In September, we wrote to you and warned of the pending Federal “Hate Crimes” legislation that President Obama and the Democrat majority in Washington were about to pass. It was expected that this controversial new law would be thoroughly reviewed and debated because of the significant threat which it poses to current constitutional law. We identified key constitutional objections and potential adverse consequences of classifying citizens and crimes according to “sexual orientation.” 45 states (including Utah) already have their own version of “hate crimes” statutes. No new Federal legislation is needed in this area. Nonetheless, activists have pushed this Bill as part of a larger expansion of “gay rights”, which President Obama has promised to deliver.
Military Budget is Not the Place for “Hate Crimes” Legislation
The recent passage of the new “Hate Crimes” law has been described as “the first major piece of federal gay rights legislation, a milestone that activists compare to the passage of 1960 Civil Rights legislation empowering blacks.” (Deseret News 10/29/2009). What citizens need to know, however, is that the Bill was not voted upon and was not adopted based on its merits. The full legislative process was circumvented by the Democrat majority in Washington. They resorted instead to the usual backroom deals that are so typical in Washington. The Bill was simply tacked onto and included in a “must pass $680 billion defense measure over the protest of Republicans.” (Deseret News).
President Obama has mischaracterized this issue. He has skimmed over any substantive discussion of the constitutional law implications. His rhetoric and speeches mislead the public. They kindle emotions at the expense of reasoned analysis and principled judgment. President Obama said at the Bill signing: No one in America should ever be afraid to walk down the street holding the hands of the person they love.” There is no prohibition against “hand holding” and it is not a “civil right” in need of legislative protection. President Obama also said: “We must stand against crimes that are meant not only to break bones, but to break spirits; not only to inflict harm, but to instill fear.” As we stressed before, the criminal law already provides for multiple enhancements all the way up to first degree murder and capital punishment. The most heinous crimes described by the supporters of the new Bill are covered by existing criminal law provisions.
The Deseret News reported that supporters of the new Bill tried for over a decade to expand the “hate crimes” law to establish heightened criminal penalties based on “sexual orientation.” It failed in the past because the votes were not present in the House and in the Senate and because President Bush opposed the measure. This time, it wasn’t a change of opinion or a new majority consensus on the merits of the Bill that lead to its passage. Rather, Senator Reid and Speaker Pelosi were able to slip it into a completely unrelated $680 billion defense funding measure, which Congress could not fail to pass.
This is the same approach that is used to fill other Bills with outrageous earmarks and excessive government spending for “pet projects” scattered throughout the country. Those proposals (such as the famous “Bridge to Nowhere”) are slipped into large, complicated Bills on totally unrelated topics. The President has no line item veto (and wouldn’t have used it anyway in this case) and Congress is unable to delete such measures once they are strategically positioned in clever ways during the Committee approval process. Thus, we end up with the passage of measures that would likely have never been adopted if they were subjected to the appropriate scrutiny and direct up or down vote.
White House “Spin” at the Bill Signing Ceremony
The President’s liberal agenda promoting same-sex unions nearly overshadowed the Bill signing, which was supposed to be focused on the military budget. President Obama explained his chosen reductions in defense spending as needless waste that is “an affront to the American people and to our troops.” For example, the Bill terminates production of the F-22 Fighter Jet Program. Can someone please tell us what that has to do with “sexual orientation”?
*********************************************
P.S.
“Obama Showing Contempt for Core American Values” — Thomas Sowell
Thomas Sowell is Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University. In his regular news column, he recently stated: “Obama showing contempt for core American values.” He lists all of the unelected, unaccountable and unconstitutional “Czars” appointed by the President and the alarming authority they have taken unto themselves. All of this, he writes, hardly sounds like America. “[These positions and abuses of power] didn’t exist a year ago. How much of America will be left if the Federal Government continues on this path? President Barrack Obama has even floated the idea of a national police force, something we have done without for more than two centuries.” (The President also advocates placing absolutely no restrictions whatsoever on abortion. He supports every form of abortion including public funding). Sowell continues, “Obama’s not only said that he is out to ‘change the United States of America’, the people he has associated with for years have expressed in words and deeds their hostility to the values, the principles and the people of this Country.”
Sowell concludes that the Obama Administration’s policies, actions, plans and direction are in line with the President’s history leading up to his election:
“Nothing is more consistent with his lifelong patterns than putting such people in Government—people who reject American values, resent Americans in general and successful Americans in particular as well as resenting America’s influence in the world. . . Nothing so epitomizes Obama’s own contempt for American values and traditions like trying to ram two Bills through Congress in his first year — each Bill more than 1,000 pages long — too fast for either of them to be read, much less discussed. That he succeeded only the first time says that some people are starting to wake up. Whether enough people will wake up in time to keep America from being dismantled, piece by piece, is another question — and the biggest question for this generation.”
We do not intend the above political commentary to demean the President or disparage his character in any way. It is sad and disturbing to witness insulting speech and attacks hurled back and forth in today’s political world. It is easy for people to throw out cruel barbs directed at public officials they do not know personally. After the Presidential Inauguration, we wrote and shared a positive prior encounter with the Obama family. We also, however, expressed profound worries about the President’s stated intentions concerning such fundamental issues as same-sex marriage, abortion, judicial appointments and higher taxes. (See February, 2009 CPG blog).
We are now witnessing numerous departures from our founding principles. These changes and trends directly affect American society and the foundation of our Republic. Many of these issues are now in full bloom. This is the context in which Congress recently slipped the Federal “Hate Crimes” Bill through as part of an overall agenda that is counter to America’s core values as Thomas Sowell has reported. (Deseret News, A17, 10/29/09).
Posted by: LaVar Christensen