John West's comments on demise of Florida's academic freedom bill
On May 2, John West wrote in Evolution News & Views,
The version that the Florida House passed 71-43 was completely impractical -- how can the teaching of critical analysis of evolution be required without prescribing what criticisms are going to be taught? What criticisms would they teach? Intelligent Design? The Second Law of Thermodynamics? The Theorem of Co-evolution?
Also, if Florida has pressing needs for legislation, then why did the legislative year end so early, May 2?
IMO the two-house model for state legislatures -- probably following the unfortunate example of the US Congress -- is unfortunate. It makes passing legislation difficult because both houses must agree on a final version of a bill. The two houses often initially pass different versions of a bill and the two versions must be reconciled. Nebraska is the only state with a unicameral legislature.
I am quite familiar with the dishonesty of politicians. For example, I was jubilant when the California legislature introduced several bills to repeal the grossly unconstitutional $300 "smog impact fee" levied on incoming out-of-state vehicles. But I later found out that most of these bills were just so-called "placeholder" bills introduced for the sole purpose of trying to get a spot on the legislative calendar. Unrelated amendments were added to the bills and the smog impact fee repeal measures were then dropped from the bills. That kind of bait-and-switch should be illegal -- what if the existence of these phony bills dissuaded other legislators from introducing serious smog-fee repeal bills? Only one California legislator, state senator Maurice Johannessen, sincerely introduced bills to repeal the fee. The fee was finally thrown out by the state courts and the legislature finally passed a bill to refund the fee to everyone who had paid it during a period of approximately 9 years.
.
Well, it's official. The Florida House of Representatives refused today to pass the academic freedom measure on evolution previously passed by the state Senate, and so the measure is now dead because the legislative session has ended. Supposedly, the Florida House refused to pass the Senate bill because it favored a stronger measure to require the critical analysis of evolution. . . . . . If the Republican House leadership in Florida really supported academic freedom on evolution, they would have passed the Senate bill. Instead, they shamefully passed a bill earlier this week with language that the Senate had previously rejected, knowing full well this would likely mean the death of any legislation on the topic. What has just happened in Florida smacks of classic back-room politics by politicians who are trying to play both sides of an issue. (emphasis in original)
The version that the Florida House passed 71-43 was completely impractical -- how can the teaching of critical analysis of evolution be required without prescribing what criticisms are going to be taught? What criticisms would they teach? Intelligent Design? The Second Law of Thermodynamics? The Theorem of Co-evolution?
Also, if Florida has pressing needs for legislation, then why did the legislative year end so early, May 2?
IMO the two-house model for state legislatures -- probably following the unfortunate example of the US Congress -- is unfortunate. It makes passing legislation difficult because both houses must agree on a final version of a bill. The two houses often initially pass different versions of a bill and the two versions must be reconciled. Nebraska is the only state with a unicameral legislature.
I am quite familiar with the dishonesty of politicians. For example, I was jubilant when the California legislature introduced several bills to repeal the grossly unconstitutional $300 "smog impact fee" levied on incoming out-of-state vehicles. But I later found out that most of these bills were just so-called "placeholder" bills introduced for the sole purpose of trying to get a spot on the legislative calendar. Unrelated amendments were added to the bills and the smog impact fee repeal measures were then dropped from the bills. That kind of bait-and-switch should be illegal -- what if the existence of these phony bills dissuaded other legislators from introducing serious smog-fee repeal bills? Only one California legislator, state senator Maurice Johannessen, sincerely introduced bills to repeal the fee. The fee was finally thrown out by the state courts and the legislature finally passed a bill to refund the fee to everyone who had paid it during a period of approximately 9 years.
.
posted by Larry Fafarman | 5/11/2008 05:29:00 PM
2 Comments:
> The Florida House of Representatives refused today to pass the academic freedom measure on evolution previously passed by the state Senate <
The Florida House of Representatives was wise enough to see through the propaganda measure that was misleadingly labeled "academic freedom". They didn't fall for the political motives.
>>>>> The Florida House of Representatives was wise enough to see through the propaganda measure that was misleadingly labeled "academic freedom". They didn't fall for the political motives. <<<<<<
But that is not what they said. Instead they passed a stronger -- and impractical -- bill that they knew was unacceptable to the Florida Senate. The Florida House members who voted for the House bill were just playing keep away, like those sleazy California legislators who introduced those bait-and-switch "placeholder" bills.
Post a Comment
<< Home