Transcript of June 15 Public Comments at GCEL

(taken before the vote)

Denotes commission action

Denotes public comment

The first few speakers are missing from this transcription…

Joan Gorner:  I viewed Mrs. Locke's tape, Precious Children, which was shown on PBS.  Mrs. Locke, you made stops at children's schools and orphanages.  A friend of mine also went on a People to People trip to China in the summer of 1995.  She also visited nurseries and kindergartens.  Oddly, her observations did not match yours.  This Bill of Rights shows where this Commission is headed.  Essentially, the document states that children have a right to: safe, warm, nurturing home and community, proper nutrition, unlimited love, a quality environment, access to health services, being taught a socially acceptable value system.  Now the questions.  Who defines the terms used in the B of R?  Who defines a socially acceptable value system, the parents or this commission?  What does the right to a safe home mean?  Who defines the terms?  How will the government guarantee the right to a healthy body?  Will McDonald's be outlawed?  What is unlimited love and who defines it?  [at that point she was not allowed to continue]

Sandy Elliot:  It is not the government's responsibility to tell parents how to raise their own children …

Julanne Burts:  A lot of people in Washington state have no idea what is going on in this commission.  This is not the government’s job, not the government's job to run day care centers.  People have no idea that the state wants to come in and take over.  That’s not the government's job to run day care centers.  I feel strongly about this issue.  It is pure communism, is what it is.

Katherine Reed:  Science predicts what reaction and energy will be produced by actions of entities upon the population.  I do not see any scientific justification for this Commission’s actions.  The Children’s Bill of Rights should not be ratified by the GCEL.  I respectfully request a copy of your final action to deny or ratify the Children’s Bill of Rights and your scientific justification for your decision.

Joan Monteith:  The government’s track record isn’t very good.  If you really want to help the children, you’ll let the parents keep more of their dollars by lowering taxes; you’ll give parents a tax credit so they can send their children to the school of their choice.  If you really want to help children, you will stop meddling where you don’t belong.  Another generation of children being sacrificed to government is not welcome!

Rachel Hawkridge:  You need to determine the appropriate role of state government in early education … [My] two children … understand there are consequences for their actions.  My husband and I have not had to make rules they have to follow because they understand there are consequences for their actions.  If you legislate responsibility, what is left except to abdicate their responsibility.

Stephen Whitson:  My big concern is money.  Any time the government delves into a project, even into a good project, strings are involved and it becomes apparent that this is not a good place for government to be involved.  Most parents know how to raise their children.  There is room for improvement.  We get this from churches and synagogues.  When we create a Bill of Rights for children, you take rights away from us, not give rights to us.

Cris Shardelman:  I’m here as a dissident to protest the Children’s Bill of Rights.  Looking through the Children’s Bill of Rights, I find multiple violations of the Constitution that the Legislature and Governor are charged to protect … I see repeated references mandatory language of parent’s rights that children must have, for instance, "children must fashion a quality environment by relying on appropriate personal, family, community and government agencies".  Thank you, no.  Parents have that right without that.  "Every child has a right to learn a socially acceptable value system".  This is a violation of the Washington State Constitution which says we have the right to our own beliefs and we shall never be molested in our person and our property because of our beliefs.  When we are being taxed for something like this, you are violating my rights, you are violating the rights of my children to have their constitutional rights.  I believe this taxation for this type of program must stop.

After some Commission discussion:

Cole:  We need an introductory phrase that the Children’s Bill of Rights to read voluntary.

Zukoski (executive director):  Everything else stays the same, we’re just adding to the Preamble, right under the title, the introductory sentence.

Cole:  We are simply trying to create discussion on responsibility.

Rep. Kessler:  Children are coming into the system damaged.

Rep.Talcott:  It will be perceived by the Legislature as the work of the commission and it will be perceived as the direction that the legislature will take in 2000.

?:  We have been working without pay at great expense.  Our goal is public awareness.

Oki:  Early learning, optimizing kid’s potential.  The intent is to validate that this is a significant issue.

Cole:  Public must not misunderstand that the Children’s Bill of Rights is a small part.  Don’t divert attention … very clear … its very clear it’s voluntary taking a vow …

Representative Kessler:  We should take the shall(s) out.  When we use the word shall, we have to back up our shall.

Oki:  This is not legislation!

Senator Deccio:  This is not legislation, but in reality it will be legislation.  I don't believe in socialized medicine.  It also talks about mandatory agencies.  This is perfectly clear that that's what it is to the four of us.  We're going to have to go forward with what we have here today.

Zukoski:  We're looking for 2/3 or 60%.  The motion is to "strike must and shall and replace with should."

Everyone voted for it as well as the "voluntary" statement.  The two Republican Commission members, Representative Gigi Talcott and Senator Decca, abstained from the vote that passed the actual bill.  It looked like 12 out of the 15 members voted for it.  A roll call on the vote was not taken.

Oki:  (just before leaving the meeting) This document puts parents on notice.

The committee continued on to discuss parent education and support.

Zukoski:  "We need to clearly define what exactly is meant by parent education and support."

