|
|---|
 |
Article 8 Alliance Explains What Happened Yesterday Article 8 Alliance – Massachusetts – ** June 16 SPECIAL Update ** Same-sex marriage in Massachusetts CAN be stopped. 1. Today we finally GOT the votes to win in the Rules Committee! 2. THE RULES COMMITTEE VOTED LATE TODAY!! More incredible sleaze! (But we're still alive!) 3. Just how sleazy was this? 4. HERE'S what you need to do NOW!
NEWS ITEM: [Monday evening – but coming to a school near you] Three hundred parents jammed the Burr Elementary School auditorium in Newton, MA, in an angry meeting with the principal and superintendent over the high-octane homosexual agenda in the school since the homosexual marriage ruling. Among the complaints: a second grade teacher invited his class to attend his wedding to another man; school-wide celebrations for gay marriage over the loudspeakers on May 17; increased books and lessons on homosexuality in all elementary grades. Even in radical left-wing Newton, which proudly embraces all "diversity", this was too much!
=== 1. Today we finally GOT the votes to win in the Rules Committee! ===
Everyone said it couldn't be done. But we did it.
The bill of address must get out of the Rules Committee, to get anywhere. The whole train is being held up by these few people.
There are 15 members of the House rules committee. This is a committee that never votes on anything. The chairman, Angelo Scaccia, just “feels the temperature” of things and decides whether a bill gets out or gets dumped. But this time (strangely enough) things are different. We were told that since one committee member, pro-gay House Majority Leader Salvatore DiMasi, demanded a vote, Scaccia would require an actual vote on this. And, to protect the "confidentiality" of its members, he had told us it would be a secret vote if it came up at all.
As we reported last week, we had seven solid votes, but we needed at least eight. The seven who had told us they would support us are: Angelo Scaccia, James Miceli, Bruce Ayers, Paul Frost, Edward Connolly, and Robert Correia.
Wednesday morning, we got a phone call from Rep. Elizabeth Poirier, who had been holding out. She said she had been getting, shall we say, a great deal of communication from citizens. So today, she wanted us to know that we could count on her, that she had just met with Scaccia to see how to get this bill moving!
Your efforts paid off! We had our eight votes!
We immediately called Scaccia's office and left a message: We had the eight votes. What should we do now? We kept calling, but still couldn't get anyone.
=== 2. The Rules Committee voted late today! More incredible sleaze! (But it's still alive!). ===
Finally, at 4:30 pm we called Scaccia's office again. His aide was there and told us that the rules committee had just begun meeting! Imagine that. The committee that never meets was holding a meeting. (No one we talked to could remember it happening before!)
Rep. Emile Goguen, the courageous sponsor of the bill of address, got wind of the meeting and decided to show up also. When he got there, Scaccia, the chairman, told Goguen that this was a private "executive session" and he'd have to leave. Goguen asked Scaccia if they would be discussing his bill, the bill of address. Scaccia said yes. Goguen said that they had no right to exclude anyone, particularly another rep. Scaccia ordered him out.
About 5:45 pm we got a call from Richard Rogers, Scaccia's chief of staff. He told us that the votes weren't there, so it wasn't getting out of committee (at least not now; that is, it's not dead, just still in limbo). We asked him who voted for it, and how many people were there. He wouldn't tell us.
After the meeting, Rep. Goguen ran into Rep. John Binienda, a committee member who had been in the meeting. Binienda told Goguen that the vote was a 7-7 tie, with one abstention. But he refused to say how anyone voted. Goguen also talked to Scaccia after the meeting. Scaccia refused to tell him anything. Corriea wouldn't tell him anything, either. In fact, nobody who was there wants to talk about it, said Goguen.
(One interesting fact is that at least two members, DiMasi and Speliotis (a "no" and a "yes"), had not been seen in the building all day. Yet we're told that all 15 members were at the meeting. Hmmm.)
Here's what we think really happened: Sleaze city. They got in the room, closed the doors, and decided that they really don't have the nerve – in an election year – to actually remove judges, and face the liberal media and seething gay lobby. But they don't want to face us, either, by voting it down – we know that. So they invented this fiction of a tie vote, with one abstention – and they agreed to keep the real details quiet. (Of course, this is just an intelligent guess.)
