Today's email brought notice from HRC (Human Rights Campaign) of two bills in the Nevada legislature:
Bills introduced in the Nevada Assembly and Senate could allow individuals and businesses to use religion to challenge or opt out of laws, including laws that protect LGBT people from discrimination in employment, housing and public accommodations. Assembly Bill 277 is heading to the Assembly Judiciary Committee later this week, on March 27 at 8:00 a.m. We need you to raise your voice now to help stop it from passing.
Contact your Nevada State Senator, Assemblymember and Governor Sandoval now and tell them to vote NO on SB272 and AB277
I added my few words to theirs in the "canned email" and sent this message (presuming the "Dear
__" would be filled in by an automated system):
Dear
As your constituent and a supporter of the Human Rights Campaign, I am writing to encourage you to vote no on SB272 and AB277. People shouldn't be able to pick and choose which laws they are going to follow. This bill would allow individuals to abuse the system and could result in frivolous lawsuits at taxpayer expense.
Equal treatment, including each person treating every other person equally under employment, housing, public accommodations, and every other law is a bedrock of our system and must not be abandoned.
A person's choice of religion is a private one, and one our Constitutions (both federal and state) protect, but whatever beliefs spring from it are, by definition, also private. I wonder what might be the purpose for which some wish to insinuate their private religious beliefs into the public sphere, especially when those beliefs would be used to compromise the equal treatment of another.
See Senator Manendo's response after our web host's elegant doodle...
Thank you for the email, I appreciate hearing from the people in my district!
Not sure the Democrats (like myself) can stop these bills as you well know the
last election cycle the Republicans took control of both houses. Perhaps more
people will vote next time?
Take care and thanks again,
Mark
While true, I consider this response to be inadequate, bordering on dismissive. He gives me the impression that, unless the legislature has a Democratic majority, we might as well all give up on any reasonable legislation passing that body, and accept that any (R-party) proposed, though possibly unreasonable, legislation
will simply become law.
Even though, imho, he was elected to be part of the debate, to present alternative viewpoints when those are needed, to rally around our cause those on the other side of the aisle who might not toe their party's line on everything, his response implies to me that he will bide his time at the legislature, collect his paycheck, and wait for better election results the next time.
This is a huge disappointment to me. Our district elected him to be our representative in Carson City, and I will let him know that I expect better - a better attitude, a better effort, a better awareness of politics and the political process, and certainly better communication with his constituents.
While I can think of many things to say in an email response to him, I tend to be acidic in my phrasing. Therefore, in comments, please offer your phrasing for me to consider.
11:14 PM PT: Update: The following is the email I sent to Senator Manendo in response to his:
Dear Senator Manendo,
Thank you for a personal response (somewhat, at least) to my email. While I agree with you that higher voter turnout would result in more representative government, I am disappointed that you seem to blame potential new laws exclusively on voters and the resulting party distribution in the state house. I am confident that, if the will to fight this proposed legislation exists in our elected representatives, much can be done to make sure they do not pass.
For example, the Oklahoma Senate currently has 40 Republican members and 8 Democratic members. That state's House of Representatives (comparable to our Assembly) has 72 Republican members and 29 Democratic members, yet bills similar to those about which I expressed my concern to you were recently effectively defeated in Oklahoma. The reason for their demise was (according to a resident of Oklahoma), "Two Democrats were able to kill a bill that would've hurt retired state employees; State Representative Emily Virgin (D) added an amendment to the bill that would've allowed discrimination against the LGBT community, which effectively killed the legislation; scores of Democrats across the state were very instrumental in making sure much of the anti-gay legislation authored didn't make it to the House floor."
If fights against such bills can succeed where party distribution is so much more dramatic than it is in Nevada, surely Democratic legislators in our state can at least try to be as effective. By my best understanding, that is what politics is, and what politicians usually do.
As a resident of another state with whom I have spoken pointed out, "We may not be able to stop them, but we should be raising the rafters with protests, and our elected representatives ought to be leading the way. Democrats could make sure the whole country understands that this is not the way governance was ever intended to be."
The tone of your email message indicates you have accepted defeat, and you believe I should do the same. We (the district's voters) sent you to the state house to "politic" on our behalf regardless of the party affiliation of your colleagues. I hope to hear from you again that you are, in fact, performing that function. I look forward to hearing of your legislative successes, especially regarding these two bills.
Respectfully,