The Alaska House of Representatives voted 34-4 on Friday to join a legal amicus brief in support of the Willow Project, which was approved by President Joe Biden but then immediately frozen due to a lawsuit by the nation’s largest and most well-funded environmental groups, which are challenging the approval of three of the five proposed drilling pads for ConocoPhillips.
“It is time to put an end to the baseless lawsuits filed by extremist environmental groups, which only serve to impede progress and prevent Alaskans from reaping the benefits of the Willow Project,” according to the House news release.
Voting against support for Willow defense were three Democrats and one Republican: Rep. Genevieve Mina, Rep. Andrew Gray, Rep. Ashley Carrick, and Rep. David Eastman.
Last month, the House vote was unanimous in sending a resolution to President Joe Biden in support of an approval of the master development plan.
“We are taking a stand for the people of Alaska and standing up to those who would stifle progress and deny them the opportunity to prosper,” said House Speaker Cathy Tilton, R-Wasilla. “By joining this amicus brief, we send a clear message that we will not be deterred by frivolous lawsuits and will continue to fight for the critical projects that will benefit Alaskans for decades to come.”
Rep. Dan Saddler noted that “Following the legally established process for getting permits, performing environmental studies, local impact, etc. etc, is no longer sufficient to bring resolution and progress on development issues in Alaska. The battles are now fought in the courtroom and the tools are now briefs. I think it’s important that representatives of this body, in this body of our citizens, join with those of our federal delegation in making a clear statement to the court, which I understand has the duty to give special deference to the expressed views of the Legislature in making their decision whether or not to grant the injunction.”
The project could generate up to 180,000 barrels of oil a day during peak production, and provide $8 billion in tax revenue. About 2,500 jobs would be created during construction, with 300 permanent jobs that would be available for operations.
“This is standing for our way of life,” said Rep. Sarah Vance, of Homer. “By the Legislature choosing to join on this brief it is defending our national security and our right to develop our own resources and be energy independent. We don’t have to go searching other places for the oil that we have right here.”
Rep. David Eastman said he was hesitant to support the amicus brief and that he had not had enough time to read it and he was unsure if he could support the Legislature getting involved in the court matter.
Rep. Mary Peltola was in the Minnesota State Capitol on Friday, testifying on behalf of the Fair Vote Minnesota group to a House committee on how great ranked choice voting works in Alaska, and why Minnesota might consider adopting a similar plan.
Peltola told the House Elections Finance and Policy Committee that she credits ranked choice voting with her win in 2022. In fact, it was probably the reason she, a dark horse candidate, won against the most famous person Alaska has ever produced: Sarah Palin.
Minnesota’s HF 2486 would expand the number of Minnesota local governments that could adopt a ranked choice voting system for local elections and the bill would appropriate grants to them to aid its implementation. The bill is supported by Democrats but has no Republican co-sponsors.
“Ranked-choice voting rewards candidates that can build broad coalitions of voters and bring people together,” Peltola told the committee. “In our state, our ranked-choice system allowed me to run a positive campaign and focus on issues that voters care about. In order to win, I could not afford to alienate or ignore supporters of my opponents, as their second- and third-choice votes were critical in deciding who won. With ranked-choice voting, you have to be willing to listen to every voter. You have to at least consider opposing points of view. … I could not take any vote for granted, nor write any voter off.”
Peltola did not talk about the extraordinary delays that ranked choice voting creates in knowing the outcomes of elections, nor the extraordinary expense the state pays to educate voters about ranked choice voting, which is already the subject of a major recall via ballot initiative, now being sought through a petition from Alaskans for Honest Elections.
So far, only two states — Maine and Alaska — employ ranked choice voting for state and federal offices, except for the presidential election, which is governed federally.
Fair Vote Minnesota is similar to Alaskans for Better Elections. It’s funded by dark Outside money. Both groups get support from Unite America, a group dedicated to ranked choice voting and headed by progressive billionaire Kathryn Murdoch. Major funders that have backed both groups are John and Laura Arnold, political philanthropists who give millions to Democrat Party causes every year.
It appears Anchorage Superintendent Jharrett Bryantt left Houston just in time. Texas last week announced a state takeover of the Houston public school district, which is the state’s largest school district and the nation’s eighth largest.
