September 2002 Print Edition Sightings:   

Cheryl Jacques Goofs When Responding to Lawsuit; Reminds Many of Bill Clinton's Questions about 'Is'

When Cheryl Jacques was questioned by the Associated Press about the lawsuit which charges she violated the state Constitution when she fought to keep voters from getting to vote on the Marriage Amendment, she didn't know what to say.

"I'm very confident that the Supreme Judicial Court will recognize that the Legislature in fact did act," she told A.P. "We did convene, we took up the matter, and we chose to adjourn."

But that's a little bit like Bill Clinton discussing the meaning of "is," says Sarah McVay Pawlick, President of Mass. Citizens for Marriage (MCM).

"The legislature did not 'act,'" says Pawlick. "And Cheryl Jacques was one of the main reasons that Tom Birmingham violated the state Constitution.

"They did not 'convene.' They immediately voted to adjourn and not convene because they were afraid to convene. Cheryl knew that if they did, the Amendment would pass as the people wished."

The brief that was filed with the lawsuit against Sen. Birmingham said that Jacques told him to violate the Constitution.

"Sen. Cheryl Jacques told Bay Windows that she was fighting to stop a vote from ever taking place in the Legislature," said Pawlick. "That means she was stopping the Constitutional process. She said, 'I'm fighting.to see that [the Marriage Amendment] never comes up for a vote. I'm happy to throw my body in front of the train to block this question.' She said that Birmingham's acting to stop the rule of law was 'heroic'."

Gov. Jane Swift is Required to Call the Legislature Back
The A.P. story about the lawsuit noted that MCM is reminding the state that Gov. Jane Swift is required to call the Legislature back into session to vote on the Amendment.

"This doesn't affect just us, but anyone who ever brings a constitutional amendment," Pawlick said. "The way this is right now, the whole system is broken."

The state Constitution requires the Governor to call the Legislature back into joint session if the legislators fail to take final action on an amendment before adjourning, Pawlick stated.

She said that Article 48, IV, §2 of the state Constitution says that if the Legislature fails to take "final action . upon all amendments pending, the Governor shall call such joint session."

Pawlick notes that the Constitution says the Governor "shall" call the Legislature back.

"When the Legislature never debated or voted on the Amendment but only adjourned without taking any action at all, it's pretty difficult for anyone to say that any 'action' was taken.

"This is certainly a repeat of the 'is' question that Bill Clinton had. Maybe some third grader can explain to Sen. Jacques how she broke the law and why the Legislature will be recalled for another vote as a result."

Pennsylvania Miners All Safe

We were all thrilled when the nine Pa. men come out of their coal mine alive. But the Boston Globe couldn't bear to remind us that the brave miners - and their rescuers were all men. Not a woman in the bunch.

The Globe kept referring to the men yesterday as "miners" over and over, not once using the word "men" to change the boring prose. They used the word "miners" in 19 of the 35 paragraphs, never once using "men" in any paragraph.

We all know that men and women are equally strong and necessary in any society, but only the extreme feminists believe the sexes are fungible and interchangeable. We all know that women don't belong in a mine, and the women also agree because you don't see any of them applying there. (There probably is one somewhere that someone will tell us about.)

It's just another example that men and women are different. They are not the same. And children do better when they have both - a mother and a father to raise them.

Solving a Boston Housing Crisis

Only in Boston would we solve the housing crisis by driving even more investors out of the business. But that's what the Globe wants to do.

It thinks we should bring back rent control which forces the investors to price their apartments below their costs. Will that help the crisis or worsen it? Will we see more people putting their money into building new apartments or will we see less of it?

It's almost as though the Globe wishes to stop all private ownership of buildings and have everyone in public housing. Is that what they really want? Is that how socialism will arrive?