Mediaboss Marketing

Local efforts mirror the national GOP agenda on parental rights, abortion and gun control despite little chance of success in the Aloha State.

When I first joined the Republican Party in Hawaii, I believed we could be successful despite the national partys agenda by defining our own.

Hawaii needed a credible opposition party, but the national partys individual rights at all costs didnt resonate with Hawaiis, or my own, community-based values.

As House Minority Leader, I tried creating our own path while giving in just enough to keep the broader GOP happy.I left when I realized I was wrong.

This session, the states Republican legislators are proving that national Republican values are alive and well in their local party.

The eight GOP House and Senate members proposals and votes on parental rights, abortion and gun control import the Trump-DeSantis culture wars raging across the country and provide an important reminder that Hawaii Republicans cant dissociate from their national party. And they may not want to.

Parental rights, particularly in education, have become a rallying cry for the right. Across the country, conservatives are pushing these issues atschool board meetings, which are erupting in heated debates and threats of violence.

The most well-known examples are Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis parental bill of rights, also known as the Dont Say Gay bill, and hisIndividual Freedombill. The former bans teachers from discussing gender identity or sexual orientation in the classroom, while the latter bans critical race theory.

While the composition of our Legislature means Republican-led efforts to mirror these bills wont succeed, it hasnt stopped them from trying. Rep. Elijah Piericksclaim thatHouse Bill 877, which would establish an institute for restoration at healing at Richardson School of Law, would promote critical race theory, which is basically racism against white people is the most outrageous. Sen. Brandon Awa and Rep. Diamond Garcias parental rights bills banning instruction on sexual orientation and gender identity are equally offensive.

ButHouse Bill 1393, signed by Reps. Lauren Matsumoto, Garcia and Pierick, may be the most insidious as it establishes a universally applicable, non-specified parent right. The bill defines that as the right of parents to direct the upbringing, education, care, and welfare of their child unless the government proves a compelling interest in restricting that right.

This right would not be limited to a particular educational topic, rather it would allow a parent to exempt their child from most activities unless the government makes a clear case to prevent it.Nearly identical billshave been introduced in Texas, South Carolina, Mississippi, Minnesota and Alabama along with 32 other parental rights bills introduced across the country and in theU.S. Congress.

Gov. Josh Green signedSenate Bill 1, a measure that defends a womans right to choose, into law on March 22. The Democrat-led bill was Hawaiis effort to ensure women and medical professionals are protected following this summers United States Supreme Court decision to overturn Roe vs. Wade.Civil Beat and others have provided excellent descriptions of the bill, so Ill focus on the attempted Republican amendments.

A floor amendment provides alternative language for a bill when its debated on the chamber floor. Republican-introduced amendments are essentially ideological showpieces in the Hawaii Legislature.

During the final debate, both Matsumoto and Garcia introduced amendments that were rejected by the House.Matsumotos amendmentsought to ban a minors ability to consent to abortion services.Garcias amendmentwould have restricted children younger than 16 from consenting to receive abortion services.

Matsumoto and Garcia and every other Republican in the House and Senate voted against Senate Bill 1. Democrat lawmakers Sen. Mike Gabbard and Rep. Sam Kong also voted no.

Parental rights and abortion are purity test issues for socially conservative Republicans. While their decision to highlight their positions through floor amendments are a little surprising, their unanimous no vote on the Democrats abortion bill isnt.

However, I am shocked this session by Republican lawmakers decision to mirror my former partys national positions, particularly as support for stricter gun laws reacheda new highin February amid a wave of mass shootings. While most Republicans dont believe new gun laws are needed, their numbers are dwindling too. Further, Hawaii Republicans depend on non-Republican votes to win, making their introduction of a Stand Your Ground law even more remarkable.

These laws came to the nations attention in 2005 when a jury found George Zimmerman not guilty for fatally shooting unarmed Black teen Trayvon Martin. Citing an increase in violent crimes, the House Minority Caucus legislative package included a bill that would bring Hawaiis self-defense law in line with FloridasStand Your Ground law.