Anchorage hired Bryantt in the summer of 2022. Bryantt served as the Houston Independent School District’s executive officer of talent. If he had waited much longer to leave, the unraveling of the school district might have left a big question mark on his resume. After all, Bryantt was in charge of recruiting and hiring.
The Office of Talent’s web page states “We are committed to getting outstanding results for our students. Human Resources impacts student achievement by:
Recruiting, selecting, retaining, and developing exceptional people.
Providing employees excellent support and development.
Maintaining high expectations.
Delivering high-quality customer service.
But last week the Texas Education Agency essentially declared the school district a failure after the performance of some schools is so bad that the agency believes the district is a candidate for House Bill 1842, passed in 2015, which mandates an intervention and sanction of a public school that has received an unsuccessful performance rating for two or more consecutive years.
TEA is appointing a new Board of Managers for the school district because of academic failures, especially at Wheatley High School, where students are failing. U.S. News ranks it between 13,383-17,843of all high schools in itsNational Rankings, and the school, which is one of 50 high schools in Houston, ranks between 1,213-1,481 in state rankings. Ninety-nine percent of the students are “economically disadvantaged” and only 4% pass advanced placement tests. Reading proficiency is 15%.
“What that law requires is if that threshold is ever met, that the commissioner of education is required, it’s not discretionary, is required to either order a closure of that school or order a board of managers for the whole district,” Morath told KTRK. “It’s not in the best interest of kids at Wheatley to close Wheatley, so that leaves us with the board of managers,” he said.
At the time of Bryantt’s hiring by the Anchorage School Board, Board President Margo Bellamy said that Bryantt was chosen because of “He articulates specific and innovative plans to improve proficiency in reading and math. He is laser focused on students and their academic, social, emotional, and mental health needs along with a sincere desire to ensure adequate resources are directed to the classroom to support educators and support staff.”
In his statement to the community upon his hiring, Bryantt said “Serving the Anchorage community as superintendent would be the privilege and honor of a lifetime; I want to put down roots here, and unite our complex, multicultural community around our schools. I’m ready to roll up my sleeves and partner with the community to create a shared vision of educational excellence. I have a track record of leading academic gains and attracting top talent into one of America’s largest and most diverse school districts; I am prepared to lead the Anchorage School District into a bright, exciting new chapter.”
The first part of Bryantt’s exciting new chapter will occur at Monday night’s board meeting, when Bryantt will recommend the closure of one of the top-performing schools in Anchorage — Family Partnership Charter School. See story by David Boyle, Must Read Alaska education writer, below.
Anchorage School Superintendent Jharrett Bryantt is recommending the termination of the Family Partnership Charter School’s charter.
Bryantt, according to a memo, wants to transition the school from its current charter status to an alternative correspondence school, which would give the district total control over the operation of the school, its textbooks, and its curriculum.
The superintendent’s memo to the Anchorage School Board states that, “Unfortunately, for a number of years, Family Partnership’s Academic Policy Committee has been engaged in repeated breaches of its charter and other unacceptable behavior. The APC has violated the laws, regulations and rules that govern the operation of charter schools. The Anchorage School District has repeatedly admonished the APC to take corrective action.”
The memo states the Academic Policy Committee members are incessantly fighting about the proper role of the school and they are interfering with the principal’s operation of the school.
This debate on the role of the Family Partnership Charter School has also resulted in the Association of Alaska School Boards ending its assistance to the charter school’s board.
The AASB also receives $8,600 from Anchorage taxpayers.
This appears to be a power play by the superintendent to control the curriculum, staff assignments, and overall operation of the Family Partnership School.
One reason for revocation of the school’s charter is one of the Academic Policy Committee members is also a teacher at the school. This person was allowed to evaluate the principal, which is a violation of district rules.
ASD Administrative Regulation AR 6181f states, “The charter school APC shall supervise the operation of the charter school and shall ensure the fulfillment of its mission.”
This district regulation seems to conflict with Alaska law. AS 14.03.255(a)(2) says, “The principal, not the APC, is in charge of operations of the school, including the decision to hire teachers and staff.”
This leads to ambiguity in who is responsible for the operation of the charter school.
There does seem to be some infighting with the Academic Policy Committee members, which has caused it to be somewhat dysfunctional. But this could be remedied; the charter does not need to be revoked.
