Mass. Legislature committees act on major 
  pro-family 
  & anti-family   bills - one day before deadline. 
  Here's what happened . . . 
Extensions applied for some. Others go to "study". Transgender bill still alive. 
(See list below) 
POSTED: March 17, 2010 
The Judicial Committee, Education Committee, Public Health Committee and   others met in executive sessions yesterday (March 16) to decide the fate of   major pro-family and anti-family bills filed last year, at the beginning of the   session. Today was the deadline for acting on bills or asking for an extension.   But since today (March 17) is "Evacuation Day" -- a legal holiday for public   employees -- they did it yesterday.
    
  This year there were more crucial   bills than usual, both good and bad, affecting the pro-family movement. And   the Legislature has been getting a lot of pressure from both sides. 
  
  The   homosexual lobby is focused pushing the transgender agenda as hard as they can.   And the fact that legislators tried to slip in language into the anti-bullying   bill apparently targeting MassResistance directly is evidence that we're at   least making them a bit uncomfortable. (See   our recent report on the "anti-bullying" bill.)
Here's what happened
The short answer is that a lot of good and bad bills are still alive, at   least for the time being. Others were sent "study", which is usually (but not   always) a bill graveyard.
STATUS OF BILLS (GOOD and BAD):
1. Sent forward with favorable report:
  H402 Re-write of Planned Parenthood Bill (Education Comm.)
    Note: This   bill is a completely watered-down version of the original Planned   Parenthood bill. It doesn't mandate anything, just a "study" by a state agency!   We consider this a victory -- owing to our constant pressure against the   original version!
2. Applied for extension of time until May 7 to decide (i.e., still   alive).
     All in Judiciary Committee:
  H1337    Stop schools from providing pornography to children
      
    H3840    Repeal buffer zone at abortion clinics
      
    H1728    Transgender Rights and Hate Crimes Bill
    
    H1468    Physician Assisted Suicide Bill
    
    H1746    Remove parental consent on abortions for minors
    
    H3536 and S1656 Repeal sodomy laws and other morality laws
3. Sent to a "study":
  H406    David Parker Parents' Rights Opt-In Bill (Education)
      
    H145    Disband Mass. Commission for GLBT Youth (Children,   Families)
    
    H 1670 Woman's right to know [re: abortion] (Judiciary)
    
    H 437 Alternative Parents' Rights Opt-In Bill (Education)
    
    H485, H 472, H 485, H 421, H403 -- Other less effective parents   rights bills filed this session. (Education)
    
    H1708 Officially legalize homosexual "marriage" (Judiciary)
    
    H2174 Create tax-funded "community based" Planned Parenthood clinics (Public   Health)
There's definitely a lot of work still to go.
What's behind these decisions? We think it reflects both the   hostility of certain politicians against parents' rights and traditional values,   weighed against their uneasiness with controversy and pressure from our side,   causing them to pick certain legislative battles on the "social issues" and   leave others by the wayside.
  Background: How bills   go through committee
A bill before the Legislature is first   sent to a committee. The committee holds a public hearing on the bill. After   that the committee must decide to either move the bill forward to the floor of   the Legislature -- or send it to a "study" (which is usually a graveyard). 
 Since thousands of bills are filed each year, most of them end up in a   study. A "study" is effectively a graveyard, but occasionally bills get   resurrected from there if there is enough interest (or pressure). A recent   example of that was the "1913 Law" bill last session, which was sent to a study   then months later brought back to life. 
 Generally, this decision is made   in a special committee meeting called an "executive session", where dozens of   bills are voted on by the members. At least that's the theory. In practice, the   committee chairman make the decisions and the members basically do what they're   told and don't appear to be in the decision process at all. As we describe   below, this time was no different.
  Tuesday's   executive sessions: Not a pretty picture at all
 We attended   the executive sessions of the Education Committee and the Judiciary Committee.   It was a pretty ridiculous thing to watch. Even though they were dealing with   dozens -- actually hundreds -- of very important bills (not only ours!) many of   which could have big effects on public policy, neither of these sessions, which   are ostensibly "decision making" meetings, lasted more than ten minutes. 
  
    
      |  |  In and out. The Judiciary Committee   executive session, to decide the fate of over 200 bills, took less than ten   minutes. By the time we got our camera set up they had already adjourned the   meeting and were leaving.
 | 
  
Hardly any of the committee members even bothered to show up. And in fact   very few members of the public showed up either, rather odd given the huge   outpouring at some of the public hearings. There were maybe ten people   (including reporters) watching the Judiciary Committee meeting. At the Education   Committee hearing there were just a handful of people watching, and about half   of them were connected with the teachers' union. That's too bad because the   psychological effect of visible pro-family presence is important. (They   definitely noticed us!)
 As soon as the meetings started one of the   chairmen would rattle off some bill numbers, announce their decisions on them,   and the "vote" was declared. No one objected or even initiated any discussion.   At the Judiciary Committee meeting they didn't even vote on bill numbers. The   chairman would refer to "lists" of bills, and they would "vote" on those lists. 
 After Tuesday's meetings we called the offices of two of the Judiciary   Committee members. We were told they hadn't even been given the lists of bills   their own committee had voted on. Nor did they seem particularly interested in   it. One wonders why the Legislature bothers to put on such a   charade.
Stonewalling, stalling,   concealing
Trying to get the results was, well,   bizarre. When the Judiciary Committee "voted" during their executive session   they did not name any bill numbers, just unidentified "lists" of bills. But   after the meeting when we asked to see the actual lists they refused to provide   them! They said that the lists "aren't being released to the public."  Even the   State House News reporter told us he couldn't get them!  It was unbelievable; no   one had ever heard of that. Later we persuaded a Judiciary Committee staffer to   read us the results of our specific bills. Eventually we were told we could come   in Wednesday and pick up a list but they couldn't fax it or email it to us. It   wasn't easy.
    The Education Committee meeting was also very   strange. As the meeting began the chairman announced that no video or sound   recordings of the session would be allowed. But the 9-minute meeting was so dull   and bland that no one would be interested in it anyway -- except to marvel at   how superficially and insincerely they do their business. That's probably   what they wanted to keep from being posted on a Web site! (But at least they   provided us the lists of the bills without any problem.)
 The arrogance of   these legislators is quite incredible.
    The next   stop for bills: On to the House and Senate
  Once bills get out   of committee, things can get a little complicated. A lot of the bills go to   other intermediary committees which can modify them and/or send them to the full   House and Senate for a vote, and then finally to the Governor's   office.
    The official legislative session ends on July 31, so in   general bills must be passed by the House and Senate by then, though they can be   signed by the Governor afterwards. (The original Parents Rights Bill was finally   passed on the afternoon of July 31, after a huge amount of pressure by parents.)   However, they can meet in special sessions until December 31, so anything can   happen. This year being an election year, of course, makes things   interesting.
  
    
      |  |    Shallow media interest. The only   thing that interested the reporters -- of all the bills in question -- was the   bill on removing Bunker Hill Day from the list of holidays for public employees.   Right after the Judiciary Committee meeting Sen. Jack Hart (D-South Boston), on   left, tells Ch. 5 that "It's not a hack holiday. Real people died in American   history." Next to him, agreeing, is Rep. Eugene O'Flaherty   (D-Chelsea).
 | 
  
We will continue to monitor these bills.