Hawaii RepublicansHouse Bill 636would allow a person who believes they are in immediate danger of significant physical harm to use deadly force even if they know they have a chance to walk away. It operates on the exact same premise that led to Zimmermans acquittal. It didnt receive a hearing this session.

Also notable is Republican lawmakers unanimous decision on Friday to voteagainst a billthat would prohibit the carrying of firearms in certain areas, including schools, movie theaters and government buildings in Hawaii.

While Hawaii has some of thestrictest gun lawsin the nation, the U.S. Supreme Courts2022 rulingthat declared New Yorks concealed carry law unconstitutional could threaten them, andSenate Bill 1230was drafted in response.

To be clear, I do believe that logical people can view decisions about rights as a difficult balancing act.I signed a bill allowing parents to exempt their children from sexual education because I believed that most parents, like mine, would have the closest view of what their child was ready to process.

But Ive since understood that I should have taken a wider perspective. Not every parent is like mine. Laws are tools, and as lawmakers, we should always consider how someone might abuse the tools were putting into their hands. Hawaii Republicans should remember that.

As leading Republican presidential hopefuls, DeSantis and Trump are setting the tone on these culture war issues, and Hawaiis Republicans are following their lead. I know better than most how hard it is to defy the national Republican agenda, but I strongly encourage my former colleagues to do it anyway. Come what may.

Sign Up

Sorry. That's an invalid e-mail.

Thanks! We'll send you a confirmation e-mail shortly.

Originally posted here:
Beth Fukumoto: Hawaii Republicans Sound A Lot Like Their ... - Honolulu Civil Beat

One of these things is not like the others,

One of these things just doesnt belong,

Can you tell which thing is not like the others

By the time I finish my song?

The old Muppets song comes to mind when considering the issue of parental rights in the Indiana General Assembly this session. We have heard it over and over in bill after bill.

For instance, parental concerns led to language in House Bill 1635 to separate vaccine records from high school transcripts.

Senate Bill 321 was originally filed and amended last week to require a parent give consent for the student to receive services at a school-based health center. It also requires the parent be present at the time the student receives services.

Senate Bill 12 empowers parents to object to inappropriate materials in schools not just obscenity.

Heck, House Bill 1407 had an entire preamble about parental rights (thought it has died).

The state of Indiana, a political subdivision or other governmental entity of the state of Indiana, a government official, or any other person acting under the color of law shall not infringe on the fundamental right of a parent to direct the upbringing, education, health care, and mental health of the parents child without demonstrating that the infringement (1) is required by a compelling governmental interest of the highest order as long recognized in the history and traditions of the state of Indiana; and (2) as applied to the parent and the child, is narrowly tailored and not otherwise served by a less restrictive means.

But Republicans pushing these bills havent always been consistent. Thats because they are also ignoring or taking away parental choice in several cases.

For instance, under House Bill 1608, a parent who has accepted a childs gender identity must give their explicit consent to change the childs name or pronouns. But the legislation goes on to say that school staff can ignore the request of the parent and cant be disciplined for identifying a student consistent with the students legal name.

But the biggest example of spurning parental choice and rights is Senate Bill 480, which eliminates the right of a parent to direct the medical care of their minor child. But only if the child is transgender.

A parent can still consent to puberty blockers or hormone therapy for another medical diagnosis. But not if the same medications or therapy are used to help their child with gender transition.

In the General Assembly, Indiana lawmakers trust parents to choose their childs school; waive vaccination requirements and consent to all other medical care.

And I have yet to see a good explanation for this contradiction.

When Sen. Tyler Johnson, R-Leo the author of the ban on transgender minor care was asked about parental consent, he said, Im not here to attack parents. We have the medical, moral and legal obligation to protect Hoosier children and thats where Ill leave that at.

Rep. Renee Pack, D-Indianapolis, got to the heart of the matter on the House floor last week, saying Hoosiers are confused by the differing stances. She said there are times when lawmakers want to listen to parents and protect their rights and there are times when we want to say listen to us. We know better than doctors.

I have a daughter myself and believe parental rights are important and should be protected. But it appears that only goes so far. Because parents making informed decisions in consultation with their child and medical professionals are being second-guessed by the state of Indiana.