The Family Partnership students perform much better than the average of district students. The proficiency percentages for all students in the district compared to the Family Partnership students:
School
English Language Arts
Math
Family Partnership
60%
40%
ASD
34%
27%
The results speak for themselves. Family Partnership Charter School is excelling in educating its students. Why would the district want to close an excellent school?
It appears as if the district may be filling its budget hole of $48 million, using the closure of the Family Partnership Charter School. If this charter school is closed, the district stands to gain about $2,000 dollars per enrolled student.
Currently, a family whose student is enrolled in FPCS gets about $4,000. When the FPCS charter is revoked and the school is turned into a correspondence school, that same family would only receive about $2,000. The district would gain another $2,000, while taking away some the best education being provided in the district.
The issue will come before the school board during Monday’s meeting, which starts at 6 pm at the Anchorage School District building at 5530 E. Northern Lights Blvd. Access the agenda at this link. Watch the meeting online here.
Anchorage homeowners pay a heavy price for living in Alaska’s largest city. Proposition 14, currently on the April 4 ballot, will hurt property owner’s bottom line even more.
The current average price of a single-family home in Anchorage is $456,000, a new high. The pricey cost of housing makes it virtually prohibitive for a young couple to settle in Anchorage and start a family.
Proposition 14, dubbed the “Care for Kids” initiative, will raise taxes on property owners another $6 million a year. That’s an extra $6 million transferred out of the anemic private sector and into an ever-ballooning city budget.
Prop 14 will move money collected from the marijuana tax, which passed by ballot initiative in 2016, out from under the tax cap, meaning the city will be able to tax property owners $6 million more before bumping up against the tax cap.
The Assembly just passed the largest city budget in history. Now they’ll have even more money to play with.
The language in the Prop 14 ballot conveniently — and deceptively — does not mention moving the marijuana tax out from under the tax cap. Voters will have no idea they are supporting millions in new taxes if they vote yes on Prop 14.
A widely distributed flyer promoting Prop 14 reads: “Proposition dedicates the existing marijuana tax revenue to fund child care and early education, and build a strong economy.”
The impression is voting yes on Prop 14 only redistributes funds. But it sweeps this tax out from under the tax cap and therefore allows the Assembly to raise taxes.
Anchorage property taxes are already high. Compare them to property taxes in all U.S. counties, and Anchorage homeowners pay more than people living in 3,040 others.
Anchorage property owners are so overburdened, the city’s property tax rate ranks 103rd highest among all 3,143 counties.
You won’t read that in the Anchorage Daily News.
Compare Anchorage property tax rates with similarly populated cities like Boise, Idaho, Aurora, Colorado, and Mesa, Arizona, and the over taxation becomes even more glaring. Anchorage homeowners’ yearly property tax bills are double of those living in those cities.
Anchorage property tax rates for a medium-priced home is higher than 42 of America’s largest cities. Only homeowners in the Democrat-run cities of Seattle, Chicago, Hartford, Austin, Boston, San Francisco, San Jose, and New York pay more in city property taxes than those living in Anchorage.
You won’t see that reported on KTUU.
Proposition 14 will not only soak homeowners, but it also means more bureaucracy, as the initiative creates an “Accountability Board of Child Care and Early Education.”
Many would argue now is not the time to transfer millions more out of the private sector into government, especially in Alaska’s largest city, a city that often drives the state’s economy.
Anchorage city leaders are always coming up with new ways to get around the tax cap.
Former Mayors Mark Begich and Ethan Berkowitz, both Democrats, successfully found end runs around the tax cap.
Now the insatiable government-centric types are using a ballot initiative to raise taxes in Anchorage with the pitch of doing it “all for children. “
They’re disguising the tax hike as a redistributing of funds. They do so with the cooperation and blessing of the liberal media.
Dan Fagan is a reporter for Must Read Alaska. Email [email protected].
Anchorage Assemblyman Felix Rivera, speaking to a reporter from the Anchorage Daily News, has raised the topic of gay porn for kids as a campaign issue. As he runs for a third term on the Assembly, he said on the record that a porn-pushing book for teens, which has raised a firestorm of parental pushback across the country, should not be removed from the teen section of the library by the Anchorage Library Board, which sent the illustration-rich book to the City Attorney for legal review.
