|
ACLU OF PENNSYLVANIA LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR’S REPORT
DECEMBER 30, 2005
Here is my report on the 2005 work of the ACLU of Pennsylvania’s Legislative Department. In almost every aspect of the work described in this report, the Legislative Department had the opportunity to collaborate with our Community Education Organizers. Our efforts were supplemented by wonderful volunteers and grass roots activists. We also worked with a wide range of other organizations in a variety of coalitions. All of that means that there are a lot of people who helped make it possible for us to be so active and effective on so many issues.
The Patriot Act
Well it was quite a roller coaster of a ride on the Patriot Act and we have been right in the thick of things with regard to the never ending battle over the reauthorization of the Patriot Act. We worked, and continue to work, with the national ACLU staff in Washington to make sure that our Senators and Representatives know that we expect real reform.
Much of our focus in 2005 was on making sure that Senator Specter, Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, knew about the broad based support in Pennsylvania for significant reforms of the Patriot Act. We built a wonderful coalition, pulled together a great statewide conference in June and sustained an active grassroots and media campaign throughout the year.
And as you know this battle is not over. We will persist in our efforts and coordinate with the ACLU’s office in D.C. to make sure that the legislators from Pennsylvania know that their constituents want real checks and balances and want constitutional processes truly respected.
In Harrisburg
In the meantime, we have been defending civil liberties on several important issues in the Pennsylvania legislature. Here are the highlights of that work:
Academic Freedom – House Resolution 177 – This resolution established a committee that is conducting a series of hearings examining the nature of academic freedom and free speech rights of students at Pennsylvania universities and colleges. We are closely following the hearings as we suspect this may just be a stalking horse for an “Academic Bill of Rights.” One of the members of our University of Pittsburgh Law School chapter testified at a hearing in Pittsburgh last November. Two days of hearings have been scheduled for Philadelphia in January of 2006 and we are letting some of our student chapters know about the hearings in case they want to participate.
Budget Hearings – We provided friendly legislators with questions to ask at the budget hearing on subjects such as counsel for defendants in death penalty cases, racial profiling, and secrecy in how the state spends homeland security money. We also prepared talking points on domestic partner benefits just in case that issue was raised during the budget hearings.
Court Interpreters – On July 3, 2005, Senate Bill 669 was passed unanimously by the Pennsylvania Senate. This is the legislation that several groups, including the ACLU of Pennsylvania, have been working on for the last couple of years. The prime sponsor of the bill is Senator Jay Costa from Pittsburgh who is the Democratic Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee. The bill is now in the House Judiciary Committee.
Criminal Records – The Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts (AOPC) has proposed putting all criminal docket information on the Internet. We wrote to AOPC on November 8, 2005, and urged them not to do so because of the potential misuse of such information and the harms that could be caused to innocent individuals.
We have also been working with other organizations in responding to proposals to limit persons with criminal records from engaging in certain jobs. While there are several bills pending, at the moment there seems to be no specific action on any of them.
Death Penalty and Mental Retardation – Four bills have been introduced in Pennsylvania that would implement the Atkins decision. Those of us who supported the efforts of Senators Helfrick and Kukovich last session are most interested in HB 1410 introduced by Representative Kathy Manderino and SB 631 introduced by Senator Mary Jo White because both bills provide for the possibility of a pre-trial determination. The bills are not identical. They have differing definitions of mental retardation. The language regarding pre-trial determination is identical in the two bills.
The other two bills, HB 698 introduced by Representative Dennis O’Brien and SB 334 introduced by Senator Stewart Greenleaf, are identical and provide for a determination of mental retardation only after a verdict of guilty of first degree murder.
Both of the Senate Bills have been referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee and both of the House Bills have been referred to the House Judiciary Committee. We are working with a number of other organizations to build further support for the bills that provide for a pre-trial determination.
On December 27, 2005, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court issued an opinion in a post conviction death penalty case where the defendant claimed he was a person with mental retardation. While that decision does not directly address the issues raised by these bills, it will undoubtedly cause the legislature to take some kind of action on this issue in the coming year.
Ecoterrorism - House Bill 213 – This bill deals with “ecoterrorism.” It functions primarily as a sentencing enhancement statute and would kick in when someone commits a property related crime with the intention of intimidating or coercing “an individual lawfully participating in an activity involving animals, plants or an activity involving natural resources.” We believe this legislation violates the First Amendment because it discriminates on the basis of the perpetrator’s viewpoint. The bill has passed the House. There was a public hearing on this bill in June of 2005 and I testified at that hearing. As a result of some of the issues raised at the hearing, the bill was amended and reported from the Senate Judiciary Committee on November 14, 2005. No further action has occurred in the Senate and we continue to keep an eye on this bill.
English as the Official Language of the Commonwealth - House Bill 2089 – This bill would designate English as the Official Language of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The bill is currently in the House State Government Committee. We have written to the members of the Committee to explain why this legislation violates the First Amendment. We have also mobilized a range of other organizations that provide services to people with limited English proficiency so that members of the House State Government Committee understand that there is significant opposition to this legislation.
The bill was scheduled for a vote by the House State Government Committee at a meeting on October 25, 2005, but a motion to table the bill prevailed. The bill remains on the table.
A new coalition has formed to continue the work of opposing this legislation in the coming year.