One could argue a parent who refuses to immunize their children is hurting the child. But I dont see a bill outlawing that decision.

Consistency is key in these types of debates, and Senate Bill 480 doesnt match the parents rights rhetoric.

Niki Kelly is editor-in-chief of indianacapitalchronicle.com, where this commentary first appeared. She has covered Indiana politics and the Indiana Statehouse since 1999 for publications including the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette. Send comments to [emailprotected]

Read the original:
Niki Kelly: Republicans champion parental rights, except when they ... - The Republic

A formerly well-connected Republican donor was convicted on Friday of enticing teenage girls with gifts, cash and money in exchange for sex.

A federal jury found Anton Tony Lazzaro, 32, guilty of seven counts involving commercial sex acts with five girls aged 15 and 16 in 2020, when he was 30 years old.

The charges carry mandatory minimum sentences of 10 years with a maximum of life in prison.

The jury will return to court on Monday to determine what property the government can seize based on each conviction, the Minneapolis Star Tribune reported.

Lazzaro who contends the charges against him were politically motivated plans to appeal, a spokesperson for his attorneys said in a statement to the Associated Press.

The unusual application of this federal sex trafficking statute to his activities is frighteningly broad, conflating what is nothing more than arguably an act of prostitution with federal sex trafficking, Stacy Bettison said. He believes he has strong grounds for appeal, and he will vigorously seek reversal of his conviction. Mr Lazzaro trusts he will be vindicated.

Lazzaros indictment led to the downfall of Jennifer Carnahan as chair of the Republican party of Minnesota.

His co-defendant, 21-year-old Gisela Castro Medina, who formerly led the University of St Thomass College Republican chapter, pleaded guilty to two counts last year. She testified against Lazzaro.

Prosecutors argued during the trial that Lazzaro enlisted Medina, who he initially paid for sex, to recruit other teenagers preferably minors who were white, small, vulnerable or broken.

He wanted sex, and not just any sex, federal prosecutor Melinda Williams said during closing arguments on Friday. He wanted sex with minor girls under the age of 18. And he had a plan to get it.

Lazarros attorney, Daniel Gerdts, argued that the governments salacious prosecution was based on completely unfounded allegations.

The prosecution clearly disapproves of Mr Lazzaros playboy lifestyle, Gerdts said. And frankly, as the father of three daughters, so do I. The opprobrium is well deserved, but that is not why were here.

Carnahan, the widow of former Minnesota Republican congressman Jim Hagedorn, resigned a week after the charges against Lazzaro were unsealed. She denied knowing about Lazzaros crimes but his arrest prompted outrage among party activists.

Pictures on Lazzaros social media accounts showed him with prominent Republicans, including ex-president Donald Trump and former vice-president Mike Pence. He gave more than $270,000 to Republican campaigns and political committees over the years.

Read more from the original source:
Republican donor convicted of sex trafficking teenage girls - The Guardian US

WASHINGTON A Republican senator has single-handedly held up promotions for the militarys senior commanders at least through mid-April as he attempts to pressure the Pentagon to change a new abortion policy created to ensure access to abortions for service members after the overturning of Roe v. Wade.

The weekslong push by Senator Tommy Tuberville of Alabama, which is threatening to drag on into its third month after the senators left town on Thursday for a two-week holiday recess without resolving the matter, has prompted the first major clash of the new Congress over abortion access in the wake of the Supreme Court decision last year overturning abortion rights.

The Republican-led House passed a measure in January that would lay out criminal penalties for abortion doctors in some cases, but Democrats in the Senate, who control that chamber, have no intention of allowing the bill to be considered. Mr. Tubervilles move, by contrast, has forced a debate on abortion access to the forefront of the Senate agenda.

Mr. Tuberville, a right-wing freshman, began blocking the promotions of generals and admirals across the services in mid-February, after the Pentagon announced it wouldgive U.S. service members up to 21 days of leave for abortions or fertility treatments and reimburse travel and transportation costs incurred while obtaining such treatments.

