Will Pawlenty try to scale back LGBT rights in 2010?
Tuesday, December 22, 2009 at 3:46 pm
- 6 Comments
In his interview with Newsweek (mentioned earlier by Chris Steller), Gov. Pawlenty said he regretted a 1993 vote to expand the state’s anti-discrimination laws to include sexual orientation and gender identity and that they law should be changed. Specifically, he said laws that protect transgender Minnesotans from being fired for being transgender should be changed.
From Newsweek’s Q&A:
Newsweek: Yes, gay-rights activists regarded you as a pretty cool guy at the time.
Pawlenty: We overbaked that statute, for a couple of reasons. If I had to do it over again I would have changed some things.Overbaked?
That statute is not worded the way it should be. I said I regretted the vote later because it included things like cross-dressing, and a variety of other people involved in behaviors that weren’t based on sexual orientation, just a preference for the way they dressed and behaved. So it was overly broad. So if you are a third-grade teacher and you are a man and you show up on Monday as Mr. Johnson and you show up on Tuesday as Mrs. Johnson, that is a little confusing to the kids. So I don’t like that.Has the law been changed?
No. It should be, though.
Pawlenty’s office did not return a request for comment on whether he planned on using his last year in office to end that provision or if he has worked with party leaders to get a bill offered in the 2010 legislative session.
His dislike of the 1993 law shouldn’t come as a surprise. Pawlenty has vetoed a number of LGBT-rights bills in his career as governor. He vetoed a bill to beef up anti-bullying efforts in schools; legislation that would give control to local municipalities in deciding who could receive domestic partner benefits (twice vetoed); and a bill would have expanded current laws that allow for the use of sick time to care for spouses and dependent children including same-sex couples.
Follow Andy Birkey on Twitter6 Comments
Comment posted December 22, 2009 @ 5:11 pm
What a leap! How do you go from Pawlenty’s regret for a vote in 1993 to an active attempt to “scale back LGBT rights.”
As you are well aware, it is the Legislature that legislates. The ultra-liberal, nanny-state Minnesota Legislature would have no intention of allowing such legislation to pass, even if it were to be introduced.
This article appears to be a shot at a lame duck, attempting portray the Governor as another homophobic Republican (no doubt, undeserving of consideration for any advancement of his political career).
Comment posted December 22, 2009 @ 10:20 pm
Dennis, no one needs to portray Gov. Pawlenty as a homophobe–he does that well enough on his own. His record of vetoing pro-LGBT bills speaks for itself.
And if he has any hope of getting the Republican ticket for 2012, more rhetoric like this is going to crop up.
Comment posted December 23, 2009 @ 9:19 am
Pawlenty began saying he regretted his 1993 vote when he started running for governor the first time. And his excuse for his change of heart on the legislation has always been the same – focusing on men who “simply dress as women.” He shows no understanding of the terrible difficulties transgendered people face.
I confronted Pawlenty about his change in position on this legislation after a gubernatorial debate in his first run for governor. It was clear to me from his response that he changed his position to appeal to the religious right fringe that controls Republican endorsements. His rationale was carefully constructed to cause him the least amount of collateral damage. What he actually believes is right or wrong on this issue is irrelevant. I’m not sure he’s even thought about it. What interests him is always what will get him to the next rung on the ladder he’s climbing. If real people get hurt in the process, too bad.
Comment posted December 26, 2009 @ 8:19 pm
I expect that Mr. Pawlenty appreciates the opportunity to do some gay-bashing to bolster his presidential appeal to right wing Republicans.
Were there problems with school employees showing up unexpectedly cross-dressed?
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
