Rule 46
January 28th, 2010 by Derrick DePledgeState House leaders may recommend in private caucus Friday morning that the civil-unions bill be indefinitely postponed for the session.
The move, which would require a procedural vote on the House floor, is covered in Rule 46 of House rules:
Indefinite postponement
When a question is postponed indefinitely, the same shall not be acted upon again during the regular or special session in which it was introduced without the consent of two-thirds of the members to which the House is entitled.
January 29th, 2010 at 6:48 am
This would be a shameful betrayal and it will not save them from attacks from the anti-gay bigots in the fall elections. By saying he does not want to "expose" members in an election year, Speaker Say has essentially promised this issue will be dealt with next session.
So why will anti-gay bigots not have a strong interest in trying to bump off pro-civil union legislators in the fall elections?
How does running and hiding under their desks protect the legislators?
It does not.
Whether the bill passes, or fails, the conservatives will come after them. There is no logical reason why killing it is safer than passing it.
Is THIS what they entered political service for? They need to find some backbone and vote according to their actual beliefs, not their fears.
Bullies NEVER respect cowards, cowards never respect themselves, and their friends, spouses and co-workers will regard them as moral failures.
They think they can hide their identities behind procedural gimmicks, but their names are known. I am saddened to watch them sink so low.
I hope they reconsider in the next few hours.
January 29th, 2010 at 7:43 am
HOUSE! YOU ARE DEMOCRATS! STAND UP for what the MEANS!
I watched the PBS documentary last night on Patsy Mink. At the very end, in her own voice, she said:
"I shall never stop fighting for the principles of equality and justice"
That Patsy dared to remain “ahead of the majority” in her beliefs enabled groundbreaking changes for the rights of the disenfranchised.
Fight, Democrats. Fight as Patsy Mink did her whole life.
It is the time, TODAY, to DO THE RIGHT THING.
January 29th, 2010 at 10:05 am
And they are "disenfranchised" how?
Last I knew everyone has the same rights (and responsiblities) as Americans.
The Hawaii voters voiced their opinion and marriage is between one man and one woman.
As long as you pay the marriage penalty tax, divorce law, community property and the rest of it... you're welcome in miseryland!
The _real_ question for me is this.... WHY is the government involved in the marriage business?
January 29th, 2010 at 12:23 pm
Well, Hipoli, they didn't "do the right thing" and there is one person who is more responsible for that than anyone else: COLLEEN HANABUSA.
Sorry if the truth hurts, but it's still the truth.
January 29th, 2010 at 12:57 pm
I'm glad to see 'ohiaforest3400' pointing people in the right direction. He or she is exactly, precisely, correct.
January 29th, 2010 at 3:36 pm
How the heck can you possibly blame Hanabusa for this????
This is firmly Speakers fault! He allowed his member to worry more about their re-election than doing what was right!
Two words for those Reps - and I happen to know exactly who you are:
CHICKEN SH$TS.
Theres a couple of you chicken sh$ts that I expect this kind of weak stupid selfish voting from...but the leaders? You call yourselves leaders? You all are not WORTHY of being democrats! You may as well get out of the party and go join Jonah in bible study!
Obviously, the principles of justice and equality have no home in Hawaii any longer.
Im so incredibly ashamed of our House of Representative today.
January 29th, 2010 at 7:26 pm
So typical of where we find ourselves in Hawaii today. Terrified to offend, unwilling to reach a conclusion.
"The best lack all conviction, while the worst Are full of passionate intensity” WBY.
January 29th, 2010 at 9:49 pm
Shameful.
Embarassing.
Indefensible.
January 30th, 2010 at 9:30 am
I would like the comments of Charles to be entered as if they were my own.
January 30th, 2010 at 8:16 pm
Hipoli, the reason this is Hanabusa's fault is because she set up this very outcome last session.
How? By stalling, lying, manipulating so that the bill could not move 'til this year when, because it's an election year, she knew it wouldn't move. And why would she do that? So that she can pander to both sides: "Hey, CU advocates, the Senate passed the bill"; "Hey, traditional mariage supporters, I held the line long enuf so that it couldn't get back to the House untial an election year when it had no chance."
You know it's the truth. You know it's because Hanabusa is no leader, something you'd lilke to forget when you contemplate the thought of Ed Case becoming 1st District Congressman (a though that makes me rather ill as well). But this is what YOU said last year:
In a March 7, 2009, post to this blog regarding HB 444 being stuck in committee on a 3-3 vote, you wrote:
"Someone remind me -- didnt Hanabusa pull a vote to the floor on a Judge when Clayton Hee was Judiciary Chair? Wasnt that just the other year? So -- doesnt that take her argument about not undermining Chairs and committee's away? Kolea, youve hit it -- this is now all about Hanabusa's future political career.
Just Do the Right Thing."
In a March 19, 2009, post to this blog regarding a poll that found broad support for civil rights for same-sex partners, you wrote:
"Just Do The Right Thing!
Come on, President. Be the Leader I damn well know you are."
On March 23, 2009, as rumors swirled about a motion to recall the bill from committee, you wrote:
"Come On, Hanabusa! I know you have it in you.
This one is EXACTLY why you are all Democrats!
Just Do The Right Thing."
Now, I completely agree that a number of House members who think they belong to a student council social club utterly lacked the cajones to do the right thing. But do I blame Say for that? Nope. He can't make them vote one way or the other. Do I blame him for the motion to put the bill over indefinitely? Nope. While I would like the bill to go to the Governor even with just a majority in the House, it invites a veto, a veto that would be rendered with the national Republicans in town, with Karl Rove, demon incarnate of Lee Atwater, there to show them how to make political hay of it. Do we need a reason to boost the campaign of Governor Wannabe Duke? As it is, if the proponents can get 2/3 to revive the bill this session, they've got the 2/3 they need to override a veto.
No, there's plenty of blame to go around but, like I said, Hanabusa gets most of it. The House acted when they could -- in a non-election year -- with about the 2/3 they needed. Then Hanabusa got ahold of it and engineered its death; last year was the only chance; passing it this year was like passibg a corpse over to the House. Thanx for nothing, Colleen.