way I've seen sports fans get sssoooo worked up, as I generally stand there thinking "So?? the team with the blue shirts won instead of those with the orange shirts.. whooppee do, they all got some great excercise and got paid for it..." Yet I realize that it's really just a way of feeling connected to something bigger than just myself, a cause, part of group of people, a community of like minded souls, another pseudo family.
This is my long winded way of saying:
I don't like this article, I see it as a sneaky slight against Senator McAndrews. I will consider writing a retailitory editorial stating what I've said here, or I may decide to ignore it as not worth acknowledging.
I'm hoping you don't get worked up and take this article and the "other side's" B.S. personally. I was doing that too much myself and I remember how it really just made me miserable. I think you are too fabulous a person, I don't want that misery for you.
Cheers and Best Wishes to our favorite News T.V. Star~
Jennifer
Now of Florida
Actually I wonder if Rep. Dyson and Senator McAndrews could file a lawsuit for slander over this article.
ReplyDeleteI also did a quick search to find out more about this author, there was nothing "quick" about it, Gregory B. Hladky, Capitol Bureau Chief
appears to have some interesting connections... I would prefer to do more research than I have time for today before writing an editorial response to this article.
~Jennifer
O.K., I've made my final decision. I'm not writing an editorial in response to this article. Here's why:
ReplyDeleteThis author is nothing more than a "shock jock" of a "conservative" newspaper. Like the shock jocks of the radio they make their living by pissing people off. These shock jocks make thier income by saying or writing things that they know hard working people who earn an honest wage will get pissed off about. The hard working people then spend their own precious (see our mutual friend's current blog) time and money responding to. The shock jock then laughs their lazy selfish little butt all the way to the bank. I'm not falling for it, let "Gregory B. Hladky, Capitol Bureau Chief" get an honest job. I'm going to get back to my own laborious stuying and then something pleasant. Life is too short not to enjoy it.
Best Wishes and Thanks for your great Blog :-)
~Jennifer