State reps. Joe Driscoll and Jason Lewis co-sponsored an amendment to the state budget that mimics the transgender bill currently dying a slow death somewhere.
Good for Them!
The bill not going anywhere was co-sponsored by over 100 reps including Speaker DeLeo and defines transgender as related to one’s expression.
Driscoll and Lewis moved the issue (not the bill) out of committee and now the other hundred plus reps can do what presumably they have wanted to do since the day the signed on as a sponsor; vote for the transgender bill allowing gender to be determined by expression.
Time for a roll call in the House. Rep. Driscoll and Lewis are showing guts and political savvy through the use of parliamentary procedure to move this to the forefront, pass it, and move on. Now they have to stay the course and not back down. Do not pull the amendment. Profile in courage time fellas. (Last time I will use that cliché, ever. Promise)
Rep. Driscoll’s willingness to take on this battle now while other reps are too interested in personal gains should re-assure some of us that there are a few up there who want to do what is right.
As for you Jason, well maybe you will show me something if you don’t back down and do everything you can to make this amendment pass. If Driscoll pulls it you don’t have to. Keep Hope Alive.
I hope you BMGers and the transgender advocacy people are contacting the 100 plus reps that signed on to the bill and making them aware of this amendment. They, including the Speaker, should be receptive. Right?
Note to transgender advocates: Do not accept the sponsors’ explanation that “we tried” if they do not request a roll call and line up a few members to stand with them. Without this they did not try.
So much for keeping outside sections out of the budget…But I agree that the issue should be brought up and the BILL be debated.
Emphasis mine.
There’s a good chance that they’ll accept your taunt and simply roll call it in without any debate, taking safety in numbers and ignorance. I take it you are challenging members to actually vote for it rather than just say they are for it, which is a fun parlor game to make them squirm, but to risky that they just won’t squirm at all.
Ernie, could you explain to me what a roll call on this amendment to this bill means? I’ve seen that Peter Porcupine has also called for a roll call. Would it scuttle the whole bill, if reps had to be on record supporting this amendment, and have to be jettisoned? Without a roll call on the amendment, they’d just vote it in with the whole bill? But they’re still on record as voting for it because its part of the bill, so what’s the difference?
of original co-sponsors?