=== 3. Just how sleazy was this? ===
It's clear that our elected officials would much rather keep a rogue court in office, keep the public from reclaiming control of their government, and allow the homosexual activists free reign, than face any personal discomfort. What lengths will they go to? Let us count some of the ways:
1. Roadblocks. The bill of address was originally filed as a "resolution", which would let it avoid any committees and go straight to the floor. Mysteriously, it got changed to a "bill". What happened? The Clerk of the House can't even explain it. Even the sponsor, Rep. Goguen, was never told. 2. Confuse the issue. This has happened a lot. For example, one lady called and told us that committee member Rep. Lida Harkins told her that a bill of address can only be used if judges become "senile" or unable to perform their duties. Not true. The constitution talks about "an impartial interpretation of the laws, and administration of justice". 3. Secret meetings. Excuse me? Who ever heard of an official legislative
committee meeting in SECRET, and even kicking out another state representative??
It's not only illegal, but against the House's own set of rules: All meetings, including hearings and executive sessions, of House standing committees, and special committees of the House of Representatives, shall be open to the public and any person shall be permitted to attend any meeting except as otherwise provided by this rule. Areas for the media and the public may be specifically designated by the presiding officer. No quorum of a committee shall meet in private for the purpose of deciding on deliberating toward a decision on any matter except as provided by this rule. The exceptions, where House rules allow for private "executive session" meetings, are only for specific situations: Discussing personal matters about an individual. Hear complaints or charges against an individual or public officer. Discuss strategy regarding litigation. Discussing purchase or lease of property. Everything else must be open to the public. 4. No prior notice. The Rules Committee is not required to publish prior notification to the public about its meetings. But in this case, it didn't even notify other House members! Rep. Goguen only found out because he happened to sit next to one of the members, who mentioned it. It seems this meeting was called within hours its starting time. It would appear that they didn't want a lot of people to know about it. 5. Refusal to disclose how members vote. Votes by committees are required to be recorded and made public. Who ever heard of a committee not telling anyone which members attended, or how they voted? This group of "public servants" is willing to break not only its own rules, but the common rules of any democratic governing body in a free society. And this includes our so-called "friends" in the legislature!
=== 4. HERE'S what you need to do now! ===
First, ask yourself, is this really America we're talking about? Is this an elected legislature, or the Soviet Politburo? What's going on here?
Well, we have some basic questions that the people have a right to know: 1. Which of the rules committee members were at the meeting? 2. How did each one vote?
Since the chairman won't release any official records, it's up to the people to find out. Every one of these members need to hear from people across Massachusetts and America. We're not allowing our government to be run this way.
(They won't tell Rep. Goguen, the sponsor of the very bill they were voting on!)
Here's your assignment: Call every one of these committee members. Let them know what you think about their actions. More importantly, get them to tell you who was at this meeting, and how each person voted. Don't let them hide behind secrecy. Remind them that this is America, and soldiers are dying overseas for our right to a free government. Then get back to us and let us know what you find out (by return email, or phone – 781-899-4905.)
We'll compare all the answers. We'll find out how our "friends" treated us. And we'll publish the results for everyone to see.
It looks like this is the first step in getting our government back. Are you up for it?
(One thing – on Thursday, June 17, the legislature is closed. It's Bunker Hill Day. The rest of us work, of course, but government employees get a holiday. So you may need to reach them at home. Was the Battle of Bunker Hill fought for this???)
Let us know your results!
THEY SEEM TO THINK THEY CAN WEAR US DOWN. THAT WE'LL GIVE UP, AND JUST ACCEPT THE ILLEGITIMATE COURT DECISION, ALL THE SOCIAL UPHEAVAL IT CAUSES TO US AND OUR FAMILIES, IN MASSACHUSETTS AND ACROSS AMERICA. NOT THIS TIME!
AS WE’VE BEEN SAYING ALL ALONG – IT’S UP TO THE PEOPLE NOW! THIS CAN AND WILL BE WON. For More Information. please call us at Parents Rights Coalition / Article 8 Alliance at 781-899-4905 |
|
|
Archives | Letters | Bookshop |
