Forbes: Ronnie’s Gym and Window Tinting
By Guest Post | Saturday, October 10th, 2009 | PolicyGuest Post by Congressman J. Randy Forbes
Someone forwarded me an email the other day with the subject line “Ronnie’s Gym and Window Tinting.” I scrolled down the email to see a photo of a real brick-and-mortar store with a bright yellow sign advertising – sure enough – a gym and window tinting service all in one. Underneath the photo, the caption read: Who says gyms and window tinting don’t go together?
The email was meant as a joke. Most of us have chuckled at similar stores we pass that provide services or things that just don’t quite go together. I thought to myself how ironic it was that something similar occurred in Washington this week – and that was not meant to be a joke at all.
This week, the House of Representatives voted on the annual bill that sets policy and direction for the Department of Defense. This must-pass annual legislation typically garners strong support on both sides of the aisle. This year, however, the legislation was far from noncontroversial. Tucked into this national security bill was a divisive social policy measure having nothing to do with our military or our national security.
The controversial provision, known as “hate crimes”, will afford gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender victims of crimes preference over other victims of crimes. Scores of faith leaders and conservatives have actively voiced their opposition to hate crimes language primarily because of strong evidence that the legislation could be used to infringe on freedom of speech and religion and be used to prosecute ministers who preach homosexual behavior as sin. Yet for years, activists in favor of hat crimes legislation have tried to pass stand-alone bill without success. However, in as many years, the controversial bill has never passed in the Senate on its own – which makes it tempting for advocates of the provision to find a bill that they are certain will become law and attach their bill to that. Say for instance, a bill whose purpose is to provide for the defense of our Nation.
Yesterday we watched as the congressional leadership engineered a particularly egregious abuse of the legislative process using the broad bipartisan support for our men and women in uniform as leverage to pass divisive social policy. They’ve turned our national defense policy bill into a political pawn. And it is just plain wrong.
While many Americans may not be aware of this particular transgression, they certainly are awake to the fact that their elected representatives in Washington are willing to bend, stretch, and outright ignore established rules and the legislative process for political gain. Whether it involves cutting off debate, demanding votes before legislation is read or the cost is calculated, a wholesale prevention of allowing Members to offer improvements to a piece of legislation, or other actions clearly denying the rules of order or common sense – it is an alarming trend in Washington of which Americans are particularly weary.
Americans do not understand how provisions completely unrelated to the issue at hand can be added to legislation, let alone passed and signed into law. They cannot comprehend how leadership in Congress can stifle debate on legislation, when lawmakers by their very nature are supposed to be asking tough questions about legislative proposals. They cannot believe how an unprecedented 61 bills were called for a vote less than 24 hours after being introduced in the 110th Congress, giving Members of Congress little to no time to read the bill text.
Regardless of where one stands on the hate crimes provision, there were other gravely concerning issues with this particular defense bill, not the least of which was the removal of a House provision to extend for one year a long overdue and well-deserved benefit for our nation’s disabled veterans known as concurrent receipt. I’ve been addressing this and other concerns for a number of weeks on the Floor of the House Representatives.
The law requires that the Administration present a shipbuilding plan and a certification that the budget will meet that plan. In defiance of the law, the Administration has simply refused to do it. The law also requires that they submit an aviation plan. They refused to do that, too. In response, the House Armed Services Committee unanimously passed a congressional resolution of inquiry requiring that the plan be submitted by September 15, 2009. Still, the Administration ignored the law.
Earlier this year before the defense budget was sent to Congress, this Administration issued a gag order preventing senior Pentagon officials from speaking with Members of Congress about budget cuts and the risks to our national defense, consequently preventing transparency in the defense budget process. They have apparently issued a similar order now to General McChrystal regarding his Afghanistan assessment. In short, we have a defense policy bill that, for the first time, is being driven by social and budget pressures rather than our budget being driven by our defense needs.
While stores like Ronnie’s Gym and Window tinting with odd pair services may make us shake our heads and chuckle, Americans find nothing light or humorous about such acts making their way into policy that defines the laws of our nation. All across the country, Americans are beginning to stand up against blatant partisan politics, lack of transparency, and defiance of rules and common sense in the legislative process. The American people deserve better and they know it.
Congressman Forbes spoke on this issue on the House floor this week. His remarks can be viewed here.
Tags:
Contribute for Conservatism!
We're 75% there! Thank you to everyone who has so far contributed! Just $2000 to go!
Comments
12 Responses to "Forbes: Ronnie’s Gym and Window Tinting"
Excuse me, but while I personally oppose “hate crime” legislation, I didn’t know that anyone’s right to freedom of speech or religion involved assaulting or murdering homosexuals.
…Or have I missed a recent SCOTUS decision?
Timothy, in case you didn’t realize, assault and murder are already illegal.
Uh, exactly the point Brian. How is this piece of “hate crime” legislation an infringement of anyone’s right to freedom of speech or religion?
Are you more dead if I killed you because I hate you, or if I killed you to rob you?
If someone assaults me just to rob me, should they get less time because they didn’t hate me for my religion? Why do I deserve less protection because I don’t fit into certain groups?
You have yet to answer my question on how this infringes on anyone’s right to freedom of speech or religion.
And I’m guessing that you want a removal of additional penalties for the murder of police officers, judges, and witnesses too?
Hmm…since I favor the death penalty for murder, what would you like me to support for murder of a police officer? Double Execution? After we execute the murderer, we can execute him again?
Sure. Why not?
The reason there are concerns about freedom of speech and religion is because hate crime provisions are already applicable to speech. A hate crime is not just a violent crime, it also has to do with perceived slurs or insults and are prosecuted in many states. There is an obvious threat to freedom of speech here if we have to curb what we say in case we may offend one of these “protected” groups.
Brian, you only get the death penalty in Virginia for certain enumerated crimes. In most cases, murder in and of itself is not a capital offense:
http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+18.2-31
And Georgie, thank you for illustrating the fact that know nothing about the law. Assault is putting a person in immediate apprehension of harm, so, yes, if I yell out “I’m going to kill you faggot!”, then yeah, I’m going to be rightly prosecuted.
And if you bothered to look up what the House has passed, you would see the following:
Tim, since you brag to be “surrounded by idiots,” I chuckle that you’re adopting their weaknesses.
I told you what I favor. You can cite current Virginia law all day long, and it doesn’t change what I favor.
I favor the death penalty for murder. It’s admirable that you look to government to tell you what to believe, but I don’t share your desperation.
Out of curiosity Brian, did you support Cuccinelli, Brownlee, or Foster for the Republican nomination for Attorney General?
The basic concept of a 3 day split is to break down your body into it’s main muscle groups and slot them into a routine based over 3 different workout days per week. Each muscle group will only be directly worked once per week. Each workout day is followed by a days rest to help aid recovery of your body so you are fresh for your next workout session.
I wished to give thank you for this amazing read!!!
Leave your response