A few minutes ago, Kentucky Governor Steve Beshear vetoed the so-called “Religious Freedom Restoration Act,” a bill that would have resulted in serious unintended consequences, such as potentially undermining local civil rights ordinances, including those that prohibit discrimination against women, religious minorities, and the LGBT community.

(Please see the Governor’s statement below which outlines many of these consequences, and lists the broad umbrella of organizations that urged him to veto this bill.)

Six years ago, I withdrew from the 2007 Democratic gubernatorial primary to endorse Steve Beshear’s candidacy.  I later had the honor to serve for three years as his Secretary of Finance and Administration.  While Governor Beshear has done a very good job helping the Commonwealth weather the worst economic storms of my lifetime, I believe that this is his finest moment.

As always, but especially today, I am proud to call Steve Beshear a friend and my Governor.

Beshear’s veto faces a potential override by the Kentucky General Assembly.  Much as many of you joined me in urging the Governor to veto this bill, I strongly advise you to contact your legislator over the weekend and urge him or her to refuse to override the Governor’s veto.

 

Monday, legislators will return to hundreds of “green slips” on their desk. Please help ensure the “Uphold Veto” pile is larger

Click here for a list of legislative email addresses and click here for legislators’ toll-free telephone numbers.

Please understand that many who voted “yes” did not comprehend the unintended consequences of the bill, and/or may have been afraid of the public backlash of voting for a bill that purports to uphold “religious freedom.”  It is our responsibility as citizens to educate our elected officials in a civil and respectful way.  Please join me.

====

UPDATED:

Here’s what veto opponents had to say about the Governor’s action:

“Gay rights groups in this state have now come out of the closet on their opposition to religious freedom,” said Martin Cothran, a spokesman for The Family Foundation.

===

Governor Steve Beshear’s Official Statement

FRANKFORT, Ky.  (March 22, 2013) — Governor Steve Beshear vetoed House Bill 279 today, noting its well-placed intentions but possible significant unintended consequences.

“Religious freedom is a cornerstone of this great nation, and a right enshrined in both the United States Constitution and the Kentucky Constitution,” said Gov. Beshear.  “I value and cherish our rights to religious freedom and I appreciate the good intentions of House Bill 279 and the members of the General Assembly who supported this bill to protect our constitutional rights to practice our religion.  However, I have significant concerns that this bill will cause serious unintentional consequences that could threaten public safety, health care, and individuals’ civil rights. As written, the bill will undoubtedly lead to costly litigation.  I have heard from many organizations and government entities that share those same concerns. Therefore, after giving this measure thoughtful analysis and consideration, today I vetoed the bill.”

HB279, sent to the Governor on March 11, would allow an individual to disregard any state or local law that places a substantial burden on his or her sincerely held religious belief.  As written, the government would have to show by “clear and convincing evidence” that the state has a compelling interest in requiring the person to follow the established law,and that there is no less restrictive means to accomplish the government’s objective.

Federal law and HB279 are fundamentally different

Supporters have referenced the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) and similar state RFRA laws as the template for this legislation.  However, Gov. Beshear noted that House Bill 279 is fundamentally different than those laws – mostly because the vague language of HB279 lends itself to overly broad applications.

As written, HB279 imposes a heightened standard of “clear and convincing proof” to evaluate compliance with a law that contains an unclear definition of “burden,” which invites costly and possibly lengthy legal challenges.  The bill offers no exceptions for certain state agencies or civil rights laws.  There are no exceptions for the protection and safety of the general public, such as public health standards.

“Imprecise legal standards lead to unforeseen consequences,” said Gov. Beshear.  “Citizens and governmental entities are entitled to a clear understanding of the boundaries of permissible conduct.  This bill, as written, while well intended, is undermined by precarious legal wording,” said Gov. Beshear.

Possible Unintended Consequences

Groups as varied as the Kentucky Association of Sexual Assault Programs, Inc. to theNational Association of Social Workers-Kentucky Chapter to the Center for Accessible Living have called on the Governor to veto the bill, citing concerns including:

• ·         Weakening of local civil rights laws;
• ·         Impact on implementation of the new Common Core Standards in our schools;
• ·         Negative impact to economic development efforts;
• ·         Adverse impact on enforcement of drug laws;
• ·         Additional financial burdens on local governments; and
• ·         Possible withholding of needed medical care or use of religion as a justification for abuse.

State government agencies also expressed concerns to the Governor that this bill could:

• ·         Increase litigation costs;
• ·         Decrease federal funding; and
• ·         Threaten public health, including refusal to provide needed medication or services.

Despite his veto, Gov. Beshear expressed a willingness to work with supporters to develop a bill that might mitigate these unintended consequences.  “I urge supporters and opponents of this legislation to come together before next session and find compromise legislation that protects religious freedom, while avoiding the possible unintended consequences of House Bill 279, and I pledge to work with them to find that compromise,” he said.

The following groups and elected officials urged the Governor to veto the measure, orexpressed their concerns about the bill to the Governor:

Kentucky Association of Counties

Kentucky County Judge/Executive Association

Kentucky League of Cities

Kentucky Magistrates & Commissioners Association

Kentucky Association of Sexual Assault Programs, Inc.

Kentucky Commission on Human Rights

Kentucky Education Association

Jefferson County Teachers Association (JCTA)

Center for Accessible Living, Inc.

