The South is such a strange, nuanced place. Which means your state Capitol can be a curious and contrarian haunt as well.
One week, the dominant topic within its walls is a white Republican lawmaker who wants Martin Luther King Jr. Drive in Atlanta restored to its previous name, owned by a Confederate general. Who describes the Ku Klux Klan as a group of strict guidance counselors tasked with keeping society on the straight-and-narrow.
The very next week – this one, in fact — another white Republican lawmaker argued for his bill to prohibit discrimination at restaurants, hotels, and other profit-making entities doing business with the public. House Bill 849 mirrors federal legislation that Congress approved five decades ago. During their long reign, Georgia Democrats never got around to a state version.
That same white Republican lawmaker has now introduced additional legislation that, one could argue, makes far more difference to African-Americans than a retired school teacher’s skewed view of Southern history.
HB 941 would curb the unique legal privileges Georgia gives law enforcement officers who face indictment for killing or doing bodily harm during an arrest. The measure follows an Atlanta Journal-Constitution investigation that found that, of 184 fatal police shooting cases since 2010, none resulted in the prosecution of the officer.
We could call these two bills enlightened, even progressive. But we appreciate that state Rep. Rich Golick, R-Smyrna, identifies himself as a rock-ribbed conservative, and we would rather not do him any harm. So we will merely accuse him of being reasonable and hope that he can live with that libel.
Golick is proof that, even as a presidential season drives us into separate and far-flung corners, necessary work can get done with partners from the other side. His grand jury bill bears the signature of House Minority Leader Stacey Abrams, D-Atlanta. His bill to bar discrimination in public accommodations carries the name of state Rep. Karla Drenner, D-Avondale Estates. For many years, Drenner was the only openly gay lawmaker in the Legislature.
In an interview Wednesday, Golick insisted his bills have nothing to do with ideology.
His grand jury bill addresses the fact that Georgia is the only state that allows an accused law enforcement officer to sit in on grand jury testimony – and then address that grand jury without answering any questions.
”Any time you see that our state is the only state in the country that takes a particular approach on anything, you’ve got a responsibility to take a giant step back. It warrants a look,” Golick said.
Last year, a Cobb County grand jury declined to indict a Smyrna police officer who shot and killed a man in the back, as he was driving away. The officer said he fired at the man to protect a colleague. The incident occurred in Golick’s House district, but the lawmaker said he had no quarrel with the decision not to pursue charges.
Golick said it was his chairmanship of the House committee that oversees criminal legislation that required him to enter this particular fray – as a “facilitator” between prosecutors, who wanted changes to the current system, and law enforcement officers, who fear a public that doesn’t appreciate the risks they take on a daily basis.
Golick said there was some talk of barring officers from grand jury probes – as all other targets of investigation are. “We utterly reject that. Because what that says is that police officers are basically like everybody else,” Golick said. “The fact of the matter is, police officers are not like everybody else. They're agents of the state. They do have a special role in our society.”
HB 941 would bar accused officers from hearing witness testimony, which now might allow them to “tailor” their own statements. And if they do choose to address a grand jury, they would be subject to cross-examination.
Abrams called the bill “a very reasonable and practical compromise” that addresses critical suspicions that have been raised about policing.
Whether intended or not, Golick’s bill to bar discrimination by businesses that engage in commerce with the public also opens up a sensitive subject. The Smyrna legislator insists that HB 849 was drafted without any notion of impacting the debate over several “religious liberty” bills now before the Legislature – at least one of which would allow businesses to cite religious beliefs for refusing service to same-sex couples.
“It has nothing to do with that,” said Golick, who traced his interest in the topic to 2001, when he drafted legislation to prevent insurance companies from charging black policyholders higher rates than white ones.
Golick pointed out that he has endorsed one of the "religious liberty" bills, HB 837, authored by state Rep. Ed Setzler, R-Acworth.
Golick’s bill would forbid discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion or national origin. Nonetheless, the lawmaker couldn’t have been surprised when this week, in a House subcommittee and then a full committee hearing, LGBT advocates attempted to modify the legislation to bar discrimination based on, among other things, sexual orientation or gender identity. (The attempts failed, but “sex” was added to the list of protected classes.)
Let us accept Golick’s explanation that his sole motive behind HB 849 is to plug an ancient hole in the Georgia code. But others might have different motives for their support. If a “religious liberty” bill passes this year, and Georgia is subjected to the commercial boycotts that the state’s business community fears, then HB 849 might become mitigating evidence.
Even if no such bill passes, then HB 849 could become the legislative platform that gay and lesbian activists use to pursue their cause in future sessions of the Legislature. Golick is open to the discussion. Quiet, reasoned discussion.
“Sometimes you have to close off the rest of the world around here. And that’s actually a good thing,” he said. “It’s important to not be affected by external noise. You have to block out the inflammatory rhetoric on both sides. Because at the end of day, we’re left with the words on paper. We’re not left with the rhetoric, we’re not left with sensationalism. We’re left with the law.”
About the Author