Felix Rivera
The book, “Let’s Talk About It,” has instructions on how to have gay sex, random sex, how kids can and should send pictures of themselves as sexual content through their smart phone, and the finer points of anal sex, to name a few topics.
The book’s forward dedicates the material: “To whoever needs it, whatever your age,” but the book is targeted for teens, especially those reading-deficient teens with a need for graphic depictions rather than written words, and has been in the stacks of the Teen Underground section of the Loussac Library, which is restricted to 12- to 18-year-olds.
Rivera, who is on the April 4 ballot for reelection for a seat representing Midtown, said that removing the book for review is worrisome because “It makes me concerned, frankly, about the judgment of the members of the library advisory board and their motivations.”
Rivera said Anchorage has “officially joined in a much broader way, the culture wars that have ingrained the rest of the country,” when it comes to access for these types of books for children.
In addition to “Spicy Gato” (Rivera’s social media name), another openly gay member of the Assembly, Chris Constant of downtown, has also expressed his concerns about the book being subjected to adult review, and said he isn’t sure the vote to remove the book was proper because although it passed 3-2, there were two members not present at the meeting. Neither Rivera nor Constant have children; both are up for reelection in their districts.
Last month, the chair of the Anchorage School Board prevented Anchorage parent and activist Jay McDonald from reading aloud a passage from this same book during the public testimony portion of the meeting.
Some of the issues that parents have raised with the book include:
The book downplays sexually transmitted diseases, referring to them as “No big deal.” Many sexually transmitted infections can have life-long impacts on people, such as AIDS, HPV infection complications can include cancer and passing along the disease to an unborn child. A chlamydia infection can cause pelvic inflammatory disease, a painful infection that can destroy the female reproductive system.
Sexting. The audience for the book is not even at the age of consent, and there can be serious long-term consequences to sending photos of yourself in compromising sexual situations through the internet, as many adults have learned the hard way. The internet is forever, and your children, grandchildren, and parents may see these photos someday. They are often used for blackmail.
Kink. “If you think you might have a kink, look on the internet” is the advice the book is giving to 12-year-olds. The book wants children to learn more about kinky sex, some of which is dangerous and abusive. Exposing children to “kink” on the internet is an invitation them to end up abused or trafficked.
Porn. “Pay for your porn” is the exact wording the book gives to 12-year-olds, and these children could get lured into signing up for porn subscriptions they don’t realize they’ve agreed to. There are also laws in states about exposing porn to children, and this book does not validate those concerns or laws. Porn addiction is a well-documented problem in America. Recovery Village reports that one out of every 100 U.S. adults admit to having an internet porn addiction. Most people who have a porn addiction say that porn hurts their personal relationships, the nonprofit says.
Pregnancy. The book talks about sex as though it is risk free. It does not talk about the risk of becoming pregnant, nor does it talk about the female experience in puberty, including periods, and painful menstruation. One of the most profound and often difficult experiences for teen girls is their menstrual cycle, and the book completely ignores that experience.
The library has an extensive list of sex books for kids in the Teen Underground, and has a section for gay romance as well, which can be found at this link.
A committee hearing last week revealed how angry the public still is with the health care system’s patient isolation policies during the Covid pandemic, and how the health care system itself would probably do it all over again, if needed.
The House Health and Social Services Committee heard from Alaskans from across the state last week about the horrors of people dying alone during the Covid-19 pandemic, without a loved one to hold their hand. People told their stories of having been prohibited from being with their husbands, grandparents, and children as they died or were on the brink of death in hospitals during the pandemic, when hospitals enacted strict “no-visitor” rules.
Rita Trometter from North Pole describe how, several years ago, her adult-age son came down with a terminal medical condition.
“As parents, we promised him that he would never be alone,” she said. She, her husband, and friends would take turns being with him in the hospital.
“He was with persons he trusted and felt comfortable with 24-7,” Trometter told the committee. “Yes, I slept in his room, even when medical staff made it less than desirable. This is what we do for our family and especially our children.” Having her son not feel alone made all the surgeries, medical procedures, paperwork, and doctor interactions less stressful.
“No matter the age, your child is always your child,” she continued. “During the ‘plandemic,’ those options of making your child or loved ones and oneself feel secure disappeared. The result is that any future government control upon our lives for medical care will diminish the small amount of trust that is left in the field of medicine.”