Hispanic-Latino Coalition

Lexington-Fayette Urban County Human Rights Commission

Louisville Metro Human Relations Commission

National Assoc. for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP)—Louisville Branch

National Association of Social Workers-Kentucky Chapter

United Food and Commercial Workers Local 227

1^st District Councilwoman Attica Scott—Louisville Metro

21^st District Councilman Dan Johnson—Louisville Metro

26^th District Councilman Brent Ackerson-Louisville Metro

3^rd District Councilwoman Mary C. Woolridge—Louisville Metro

6^th District Councilman David James—Louisville Metro

9^th District Councilwoman Tina Ward‐Pugh—Louisville

AIDS Volunteers of Lexington

American Civil Liberties Union of Kentucky

Americans United for the Separation of Church and State

Bereans for Fairness

Bluegrass United Church of Christ

Catholics for Fairness

Central Presbyterian Church, Louisville

Children’s Healthcare is a Legal Duty

The Church of Christ, Union (Union Church, Berea)

Douglass Boulevard Christian Church

Episcopal Church of the Advent, Louisville

Fairness Campaign

Faith Leaders for Fairness

Franklin/Simpson Human Rights Commission

Gay and Lesbian Services Organization (GLSO)

Jewish Community Relations Council of Louisville

Journey Fellowship, Owensboro

The Harvey Milk Society of Berea College

Kentuckians For The Commonwealth (KFTC)

Kentucky Alliance Against Racist and Political Repression

Kentucky Equality Federation

Kentucky Fairness Alliance

Kentucky Feminists United

Kentucky Jobs With Justice

Kentucky Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice

Kentucky Secular Society

Kentucky Special Parent Involvement Network (KY–‐SPIN)

Kentucky Young Democrats

Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund

Lexington Fair Housing Council

Lexington Fairness

Louisville Atheists and Freethinkers

Louisville Metro Council President Jim King

Louisville Metro Human Relations Commission Advocacy Board

Louisville Metro Human Relations Commission Enforcement Board

Louisville Showing Up for Racial Justice (LSURJ)

Mayor Greg Fischer, Louisville Metro Government

Mayor Sherry Carran, City of Covington

Metro Louisville Women’s Political Caucus (MLWPC)

Northern Kentucky Democratic League

Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG)—Lexington Chapter

People Associating Together In Owensboro (PATIO)

Planned Parenthood Federation of America

Planned Parenthood of Kentucky

Quaker Committee for Kentucky Legislation

Richard Meadows, Fayette County Commissioner

Shevawn Akers, LFUCG Council Member

SteinGroup LLC

The Women’s Network

Unitarian Universalist Church of Lexington

Women In Transition (WIT)

Women’s Leadership Conference for Religious Freedom (WLCRF)

Two of my fellow co-founders of No Labels — former Comptroller General Dave Walker and former Clinton Administration policy expert Bill Galston — discussed the future of No Labels’ hallmark legislative proposal, No Budget No Pay, in today’s The Hill.  Here’s an excerpt:

Although most citizens may find it hard to believe these days, there is  actually a law that establishes not only the process for producing a federal  budget but also a timetable. First passed in 1974, the Congressional Budget Act  tried to ensure that the different parts of the government would know what they  could spend during the coming fiscal year—and would enjoy that certainty early  enough to be able to make plans to spend the taxpayer’s money as efficiently and  effectively as possible.

That’s the theory, but in practice it hasn’t  worked out that way. In fact,  the government has not passed all its budget  and spending bills on time since 1997.

Late budgets have real and serious  consequences. In the absence of timely spending bills, Congress passes “continuing resolutions,” which are short-term band-aid measures to keep the  government running. This stop-and-go budgeting creates havoc for government  agencies and the citizens who rely on them. It’s hard for federal agencies to  plan and make commitments for the long term when they’re worried they might run  out of money in three months.

This is no way to run the largest  organization in the world – one that spent $3.8 trillion last year.

The  dysfunctional budget process also contributes to the general climate of  uncertainty that many economists believe restrains businesses from making new  investments and hiring additional workers.

That’s why both of us were so  thrilled when No Labels’ No Budget, No Pay proposal was included in this  February’s debt ceiling extension bill. No Budget, No Pay is as simple as it  sounds: If Congress can’t pass a budget on time, members aren’t paid.

No Budget, No Pay provided sorely needed  accountability for our legislators. And it worked. Last week saw the delivery of  budgets from Democrats in the Senate and Republicans in the House.
But  there’s still a missing piece of the budget puzzle.  The president is  required by law to submit his budget proposal by the first Monday in February,  but President Obama’s budget is late. In fact, this is the first time in history  that Congress has released its budgets before the president. And if President  Obama releases his budget on April 8, as recent reports suggest, it would be the  latest budget presented by a president not in his first year of office since  1921, when record-keeping began.

That’s why we believe it’s time to  expand No Budget, No Pay to the executive branch.

If the president  doesn’t submit his budget by the first Monday of February – as the law requires – he or she should not be paid until the budget is released and transmitted to  Congress.

Although No Budget, No Pay could only apply to future  presidents (the Constitution prevents current presidents’ salaries from being  increased or decreased), President Obama would take a big step toward more  accountability in our government if he agreed to apply No Budget, No Pay to the  executive branch.

Congress took its medicine with the No Budget,  No Pay Act earlier this year.  Now it’s time to hold the presidency to the  same standard.

Click here to read the full piece.