The Pentagon created the policy in the wake of the Supreme Courts decision Dobbs v. Jackson Womens Health Organization last year, which overturned the precedent that enshrined abortion rights nationwide and gave rise to a national patchwork of laws. That left Americans including military personnel who are housed at bases throughout the country, sometimes with little control over where with unequal access to abortion.

Under the new policy, a service member living in a state where abortions are banned or severely restricted would have time off and reimbursement to travel to a place where the procedure is legal and accessible.

Mr. Tuberville, whose home state hosts six military installations and has laws banning abortion even in cases of rape or incest, has insisted that his objections have nothing to do with the Supreme Court decision to the access of abortion, but instead are about not forcing the taxpayers of this country to fund abortions.

The militarys health care plan covers abortions in cases of rape, incest or threat to the life of the mother, but under the new policy, service members would be able to request travel reimbursement for any reproductive health procedure, including those not covered under the official plan.

Yall got the American taxpayer on the hook to pay for travel and time off for elective abortions, Mr. Tuberville said to Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin during a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing this week, arguing that thePentagons policy ran afoul of the Hyde Amendment, which prohibits spending federal dollars on abortions except in cases of rape, incest, or threat to the life of the mother. Congress will write the laws not the secretary of defense, not the Joint Chiefs.

The protracted impasse has left Democrats and some Republicans wringing their hands over the potential national security repercussions of leaving the senior ranks of the military susceptible to depletion by attrition until the Pentagon either capitulates to Mr. Tubervilles demands, or he is convinced to relent.

It may not be his intent, but he is effectively accomplishing what our adversaries could only dream of: denying our military of its leadership and degrading our ability to fight and win the nations wars, Senator Jack Reed, Democrat of Rhode Island and the Armed Services Committee chairman, said during a floor speech this week. He accused Mr. Tuberville of a profound assault on the professionalism of the men and women of the armed services.

Military promotions are not a political matter and they are not toys for political gains, Mr. Reed added.

He noted that Mr. Tubervilles blockade could affect not just the 150 to 200 pending nominations for generals and admirals, but potentially 650 more that are expected over the next eight months including a replacement for the outgoing chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

If this policy continues or this practice continues, we are wiping out the leadership of the Department of Defense, Mr. Reed said.

Yet such arguments failed to sway Republicans, who argued that the burden was on Senate Democrats and the Pentagon to address Mr. Tubervilles concerns, even as some personally distanced themselves from his tactics.

What I dont understand is why it doesnt appear that anybody is reaching out to find a compromise with him, said Senator Mike Rounds of South Dakota, who sits on the Armed Services panel. The military should probably sit down and visit with the senator and find a path forward.

Senator Todd Young of Indiana, who served in the Navy and the Marines, said Mr. Tuberville was rightly using his power in the Senate to raise an important issue.

We shouldnt abuse that prerogative that we have to insist on votes and use this gratuitously and frequently, but in this case I think he has an important point on behalf of his constituents which is that he deserves a vote, Mr. Young said. Democrats, he added, should give him a vote. Why cant we go on record about this matter?

The most obvious forum for such a discussion would be during debate on the annual defense authorization bill, which frequently dictates policy changes that touch on matters of national political debate.

If he wants to put up an amendment into the N.D.A.A. to disallow this rule, then that is a path, said Senator Mazie Hirono of Hawaii, referring to the National Defense Authorization Act. I hope that at some point hell say, OK, I made my point.

But that debate is still months away, and for now, it appears Mr. Tuberville is digging in.

This has been a coordinated campaign to pressure me to lift these holds, Mr. Tuberville said on the floor this week. That doesnt bother me one bit, and it is not going to work.

On Thursday, the Senate passed a package approving the promotions of rank-and-file members of the armed services by unanimous consent. But Mr. Tubervilles hold means the Senate would be forced to go through the nominations he is blocking one by one, holding a series of votes on each in order to circumvent his objections. Democrats argued that such a path would be untenable, as it would probably consume months of floor time.