Kristin Hills of Big Lake described how her grandmother in 2020 was diagnosed with a brain tumor and entered hospice care, “where she was held as a prisoner for five months. She would call home depressed and angry and scared and alone, and she wanted her family there with her … She had no one.” The family had always promised her she would not die alone, but their hands were tied.
The idea that isolating her grandmother would prevent her from getting Covid didn’t work, Hills said, because the staff brought the virus in and she was infected with it anyway.
“Family couldn’t kill her, but staff could kill her. My grandmother died with no one being able to go and sit with her … She ended up saying goodbye to her family on a Zoom call. She died in the night and we now live with pain knowing we could not give grandma her last wish — not dying alone.”
Hills also described how a family member who is mentally disabled, with the intellectual ability of a five-year-old, was diagnosed with Covid and ended up so dehydrated that he needed to be hospitalized. He was in MatSu Regional Hospital for six days without his family being able to be with him.
“I am appalled that we are even discussing in a free society whether or not we can sit with our loved ones when they are sick or when they are dying,” Hills said. “This is the exact same thing that happened in Nazi Germany and yet here we are allowing the same thing to happen in our country.”
Others called into the committee with similar stories of their loved ones dying alone in the hospital — and not necessarily dying from Covid but being kept in isolation from family due to the contagious disease that had caused hospitals to enact their strictest policies.
HB 52 is sponsored by Rep. Sarah Vance of Homer with cosponsors Rep. Kevin McCabe of Big Lake and Rep. Ben Carpenter of Nikiski. Vance brought a similar measure to the House in 2021, when she introduced it as an amendment into a telehealth bill during a special session. Her amendment was supported by the majority of the members. But then it got tangled in politics and the bill was tabled a the request of the hospital association.
Bernadette Wilson, state director of Americans for Prosperity Alaska, reminded the committee of Marvin Abbott, who spent a month camped on the lawn at Providence Alaska Medical Center, while his medically fragile daughter was alone in side in critical care for asthma. Several others from Anchorage joined the Kodiak man in his protest on the lawn of the no-visitor policy during the Covid pandemic.
But Rep. Zack Fields, a Democrat from Anchorage who appears to favor the hospital no-visitor policy, challenged Wilson by asking her why Americans for Prosperity was advocating for more regulations on hospitals. Wilson responded that AFP has always been pro-freedom and pro-family, and that she would be happy to sit down with him and go over the group’s priorities and how the group’s support for HB 52 fits within the concept of personal freedom.
Rep. Dan Saddler asked Jared Kosin, who runs the Alaska Hospital and Health Care Association trade group, if the hospitals intended to apologize to people who were torn from their families because of the no-visitor policies.
“You said there was no change in visitation policies, but there was implementation of existing policies that had rarely been implemented. In other words, this was not new policy, this was just extremities, which resulted in the denials of visitation,” said Rep. Saddler.
“Visitation had never been restricted to this degree, never, that we know of, in our lifetimes,” Kosin said over the phone to the committee. “And so pre-Covid and through covid, the written policies around visitation did not change. The policies and the way they were written were used accordingly, based on the situation.”
The policies contemplated clinical situations where visitation would need to be restricted, Kosin said. “It’s got to be reasonable judgment, it’s up to the clinical team, basically. What I’m saying is, those policies never changed during covid, those medical teams exercised those policies as written.”
Rep. Saddler was not quite satisfied.
“Mr. Kosin, I did hear a bit of a mea culpa in your comments. You said, you did acknowledge the horrific situations that came about, and I think I also hear you saying that should there be another pandemic of a high-infectious disease in the future, that the same policies that allowed the visitation limitations in the past would be applied in the future. So I’m going to offer you this opportunity. Is there any way that you think the health care industry might implement those policies differently should we have another pandemic?” Saddler asked Kosin.
“The problem is we’re all trying to predict what a future pandemic may be,” Kosin responded. “We have no idea what it will be. We have no idea if it’s something that’s going to target adolescents, we have no idea if it’s going to be something that goes back to The Plague in Medieval times.” The policy allows hospitals to deal with circumstances that are, as of now, unknown. There are situations that call for clinical judgment where visitor limitations “may be necessary,” he said.