They divided up into groups.  Julanne Burts and Marda Kirkwood tried to join them at the tables and they were told that they needed to sit in the audience.  Public Comment continued after their discussion:

{*} Marda Kirkwood:  Parents who qualify to breed, but don't qualify to raise their children.  I would like to put the Commission on notice that this is socially unacceptable.  It shows a profound disrespect for the citizens of this state.  We are tired of hearing the tired old stories about the small minority of parents out there.  We know they exist … they've exited for time immemorial … they will continue to exist regardless of the work of this commission or any laws that might be passed, because its human nature.  We have laws against child abuse, we have a justice system that is suppose to take care of that.  It does not give this commission or the government, the state of Washington or a self appointed group of experts the right to tell the rest of us how we can raise our own children.  I would like to leave you with this thought.  It is clear that we are on very opposite ends of the political spectrum … what would you think if I was in charge of defining for you and your children what constituted an acceptable value system.  I don't think you'd like it any better than I like you telling me what constitutes an acceptable value system.

Cris S:  I notice that Marty Isler explained "that they issued a request to 80 neighborhoods (went to all agencies) for a neighborhood plan.  They asked these neighborhoods to get together and survey parents and kids and find out what they would want."  I have never heard the neighborhood described as an agency.  I think there is a problem when you have the agency leading.

Response from a facilitator:  This was describing the way it was done in Pennsylvania.  They didn't mean to characterize the neighborhood as an agency.

Cris S. continues:  We have legislators here on tax payer dollars.  They can be out voted since they can be outvoted.  Are they then representing us or what happens to us.  You are spending tax money.  You are actually setting policy … something that belongs to the legislature as our elected representatives.  I think there may be a violation of the constitution here.

Representative Kessler:  "I have not accepted one penny.  I have not been compensated.  I travel from Grace Harbor County and am not getting compensation.  I am representing my caucus, not my district.

Cris S.: continues:  Money is being expended in certain ways; and since you can be out voted, you are essentially giving up your power.

Rep. Kessler response:  I am sitting as a volunteer.  I am not sitting as a legislator.

Cris S:  That is not the Constitutional way.

Sandy E.:  The 1-800 # is a good idea, and it's not expensive. … The reason you sit here today is because the judicial people, DSHS and agencies are not doing their job.  The agencies of this state are not doing their job.  I recommend that you hold these agencies accountable to what the law has authorized them to do.  What you can do is hold these agencies accountable.  Our time and labors can be better spent in more productive ways to reduce the impact on families.  Allow us all to go home.  You go home, take care of your families, allow us to take care of our families.

Jean Hueston (Democrat activist from Des Moines):  I would have signed up to speak, but I didn't know there were so many here with another point of view … There might be something in the "Bill" that keeps the government from making barriers and regulations that get in the way of families.  This should be all about supporting families.  That is all the time there is for another point of view.

{*} Arthur Hu:  I am Gary Locke's evil twin.  I'm told I look a lot like him.  I am a parent hoping to run for SPI in the year 2000.  What you're doing here is not representative government.  It is Total Quality Management.  It's basically a sell through of an idea that somebody's trying to sell.  It is not participatory and that is dangerous.  I see brain research, [this] brain research is nonsense.  Mona, I saw you on KCTS channel 9 "China's Precious Children."  The one thing that was not brought out about the wonderful Chinese one child policy was the wonderful orphanages and a) we do not have orphanages b) all the people in the orphanages are girls [girls and handicapped children] the Chinese actually … discard [girls].  I don't want to think we are going to emulate some of these policies.

Rachel H.:  In the Washington Constitution, Article I, Section II states "…no public money or property shall be appropriated for or applied to any religious worship, exercise of instruction or support of any religious establishment."  One of your groups here was discussing the possibility of funneling money to churches for day care and parent education.  Funneling money to churches is patently unconstitutional.

Commission response:  I think that was taken out of context.

Carol Miller:  I think that was not taken out of context.  The discussion at this table here was about creating foundations that would be used to provide money to churches.  You have take money being spent here, not everybody here is a volunteer. … This is centralized planning. … Centralized planning does not work as well as individuals working themselves.  I support a free market … I do not support money that's been taken from me for centralized planning by you even if it's for the children, especially if its for the children.  Private agencies work better without Government competition.

Lloyd Gardner:  The same thing will happen here as happened in Federal Way with the new report card system.  The report card was to make everything understandable to the parents.  A year and a half ago I objected because I didn't think it communicated with the parents.  [Then they started using the new card] in the last two months, all hell has broken loose.  At the time the district decided to change the card, no one understood it and therefore didn't complain.  They [the parents] waited until it came upon them and then all hell broke loose.  The same thing will happen here.

At this point, Channel 4 shut their cameras down and many of us followed them out of the room at Carol Miller's urging.  They interviewed Sonny Van Gelder who did a terrific job.  He is a DJ and is confident in front of a microphone, but channel 4 didn't use any of it including the testimony that they filmed.

________________________

*These two were not mentioned as speaking in opposition to the "Bill" in the Commission's June Minutes.

Transcribed by Sharon Oldfield from tape videoed by Michelle McKee.