As you read this
article, an ethics reform bill may have passed both houses of the state
legislature and be on the Governor’s desk for signing. It should be re-named the Eric Turner
Memorial bill, after the former Speaker Pro
Tempore, of Cicero, favored by House Leader Bosma of Indianapolis until his
corrupt deeds were brought to light.
Turner’s Democratic opponent forced Bosma to announce he would not serve
as Pro Tem this session, and two weeks
later Turner announced he would resign if re-elected. His opponent couldn't overcome the
gerrymandered Republican District 32.
Turner was re-elected although he didn't want the job anymore anyway,
and Republican precinct committee people picked his successor (Tony Cook, of Cicero).
You may have noticed I only mentioned
the party affiliation of Turner’s Fall opponent. That’s because everyone in the state
legislature is a Republican except a few people. Glenda Ritz, Superintendent of Education, is
the only state office holder who isn't an R.
And the Governor and the legislature are in the process of a bloodless,
legislative coup to strip her of power or office or both. (Hoosiers call this One-Party Rule in Russia,
and Super Majority Rule in Indiana.)
Assume every one mentioned is a Republican, unless otherwise noted,
until there is a political revolution in the State.
Anyway, the ethics reform bill is an
improvement and helpful. But laws and
legislative procedures already exist that would allow remedies from punishment
and removal for Turner-like acts to civil and criminal prosecution. Indiana’s continuing ethical scandals (e.g., Bosma
and the proposed soccer stadium) continue because there is a lack of political
will to bring it to a halt because there is almost no chance it will cost a
Republican their seat. Turner’s
district, like almost all others since 2001 and 2011, is so gerrymandered the
only real fear is a primary challenge from the far right of the Party.
But Turner-like perfidy, conflict of
interest, and billion dollar hauls is not the worst consequence for our
democratic polity and civil society, and not even the worst unethical conduct. Turner made himself and his family business
rich at the public trough. Republican
One-Party Rule is taking people’s rights from them by hateful, prejudicial, and
unconstitutional legislation that debases our Judeo-Christian heritage by using
religion as a cover for civil sin.
As I write this article, Republican
One-Party Rule has already passed through both houses and the governor, on
March 26th, has already secretively signed into law, a horrible law. The bill is deceptively titled the “Religious
Freedom Restoration Act of 2015.”
(“RFRA.”) It’s “double-speak” title
is enough to make George Orwell role over and cough in his Tubercular
grave.
RFRA
(it’s a hell of an angry acronym) is the worst bill I have seen or read in 40
years of work in Congress, the State Senate, and law practice.
First, it is indecipherable and incomprehensible. The only reason we think we know what it is
supposed to mean is because of the bill Digest and the news media. RFRA
actually says it “applies to all governmental entities.” A lay reader or a lawyer has about as good a
chance of figuring out RFRA is designed to legalize evil acts toward minorities
from just reading the bill as you do figuring out how to program a computer by
watching your teenager play “League of Legends” all night. The actual bill is a misleading mosaic. RFRA says it “applies to all governmental
action.” Not so. In reality it empowers, and applies to,
people, organizations, and corporations who hate and fear people who are
different than themselves.
RFRA
defines a “person” as an “individual,” “organization,” or “business.” The bill says that a “person” engages in an
“exercise of religion” if they say so, even if it is “not compelled by” or “central
to” their religion. or any religion.
Lawyers call this the “Straight Face Test:” If the “person” can say the reason he is
kicking the gay couple out of the restaurant is because he is engaging in an
“exercise of religion” without giggling, then he is protected by this bill.
Second, new statue is unconstitutionally
vague and over broad. This law is so bad
because it in effect establishes a government religion allowing discrimination
by de facto attacking all the anti-discrimination
ordinances in Indianapolis, Evansville, Ft. Wayne, and elsewhere, in violation of
the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and
the Indiana Constitution. To blunt this,
the drafters had to insert a clause that says the law cannot be construed to do
what the law accomplishes: “This chapter
may not be construed to affect, interpret, or in any way address the
Establishment Clause.” (Remember your
English classes? “You can eat the
cookie but you may not.” The law
tries to tell appellate judges they may not think the statute violates
the Establishment Clause.)
Third, it is an embarrassment to the
State and a potential body blow to Indiana’s economy and reputation. The NCAA, the NFL, Lilly, the Republican
Mayor of Indianapolis, and businesses, institutions, organizations, and the
LGBT community in leadership are expressing cold feet toward Indiana. The March Madness of the Final Four may turn
out to be our final Final Four. In other
words, its stupid because it got ‘good headlines’ for many in the legislators
but the financial chickens and calls for repeal are about to come home to
roost. My first year in the State
Senate, a colleague of mine, who’d been there a few terms, got the bright idea
to sponsor a ‘headline bill’ banning the sale of hypodermic needs in Indiana
because of the rising use of ‘hitting drugs’ in his area and the state. He got great press and strode around with his
chest out for about three days. Then the
Farm Bureau, the AMA, nurses, hospitals, doctors, pharmacies, farmers, Veterinarians—need
I go on?—howled, he was laughed at, and the bill was dead. To add insult to injury, the Senator was a
diabetic who himself used a hypodermic needle daily at the time.
Fourth,
it’s insincere. The proof is in the last
sentence of the law. It has so far flown
in under the radar. It provides RFRA “is
not intended to, and shall not be construed or interpreted to, create a claim
or private cause of action against any private employer by any applicant,
employee, or former employee.” You can
sue the government if it intervenes to protect the lesbian couple you threw out
of the store you were managing because of your religious epiphany, but you
can’t sue your employers if he refuses to hire you or fires you because of your
religious views on LGBT people. Some employers
in this “at-will employment” State will tolerate prejudice and discrimination
in the name of an “exercise of religion,” but they draw the line at a wrongful
discharge suit by a worker. That’s an
‘irreligious exercise of religion!’
Fifth, it’s going to drain state and
local government money. The Legislative
Services Administration’s “Fiscal Impact Statement” on RFRA reported it would
result in an increase of expenditures with the Attorney General, and payment of
more tort claims. It will also result in
similar expenditures and payments by cities and counties. The only up side to this law is it’s a
bonanza of legal work and attorney fees for lawyers.
And
last but not least, it is an unethical bill.
It is unethical because it licenses the hurtful and unconstitutional
discrimination against our fellow citizens, to curry favor with and appease
homophobic people who contrive religious reasons to be un-Christian to fellow
citizens.
As
Barry Goldwater said about gays in the military 25 years ago, when that was the
touchstone of prejudice, “The question is not are they straight, but can they
shoot straight.” Republican Conservative
Icon Barry Goldwater, and the current Republican Governor of Arizona who vetoed
a similar law, have more ethics, good sense, and tolerance in their little
fingers than Pence and his peeps. Unfortunately
lots of people in this state are going to pay a high price for the new law to
‘ban the sale of the hypodermic needle.’