Later in the hearing, Saddler tried again with Kosin, “Without exposing your association or any health care practitioner to liability, we seem to have a conflict here between humanity and epidemiology. Is there any way the health care industry might express an apology to the families of people whose loved ones died alone?
Kosin disagreed: “I’d be the first person to say we’re all sorry for anyone who has to experience a situation where you can’t have loved ones come and visit … But we’re all human beings, and we all went through something, and saw things in very different ways, and I guess I would have you pose your question to nurses, doctors, support staff who were at the hospital, who had friends die, who saw trauma … and ask them for the same apology.”
Kosin ended up dominating the hearing, and several Alaskans were not able to be heard.
Jennifer Kadake of Kake testified on behalf of people living in rural Southeast Alaska and had a non-Covid story that illustrated the problem from a different angle — that of informed consent and the need for patients to have their own advocates with them. She described how she was involved in a vehicle accident in which, while her wounds were severe, her vital signs were stable and she was coherent.
“If I had had the ability to have with me a support person of my choice during my medical treatment, a very painful experience that continues to actually give me nightmares, would have been absolutely avoided,” she said. “If I had the right to have a support person of my choice with me, my support person would have informed the medical providers that they were treating someone with a background in the medical field, trained to perform emergency medical intervention, like an intraosseous infusion, also known as an ‘I.O.'”
During her emergency treatment at her home village health center, the medical provider could not get intravenous access, resulting in the choice to proceed with the excruciating I.O. She said that because she had no support person with her, she was forcefully restrained by the local volunteer emergency care team and given the painful procedure, which involves gouging a needle into the bone until it reaches the marrow.
“If I had had the right to have a support person of my choice with me, my begging and screaming refusing the I.O. procedure would not have been ignored,” she said. The medical provider missed the first attempt and the painful procedure was reattempted. “That was about the time I passed out from pain.”
Kadake said that informed consent is not being practiced, and that patients need an advocate with them, if possible. She pointed out that for small communities like hers, patients are not told of their rights to a support person of their choice at rural emergency medical facilities, “much less information given to the patient of their patient rights at all.” She said the people in Alaska seeking medical treatment in any capacity have the right for support.
Others who testified in favor of HB 52 included Barbara Tyndall of North Pole, former Rep. Chris Tuck of Anchorage, Larisa Fonov of Wasilla, Kelli Toth of Chugiak, Alison Libby of Anchorage, Connie Graff of Anchorage, Peggy Rotan of Anchorage, and Evelyn Dutton of Anchorage.
Those kids who are feeling they might be gay but who want be heterosexual instead will have nowhere to turn to for help in Alaska, under a statute proposed by House Bill 43. The bill would ban a practice known by some as “conversion therapy,” in which therapists try to help people with gay proclivities pick a different direction for their lives.
Some forms of conversion therapy have appeared to be cruel and degrading, according to those who have undergone the therapy. It was described as generally unsuccessful by one man who sobbed as he testified by phone from New York City.
Rep. Sara Hannan of Juneau is the sponsor of HB 43; she presented it to the House Health and Social Services Committee last week.
Anchorage Assembly passed a similar “Don’t Say Straight” law, prohibiting licensed mental health practitioners and others from subjecting LGBTQ minors to what LGBTQ advocates say are harmful conversion “therapy” practices.
HB 43 specifically excludes therapies for those who want to change their gender outward appearance and take chemical hormones to grow attributes of the opposite gender, such as female breast tissue or male body hair.
“This subsection does not apply to counseling that provides support and assistance to an individual undergoing gender transition or counseling that provides acceptance, support, and understanding of an individual or facilitates an individual’s coping, social support, and identity exploration and development, including sexual orientation-neutral interventions to prevent or address unlawful conduct or unsafe sexual practices, or counseling that does not seek to change sexual orientation or gender identity,” the bill reads.
Further, it describes gender identity as an individual’s actual or perceived gender-related identity, appearance, mannerisms, or other gender-related characteristics without regard to the person’s designated sex at birth.”
HB 43 would prohibit physicians, physician assistants, psychiatrists, psychologists, psychological associates, and other “practitioners of the healing arts” licensed by the state from treating a person under the age of 18 or a vulnerable adult with a therapy or regimen that seeks to change their sexual orientation or gender identity.