Evolution vs. Intelligent Design – House Bill 1012, which has been introduced in the PA House of Representatives, would permit school districts to teach intelligent design as part of the instruction on the theory of evolution. Senate Resolution 70, which has been introduced in the Senate of Pennsylvania, acknowledges that the Pennsylvania standards on science education require the teaching of evolution and encourages all school districts to teach evolution.
On June 20, 2005, we testified at a hearing in Harrisburg on House Bill 1012 and presented the legislators with ample evidence as to why they should not pass House Bill 1012. No action has been taken on that bill and now that the Dover case has been decided we expect that this bill will really be going nowhere.
Free Expression – Students – On February 23, 2005, I testified at a House Education Committee hearing on proposed regulations governing students’ conduct. I focused on proposed changes to the existing regulation of student expression and stated our opposition to the proposed changes which could lead to further attempts to censor students. On March 1, 2005, the State Board of Education withdrew the proposed regulations. Revised regulations were submitted later in the year that largely addressed our concerns.
LGBT Issues – Senate Bill 912 – We have been working with other organizations to line up support for this legislation that amends the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act to include protection on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. While we know the bill number, it still has not been introduced.
In the meantime, a cosponsorship memo has been circulated regarding a proposed constitutional amendment barring same-sex marriage. The legislation is scheduled to be introduced on January 24, 2006. We have already begun the hard work that is needed to stop this proposal and we anticipate that this will be one of our major efforts during 2006.
Lobbyist Disclosure Legislation – Two different bills providing for lobbyist disclosure have started moving. Senate Bill 1 has passed the Senate. In the House, both Senate Bill 1 and House Bill 700 have been reported from the State Government Committee. We are monitoring both bills to make sure that are views on the need to make sure that in an attempt to promote disclosure of what lobbyists do the legislature does not impair the right to petition the government or the right of lawyers to zealously represent their clients.
Reproductive Rights – Governor Rendell exercised his line-item veto power and vetoed anti-choice language was included in the state’s 2005-06 budget. The language would have restricted the Department of Public Welfare’s ability to apply for a Medical Assistance Family Planning Waiver from the federal government by limiting the Department to not spending any moremoney than it did last fiscal year on family planning. The anti-choice legislators have been loudly complaining about the Governor’s action. We have been lobbying legislators urging them to support the Governor’s line-item veto and to vote to sustain it should there be a vote to override it. As of the end of 2005, there has been no attempt to override the Governor’s line-item veto.
Along with our Duvall Project, we have been supporting legislation known as the Compassionate Assistance for Rape Emergencies (CARE) Act. Similar bills were introduced in both the Senate and House in mid-November. The legislation would require hospital and health care facilities that administer emergency services to sexual assault victims to provide victims with information regarding emergency contraception and to provide emergency contraception upon the victim’s request. Senate Bill 990 has been assigned to the Senate Public Health and Welfare Committee. House Bill 2159 has been assigned to the House Health and Welfare Committee. No further action has been taken on either bill.
Voting Rights - House Bill 1318 – This bill has gone through several versions. At the end of June, the bill was amended on the floor of the House of Representatives to require every voter to show photo id at every election. It would also have taken away the right to vote of persons who are convicted of felonies until they complete their entire sentence. Under current Pennsylvania law, people who commit felonies can vote as soon as they are no longer incarcerated.
The provision regarding photo identification was modified and the provision disenfranchising felons on parole or probation was eliminated before the bill was passed by the Senate on December 14, 2005. The legislation is now back in the House of Representatives and its future is uncertain.
We have been supplying legislators with lots of information as to why we still oppose this bill. We have worked with the national ACLU to make sure that the views of groups like The Brennan Center, The Sentencing Project and the ABA are known to the members of the Committee. We also are working with a wide range of groups here in Pennsylvania who are also lobbying against this legislation. Finally, we have provided the Rendell Administration with lots of information about the problems in this bill.
We will continue to lobby against the bill and remind the legislators and the public that they should be figuring out how to make it easier to vote rather than trying to suppress voters.
Other federal issues
We also found time to work on other matters pending in Washington, D.C.
At the beginning of 2005, we published an op-ed piece urging Senator Specter to grill Attorney General nominee Alberto Gonzales at his confirmation hearing. We also alerted our members to contact our Senators and Congress people on the Department of Justice’s failure to include emergency contraception in its guidelines on services for victims of sexual assault.
In the winter and spring we lobbied Pennsylvania’s Senators and members of Congress to oppose the REAL-ID Act, legislation that puts us on the road to having a national identification card. Unfortunately the provisions of the REAL-ID legislation were added on to another bill and we are now faced with many issues related to the implementation of that law. We expect that in 2006 we will be working with other ACLU affiliates as part of a coordinated national campaign to seek some real changes to the REAL-ID Act.
In the fall we began working with our lobbyists in D.C. on the reauthorization of the sections of the Voting Rights Act that are scheduled to expire in 2007. We will continue lobbying on the Voting Rights Act in the coming year.
One final issue on the agenda for 2006 is the Federal Marriage Protection Amendment. Once again we will be asking our elected officials in Washington, D.C., to vote against this amendment that would write discrimination into the United States Constitution by banning same-sex marriages.
Download the Legislative Report 2005
|
