The latest expression of the South Dakota Legislature’s preference of fear and bigotry over data gets a committee hearing this morning. Senate Bill 115, the recycled anti-transgender potty bill, comes before Senate Education at 7:45 a.m. today. SB 115 is the sole bill on today’s Senate Ed agenda.
Hmm… let’s see… we have zero incidents of transgender students behaving as sexual predators in school bathrooms, locker rooms, and changing facilities, but legislators bring a bill to address that non-existent problem. We have one confessed instance of a legislator behaving as a sexual predator toward multiple interns during two consecutive Legislative Sessions in Pierre, but legislators ignore that behavior for two years and can’t even pass a single rule to make clear that boinking interns is unethical.
Equality South Dakota has the unnecessary, discriminatory, and richly hypocritical SB 115 in its sights:
If it feels like déjà vu from last year you are correct.
Some of South Dakota’s extremists have introduced an anti-transgender bathroom bill again this session and is on its way to becoming law unless you join us in the fight! SB 115 is an attack on transgender students by singling out already-vulnerable kids with unequal and discriminatory treatment. Those in Pierre pushing this discriminatory bill are hoping that we are not paying attention and they can quickly sneak this past you [Equality South Dakota, e-mail, 2017.01.28].
The Legislature may not dig decency and fairness, but it digs dollars. Veto-promising Governor Dennis Daugaard has cited the negative economic impact writing anti-trans potty panic into law will have on our fair state. Mark Lee, Sioux Falls Chamber lobbyist, told Greg Belfrage the same thing Friday:
Remember what happened to North Carolina when it passed it’s transgender potty law?
ACC tournament pulled out. NCAA events pulled out. NBA All Star Game pulled out. PayPay decided not to expand. One study puts the economic impact on North Carolina at $680 million–and counting.
Mark Lee, the lobbyist for the Sioux Falls Area Chamber of Commerce, said South Dakota and Sioux Falls in particularly could be looking at the loss of NCAA events and major corporations deciding not to expand here or even pulling out of the state if the measure is passed.
Lee says the measure is a solution looking for a problem in the state [Todd Epp, “Transgender Locker Room Law Could Cost S.D., Sioux Falls Millions,” KELO Radio, 2017.01.27].
On morals and money, SB 115 is bad for South Dakota. But Senate Education has three somewhat sensible Senators (Heinert, Soholt, Solano) and four with a penchant for yahoolery (Bolin, Jensen, Klumb, and Monroe). Soholt and Solano resisted one anti-trans legislation last year (see 2016 HB 1112); Soholt opposed while Solano supported the more prominent 2016 anti-trans bill (see 2016 HB 1008). Bolin, Klumb, Jensen, and Monroe sponsor anti-trans paranoia bills whenever they get the chance. Thus, expect SB 115 to pass committee today and head to the Senate floor.
Time to call up MN Public Radio again, I’m there spokeswoman for SD news. They will have this out to the press immediately.
According to LEAD South Dakota the bill was withdrawn this morning.
I don’t think legislators realize the problem they are creating for parents.
As many as 1 in 100 people are born with some sort of disorder of sex development (http://www.nature.com/news/sex-redefined-1.16943). That means the parents of as many as 1 in 100 children have a difficult decision to make in what gender they have put on the birth certificate.
Right now, that’s not a decision with dire consequences (as long as parents/doctors don’t also “decide” with surgery). They can adjust that decision as the child grows and asserts a gender identity. But these legislators are now making it a decision that this child will be stuck with for all of his or her growing up years.
The article I cited above also suggests that even beyond the recognized disorders of sex development, at the genetic level, gender is more of a spectrum than a binary distinction. If we want to be “as God made us,” well, God made us a little more complicated than one might think.
http://www.startribune.com/south-dakota-s-transgender-locker-room-bill-withdrawn/412276933/
Yes, the potty bill was withdrawn. Hmm, maybe SD legislators have decided that too much negative publicity is a bad thing. Or maybe they’ve decided to let the voters vote on it in 2018. Whatever they decide, the Nation will be watching.
Holy cow! Withdrawn! Senator Bolin says sponsor Russell said pull it, and Bolin said any effort to bring such a bill back this Session would an “extremely unwise decision.” Good guys win again!
No word on whether Jack Heyd and Family Heritage Alliance will still pursue an initiative….
It might feel like deja vu but it looks like the inside of an outhouse. The same legislators (Nelson, Novstrup, Russell etc.) floating the same logs in the same hole and then shutting the lid before a vote is taken. It’s lazy legislating. No new ideas. No new plans. Just turds.
I just saw this post on FB showing how they can try again to introduce the bill.
Amy Scott-Stoltz shared a link to the group: Make Education a Priority in SD.
4 hrs ·
..
Note: SB 115 was withdrawn today by the sponsor. This does not mean the subject is dead. Here is a great explanation from a former legislator on how the subject could get reintroduced this session:
‘The most likely way (and one that Sen. Jim Bolin as used before) is to take the text of SB 115 (in whole or in part) and basically copy/paste it over another bill, maybe a benign or noncontroversial bill, or one that someone else decided to introduce but changed their mind on. Amendments offered to bills have to be germane to the title of the original bill it’s amending, meaning they have to have at least one word in common. So there could have been some bill in, say, the Education committee, that they decided “wasn’t ready for prime time” and sent to the 41st day. Bolin (or really anyone) moves to bring it back from the 41st day, throws an amendment on to replace the original text with SB 115, and then it’s alive again. This can happen on the floor too, on any bill that is germane to the title and hasn’t had final action taken (meaning an up or down vote by the full body).
It doesn’t even have to the the original sponsor deciding this: it could be literally any legislator who really liked SB 115, who decides it shouldn’t have been withdrawn. That’s why continued visibility is so important – these things can happen on the fly, with no advanced warning and no time to organize.’
Here is a link to a bill that could be used to do this SB 108. I will follow this bill and let you know if I hear anything.
This can happen with any bill and any subject, not just SB 115.
sdlegislature.gov
sdlegislature.gov
Also today in breaking news is that Trump will keep President Obama’s LGBT workplace protections in tact.
Trump didn’t say whether or not other portions of the LGBT executive order would remain in place.
Roger, that is subject to President Bannon’s approval on what goes and what stays.
Rita, we should always be alert to tricks by the Legislature. However, Senator Bolin’s line—”extremely unwise decision”—sends a pretty clear signal that leadership wants to lose no more time or political capital on this issue.
We need a moratorium on using public rest rooms, just until we can sort this whole thing out.