From the description, this would have to include hormone therapy that is being given to children to block puberty, so they can have a “sex change” operation when they are of age, which is a variable standard across the country. But it does not include gender transition in the ban. It only bans therapy that is not entirely supportive of gay behaviors.
What would the difference between gender transition counseling and conversion therapy be?” asked Rep. Jesse Sumner of Rep. Hannan, whose aide, Hunter Meachum, answered the question:
“So the bill details what conversion therapy is and it also states what therapies are going to be acceptable … Conversion therapy is defined as a therapy or regimen that seeks to change the individuals’ sexual orientation or gender identity, including efforts to change behavior or gender expression, or reduce or eliminated sexual or romantic attraction or feelings towards a person of the same gender. This subsection does not apply to counseling that provides support and assistance to an individual undergoing gender transition or counseling that provides acceptance, support and understanding of an individual, or facilitates an individual’s coping, social support, and identity exploration and development.”
In other words, it’s only ok to counsel someone to undergo gender transition, not to counsel them against it.
Rep. Jesse Sumner then raised a sticky question of Hannan: “So if you’re not to have counseling that is supposed to affect somebody’s attraction or feelings towards a person of the same gender, but then in the second section you say you can change their gender, you’d have to also change the gender they’re attracted to, because they wouldn’t, your gender…you’re transitioned and you’re a new gender, right? And so you would no longer be attracted to somebody of the same gender if you were before? I mean, I guess I’m a little confused.”
He continued, “Is it the intent of the patient or…because I could also see issues with that because a child might be convinced to go along with a conversion therapy….I mean maybe I need to read this a few more times.”
Hannan answered as carefully as she could: The ban would be on attempting to say ‘you’re not,’….the vernacular of conversion therapy has been traditionally used primarily around kids coming out as gay versus kids transitioning….trans kids. This is not a bill, nor an attempt to restrict therapists who are supporting trans kids in, [stammer] who are supportive of trans kids. It’s only if it’s attempting to convert someone …yeah.”
The bottom line, it appears, is that only gender transitioning therapy is good for kids, while counseling them to not act on certain sexual impulses will be against the law if HB 43 passes.
A federal court in Florida recently ruled that a similar ordinance in Tampa is illegal because it is an abridgment of the First Amendment.
No president in history has been prosecuted after leaving office, but Former President Donald Trump says that is about to change.
He wrote on Truth Social, his social media platform, that he will be arrested on Tuesday over claims he paid former porn star Stormy Daniels to keep quiet about an alleged relationship between them. Six years ago, Trump’s lawyers were rumored to have paid Daniels to stay mum about the affair, and New York prosecutors considered charging him at the time. Now, he says the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office will arrest and charge him on Tuesday over these allegations.
“Now illegal leaks from a corrupt & highly political Manhattan district attorneys office, which has allowed new records to be set in violent crime & whose leader is funded by George Soros, indicate that, with no crime being able to be proven, & based on an old & fully debunked (by numerous other prosecutors!) fairytale, the far & away leading Republican candidate & former president of the United States of America, will be arrested on Tuesday of next week,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “Protest, take our nation back!”
Trump’s campaign also released another in many fundraising pitches he has made for his campaign over the past many weeks. He is using the pending possible arrest of himself as a message to supporters to pitch in.
“With the Deep State gunning for us like never before, President Trump is counting on your sustained support to DEFEND our movement from these never-ending witch hunts. Please make a contribution of any amount to help FIGHT BACK against the radical Left’s endless attacks, vile lies, and phony witch hunts – for 1,200% impact,” his fundraising pitch said.
A spokeswoman for District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s office told AP that the office “will decline to confirm or comment” any queries about Trump’s legal situation. Bragg is a Democrat and the position he holds is an elected office.
“This is what they do in communist countries,” Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene told the Washington Examiner on Saturday.
Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi wrote: “No matter what the Grand Jury decides, its consideration makes it clear: no one is above the law, not even a former President of the United States. The former president’s announcement this morning is reckless: doing so to keep himself in the news & foment unrest among his supporters. He cannot hide from his violations of the law, disrespect for our elections and incitements to violence. Rightfully, our legal system will decide how to hold him accountable.”
On Twitter, Elon Musk wrote: “If this happens, Trump will be re-elected in a landslide victory.”
