Representative Don Humason



TRANSGENDER RIGHTS? July 18, 2009 By State Representative Don Humason, Jr. “Only in Massachusetts…” Sometimes I just have to shake my head and laugh. It’s either that or cry. One of my Democrat colleagues in the House, Medford State Representative Carl Sciortino, has filed a bill called the Transgender Rights Bill. It would grant rights and protections to persons in the process of “reassigning their gender identity.” In other words, it would give certain rights and protections to men who like to dress like women or who are in the process of becoming women through medical, surgical, and hormone treatments, or men who simply identify themselves and wish to express themselves as women. Same thing goes for women who identify themselves as men. I’m not making this up. I couldn’t. I don’t have the imagination. Critics of the controversial bill call it simply, “The Bathroom Bill” because it would allow these individuals to use any public bathroom or locker room they wish. In other words, a man who that day “identifies” and “expresses” himself as a woman can use the woman’s room. His rights would be protected. Funny, the bill doesn’t mention anything about the rights of the women or girls who are using the bathroom or locker room and don’t want to share it with a man. If that’s not bad enough, the Judiciary Committee, to which this bill was assigned, decided to hold a massive, day-long public hearing on this bill and 226 other varying and unrelated pieces of legislation. Call me a cynic, but could this have been done intentionally to stifle participation and limit public testimony? Yup! The State House News Service reported: “Outraged attendees of a Tuesday Judiciary Committee hearing are fuming over the committee's decision to hear 227 bills - many of them controversial - in a single day, forcing committee leaders to cut off testimony from speakers on a range of topics, from gun violence, to sexual assault and a bill to add gender identity to the state's non-discrimination statute. “Frustration was visible throughout usually spacious Gardner Auditorium, which was packed to capacity, with an overflow crowd into the hallway. A state trooper and two park rangers stood watch at the door. Advocates for various bills privately questioned why the committee would schedule so many contentious bills for one hearing, and some said they would have to leave without testifying because of the long waits. “House Republicans used the occasion to point out that Democrats haven't supported their proposals to prevent such occurrences, in part by attempting to prevent such major scheduling conflicts. “Three-and-a-half hours into the hearing, testimony hadn't yet begun on the most-anticipated bill of the day for many in the audience, legislation adding protections for transgender people to the state non-discrimination statute. “As of 5:45 p.m., Gardner Auditorium was still nearly full, with advocates for and against the gender identity bill testifying. Supporters of the legislation predicted at least another two hours of testimony.” The House Republican Caucus’ blog, www.thecapitolviewlive.com, posted the following entry: “Some disturbing news was reported by State House News Service this afternoon regarding the chaos surrounding today’s Judiciary Committee hearing where 227 bills were expected to be heard. Unfortunately, State House News Service is reporting that due to the overwhelming agenda, testimony is being cut short on some key public safety issues. “Today is a busy day on Beacon Hill to say the least. Not only are there several committee hearings going on all over the building, but the House and Senate are both in full formal sessions taking up some of Governor Patrick’s vetoes. The people of the Commonwealth and the issues being addressed in hearings deserve more; they deserve the full attention of the Legislature. Additionally, the bills and amendments being taken up on the House floor deserve equal attention. Business cannot continue to be conducted this way. “In 2007, Republican lawmakers offered two amendments in an effort to make the process of hearings smoother. The first would have prevented committee hearings from being scheduled during formal sessions unless the chair of the committee submits a written description of the emergency that necessitates such scheduling. This proposal was overwhelmingly rejected by our Democratic colleagues. In fact, not one Democrat joined with us in this effort and because no action was taken we are running into problems like those mentioned above. “The second amendment offered would designate a period of time, not exceeding one half-hour, during which time testimony from legislators would be heard at a public hearing. If members are not present during that given time, they would be placed on the list to speak like any other member of the public wishing to testify. “This would have allowed more time for the public to give testimony and prevent the current practice of legislators testifying for extended periods of time during what is intended to be an effort to gather public input. Again, this amendment was not supported by a single Democrat. “Too many bills, too little time in a day and therefore the well-being of Massachusetts and its residents are being sacrificed in order to cram as much as possible into one day. We cannot continue down this path. Legislative proposals need time to be fully vetted. “The people’s work is supposed to be done in a timely fashion, but not at the cost of the democratic process. It is the status quo on Beacon Hill and until our Democratic colleagues are willing to work with us and make the process more efficient, unfortunately more situations like the one we are encountering today will most likely happen again.” * * * Representative Don Humason and his Chief of Staff Sarah Latour may be reached at their Westfield District office, 64 Noble Street, Westfield, MA 01085, 568-1366. Email address: Rep.DonaldHumason@Hou.state.ma.us Website: www.donhumason.org
This Site Designed and Maintained by: The Barre Group

TRANSGENDER RIGHTS?

