Wyomingites recently elected 90 honorable men and women to represent them at the capital. Representation is not only for voting, it is also for arguing, compromising and persuading. Our representative republic is designed for thoughtful and respectful discussion. This means free and unfettered speech.
Any encumbrances on the free speech of our representatives inhibits them from doing the job that you sent them to do. That’s why Management Council Policy 02-02 needs to be fixed.
It is not a state law, but an in-house employment policy created 16 years ago to address sexual harassment among employees in the Legislative Services Office (LSO). But this policy meant to govern at will employees now threatens the free speech of our elected representatives.
There is already a Permanent Joint Rule (22-1) that holds all elected officials accountable to established ethics rules as well as the same state laws that govern all Wyoming citizens. This rule has procedures that honor the electoral process and treat members of the Legislature differently from their hired help, Policy 02-02 lists your elected representatives right along-side LSO staff, interns and pages.
Under this umbrella, that Policy sets up a different set of rules, and a different way to investigate and punish them. Not only so, but it gives the accuser the option to set aside Joint Rule 22-1 and subject a legislator to Policy 02-02, instead. The accused gets no voice in the matter.
Joel Funk, a reporter for the Wyoming Tribune Eagle, wrote, in a December 22, 2017 article, that LSO Director, Matt Obrecht, doesn’t think Joint Rule 22-1 is adequate. Even though it covers “unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature,” including “sexual assault or a pattern of behavior.” He doesn’t think it is able to deal with an “inappropriate comment.”
Obrecht told Funk, “I don’t think that one comment should trigger a 22-1 investigation.” Instead, a single comment can trigger an investigation under Management Council Policy 02-02.
What kind of comments are we talking about? What could merit “written reprimand, mandatory increased anti-discrimination or sexual harassment training, reassignment of duties, loss of legislative responsibilities or assignments, censure, expulsion or other corrective action”?
As we have seen elsewhere, these are not blasphemies against God or disgusting, profanity-laced outbursts. Rather, comments punishable by Policy 02-02 could include comments like: “Children have a right to know their natural mother and father and to be raised by them.” “Nobody has the right to surrogacy, or the buying and selling of human eggs.” “Sex is an objective fact, discoverable by biological science.” “Men should not compete in women’s sports or be allowed entry into women-only facilities.”
Such reasonable and scientifically defensible statements are respectful and true. But new language added to Policy 02-02 subjects people to the charge of harassment or discrimination just for speaking them. Last February the Management Council inserted the language of “sexual orientation and gender identity” (SOGI) as “protected characteristics.”
Language like this has been used across the nation to restrict free speech. It is often approved by people of good heart who have no desire to discriminate against anybody, but who have no idea that this language labels normal, everyday speech “discrimination.”
Ruth Neely of Pinedale was one of those good-hearted people. She served on the committee that added SOGI language to Wyoming rules for judicial ethics. Three years later she learned the consequences of such language. Suddenly common-sense words suitable for her Sunday school classroom were labeled “discrimination” and she was removed from her magistracy.
Her case is one of hundreds across the country. SOGI language, once inserted into policy, becomes a trap that can be sprung at any time. Washington state enacted its own SOGI law in 2006. But the state never prosecuted itself for failing to recognize same-sex unions. Instead, it waited seven years before prosecuting a grandmotherly florist, Baronelle Stutzman, for this new “crime” that nobody knew existed.
Since 2011 the Wyoming Legislature has repeatedly declined to enact such unjust laws that make the very same action or comment acceptable today and punishable tomorrow. Nobody can live and work in such a toxic environment.
Our Management Council should not subject the legislators to laws that they, themselves have found unjust. The Wyoming legislature should be a place where robust and honest searching for the truth is encouraged. Timeless truths should not be punishable by reprimand, reindoctrination, and reassignment of duties.
Thankfully, Policy 02-02 is on the agenda for the December meeting of the Management Council. Every duly elected legislator should want to right these wrongs. And all voters have a vested interest in making sure that it no longer stifles the voice of their elected representatives.
No comments:
Post a Comment