Skip to Content
Political Agenda

Bullying-bill veto surprised supporters

By Joe Kimball | 05/27/09

Supporters of an anti-bullying bill passed by the Legislature say they worked with the governor's office to fashion the measure, and thus were quite surprised Saturday when it was vetoed.

In his veto message, Gov. Tim Pawlenty said that other laws already cover bullying in schools, so this one was unnecessary. Advocates say it was different, though, because it included 14 student characteristics to be included in anti-bullying training, including disability and gender, according to a story in the Minnesota Independent.

That led to opposition from some groups on moral grounds. Minnesota Independent quotes an e-mail from the  Minnesota Family Council saying the bill "gives preferential treatment and status to homosexuals, bisexuals, cross dressers, transvestites and transsexuals – persons who have sex change operations – by singling out sexual orientation and gender identity or expression for special protection. Homosexual activists will use it as 'leverage' to promote acceptance and normalization of homosexuality, homosexual marriage and unhealthy sexual behaviors."

The bill would have required school districts to provide training on how to deal with bullying, and a group supporting the plan was shocked at the veto, after working with the governor's office to get the wording in final shape.

The Safe Schools for All coalition said in a press release Tuesday that it had gotten "word from his staff that the final version had met every request and requirement the Governor had made."

"By rescinding his compromise and vetoing this widely supported bill, the Governor said he cares more about his political reputation than the safety and education of tens of thousands of Minnesota students he purports to represent," said Stephanie Hazen of the Family Equality Council.

Comments (6)

Submitted by Greg Kapphahn on May 27, 2009 - 9:42am.

What this bill would have done, which the Minnesota (anti-any that are not like ours') Family Council objected to in this bill is that it would have armed schools with specific categories i.e. identified specific issues over which students could not be harassed or abused.

Such arming is only necessary and absolutely necessary because there are perpetrators of such harassment and abuse who claim the right to do so based on the faith they learn at home and at church.

Without specific categories school personnel struggle to act against those who claim they are trying to stand against "sin" or "save others' souls" by attacking them for what the attackers have been taught are sinful, unholy attitudes and ideas.

Without such categories, harassment and even abuse can be explained away as "Biblically-demanded, faith-based admonishment" and therefore protected by freedom of religious expression.

The Talibanic end of the Right Wing Christian Conservatives, supported by our governor want to reserve the right to attack and abuse anyone in the halls of your local public school who doesn't adhere to their sadly unloving and unlovely version of the Christian faith.

Submitted by Thomas Swift on May 27, 2009 - 12:05pm.

Perhaps someone sent the Governor a copy of the "Safe schools" curriculum being pressed into classrooms in Saint Paul and Minneapolis under cover of "anti-bullying".

Greg's supposition is nonsense. Repeated approaches by one student upon another can and are considered harassment for any reason under existing law.

Further, I'm unaware that widespread proselytizing is occurring anywhere in Minnesota public schools. Heck, the mere appearance of a crucifix is enough to send some administrators into a panic.

This legislation is nothing more than another means for proponents of homosexuality to force the normalization of their behavior choices upon a captive and naive audience of school children against the wishes of parents.

If we want our kids to leave each other alone, and teach them that harassing someone for any reason is unacceptable, that is the message that needs to be carried to them.

The Governor saw through this Trojan Horse and dealt with it appropriately.

Submitted by Enoch Ferpini on May 27, 2009 - 12:21pm.

Pawlenty was a JV hockey player in high school in the 1970's. Just which side of the "bullying" debate would you expect his natural inclination lies?

Submitted by Greg Kapphahn on May 27, 2009 - 6:20pm.

Tom evidently hasn't spent time in a public school class room or hallway for awhile, nor has he talked to any school administrators.

Just because you can't imagine it, Tom, or you've never experienced it, doesn't mean it's not a problem.

Submitted by Ralf Wyman on May 27, 2009 - 9:37pm.

The most important part of this story is this:
"the final version had met every request and requirement the Governor had made."

From chats I've had with my MN House member and others, this is classic Pawlenty. He negotiates in bad faith.

Why make a committee work a bill to your standards if you are going to veto it? It's thoroughly disingenuous.

And it is how he "negotiated" the budget deals of the past few years - make DLFers compromise over and over and then veto anyway, just to totally demoralize hi adversary and beat them into submission.

I for one am glad that this session they did not totally fall into that trap. Speaker Kelliher used the Legislative Commission on Planning and Fiscal Policy to pressure Pawlenty to not play that game in this year's budget "negotiations."

Too bad the DFL and serious-minded Safe Schools leaders got totally snookered.

But it IS classic T-paw and he needs to be called out for his bad faith dealings.

Submitted by Thomas Swift on May 28, 2009 - 9:32am.

Greg, I invested 8 years of my life battling on behalf of students in the Saint Paul public school district; six of which occurred after I had removed my own kids to the safety of a private school

I sat in on the Citizen's Budget and Finance Advisory Committee, volunteered my time to help teachers grade tests, tutor kids, and evaluate the implementation of the districts "alternative intelligence" pre-admittance tests at Capital Hill magnet (mostly to mitigate the harm it was causing).

I exposed the misappropriation of public funds and fraud, held the leftist, lunatic fringe that maintains a stranglehold on the district publicly accountable for their failures and debacles.

In 2002, I ran for the SPPS school board.

I've spoken to roomfuls of teachers, parents and with more clueless administrators than I really care to remember.

I know that of which I speak, and have the background to prove it. How about you?