July 18, 2009

By State Representative Don Humason, Jr.

“Only in Massachusetts…” Sometimes I just have to shake my head and laugh. It’s either that or cry. One of my Democrat colleagues in the House, Medford State Representative Carl Sciortino, has filed a bill called the Transgender Rights Bill. It would grant rights and protections to persons in the process of “reassigning their gender identity.”

In other words, it would give certain rights and protections to men who like to dress like women or who are in the process of becoming women through medical, surgical, and hormone treatments, or men who simply identify themselves and wish to express themselves as women. Same thing goes for women who identify themselves as men. I’m not making this up. I couldn’t. I don’t have the imagination.

Critics of the controversial bill call it simply, “The Bathroom Bill” because it would allow these individuals to use any public bathroom or locker room they wish. In other words, a man who that day “identifies” and “expresses” himself as a woman can use the woman’s room. His rights would be protected. Funny, the bill doesn’t mention anything about the rights of the women or girls who are using the bathroom or locker room and don’t want to share it with a man.

If that’s not bad enough, the Judiciary Committee, to which this bill was assigned, decided to hold a massive, day-long public hearing on this bill and 226 other varying and unrelated pieces of legislation. Call me a cynic, but could this have been done intentionally to stifle participation and limit public testimony? Yup!

The State House News Service reported: “Outraged attendees of a Tuesday Judiciary Committee hearing are fuming over the committee's decision to hear 227 bills - many of them controversial - in a single day, forcing committee leaders to cut off testimony from speakers on a range of topics, from gun violence, to sexual assault and a bill to add gender identity to the state's non-discrimination statute.

“Frustration was visible throughout usually spacious Gardner Auditorium, which was packed to capacity, with an overflow crowd into the hallway. A state trooper and two park rangers stood watch at the door. Advocates for various bills privately questioned why the committee would schedule so many contentious bills for one hearing, and some said they would have to leave without testifying because of the long waits.

“House Republicans used the occasion to point out that Democrats haven't supported their proposals to prevent such occurrences, in part by attempting to prevent such major scheduling conflicts.

“Three-and-a-half hours into the hearing, testimony hadn't yet begun on the most-anticipated bill of the day for many in the audience, legislation adding protections for transgender people to the state non-discrimination statute.

“As of 5:45 p.m., Gardner Auditorium was still nearly full, with advocates for and against the gender identity bill testifying. Supporters of the legislation predicted at least another two hours of testimony.”

The House Republican Caucus’ blog, www.thecapitolviewlive.com, posted the following entry:

“Some disturbing news was reported by State House News Service this afternoon regarding the chaos surrounding today’s Judiciary Committee hearing where 227 bills were expected to be heard. Unfortunately, State House News Service is reporting that due to the overwhelming agenda, testimony is being cut short on some key public safety issues.

“Today is a busy day on Beacon Hill to say the least. Not only are there several committee hearings going on all over the building, but the House and Senate are both in full formal sessions taking up some of Governor Patrick’s vetoes. The people of the Commonwealth and the issues being addressed in hearings deserve more; they deserve the full attention of the Legislature. Additionally, the bills and amendments being taken up on the House floor deserve equal attention. Business cannot continue to be conducted this way.

“In 2007, Republican lawmakers offered two amendments in an effort to make the process of hearings smoother. The first would have prevented committee hearings from being scheduled during formal sessions unless the chair of the committee submits a written description of the emergency that necessitates such scheduling.

This proposal was overwhelmingly rejected by our Democratic colleagues. In fact, not one Democrat joined with us in this effort and because no action was taken we are running into problems like those mentioned above.

“The second amendment offered would designate a period of time, not exceeding one half-hour, during which time testimony from legislators would be heard at a public hearing. If members are not present during that given time, they would be placed on the list to speak like any other member of the public wishing to testify.

“This would have allowed more time for the public to give testimony and prevent the current practice of legislators testifying for extended periods of time during what is intended to be an effort to gather public input. Again, this amendment was not supported by a single Democrat.

“Too many bills, too little time in a day and therefore the well-being of Massachusetts and its residents are being sacrificed in order to cram as much as possible into one day. We cannot continue down this path. Legislative proposals need time to be fully vetted.

“The people’s work is supposed to be done in a timely fashion, but not at the cost of the democratic process. It is the status quo on Beacon Hill and until our Democratic colleagues are willing to work with us and make the process more efficient, unfortunately more situations like the one we are encountering today will most likely happen again.”

* * *

Representative Don Humason and his Chief of Staff Sarah Latour may be reached at their Westfield District office, 64 Noble Street, Westfield, MA 01085, 568-1366. Email address: Rep.DonaldHumason@Hou.state.ma.us Website: www.donhumason.org

This Site Designed and Maintained by: The Barre Group