Mr. Tuberville also has defended his objections by arguing that Democrats have used a similar tactic in the past, such as when Senator Tammy Duckworth of Illinois blocked a similar cohort of nominations over concerns that then-Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, a key witness in the first impeachment of former president Donald J. Trump, would not be promoted. Her blockade lasted less than two weeks.

Yet Mr. Tubervilles stand over abortion policy comes at a time when Republicans have been jeering the military for policies that they deem to be too woke, decrying the Pentagons most senior leaders over efforts to tackle far-right extremism in the ranks and demanding that they account for reports of drag queen story hours at some installations. Democrats also argued that placating Mr. Tuberville would set a precedent encouraging other senators to use the perennial task of approving military promotions as a forum to grandstand for other political pet issues and called on Republican leaders to talk him down.

If one person plays this game, everyone is going to play this game, Senator Charles Schumer, Democrat of New York and the majority leader, said Thursday. It is my view that sensible Republicans, maybe quietly, will go to Tuberville and say this is a real danger to American security and a loser for the Republican Party.

Link:
Republican Senator Blocks Military Promotions Over Abortion Policy - The New York Times

President Joe Biden AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin, Pool

House Democrats are annoyed with President Joe Biden and Republicans can't get enough of it.

In the last month, Biden has twice withheld vetoes on GOP-led bills that most House Democrats opposed and after the White House signaled that Biden opposed them, too. Democratic lawmakers' frustration with Biden has become House Republicans' favorite new sideshow.

"Cannot stress enough how comical this Lucy & the football act is between the WH & House Dems," tweeted Jack Pandol, communications director for the House GOP campaign arm.

The latest flashpoint is over GOP legislation to end the COVID-19 national emergency. The White House planned to wait until May.

Most House Democrats voted against that bill last month after the White House said the bill's passage "would create wide-ranging chaos and uncertainty throughout the health care systems." However, before a Senate vote Wednesday night, the White House put out the word that Biden wouldn't veto the bill. It passed 68-23.

The White House's January statement did not threaten a veto, but it said the administration "strongly opposes" the bill's enactment "which would be a grave disservice to the American people."

"It's, like, kindergarten-level cooperation," Rep. Abigail Spanberger of Virginia fumed to Axios. Another Democrat, Rep. Dan Kildee of Michigan, told the Axios "the lack of clear information" and "clarity in messaging" from the White House is "not productive. It's very unhelpful."

House Republicans' campaign arm on Wednesday is seizing on the schism, including a popcorn emoji in an email highlighting such quotes from House Democrats. "House Democrats remain rip-roaring angry at the White House for once again exposing their extremism to voters," said Will Reinert, of the National Republican Congressional Committee.

Biden still "strongly opposes" the bill, a White House official said Wednesday night, "and the administration is planning to wind down the COVID national emergency and public health emergency on May 11."

But the official said Biden would sign the bill if it comes to his desk and the administration would continue the work to wind down the national emergency "with as much notice as possible to Americans who could potentially be impacted."

House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries said on Thursday that no members had raised concerns to him about the national emergency "dynamic" with the White House. The White House has kept its word when the administration says Biden will veto legislation. "And as far as I'm concerned, that is the most important marker of communication," he said.

Moving forward, however, Jeffries said he's hoping for early and clear communication from the White House, particularly with regard to Republicans' latest efforts to try to repeal what Jeffries called "common sense District of Columbia police reform measures."

"It's my hope and expectation that the White House will be crystal clear, well in advance of that legislation hitting the floor as to their perspective," Jeffries told reporters.

Earlier this month, House Democrats were furious with Biden's decision to allow Congress to overrule a DC crime law, especially after his administration put out a statement opposing the GOP measure.

The overwhelming majority of House Democrats voted in opposition, and 15 were targeted in GOP digital ads, saying they "voted for reduced sentences for violent crimes."

Most Senate Democrats voted for that resolution after Biden said he wouldn't veto it.

Biden's position caught DC Del. Eleanor Homes Norton by surprise during a news conference. "This is news to me," she said, adding that she was "very disappointed."

Loading...

Continue reading here:
Republicans can't get enough of House Dems' frustrations with Biden - Business Insider