Three key Republican lawmakers on Wednesday said if a religious liberty bill moves forward, it must have anti-discrimination protections.
The comments came during a legislative panel discussion at the Georgia Hotel & Lodging Association’s annual meeting at the Westin Peachtree Plaza. All three, plus House Minority Whip Carolyn Hugley, D-Columbus, were asked whether they support Senate Bill 129, which the association fears would cause tourists and major conferences to steer clear of the state.
“If the House does pass it, I hope it includes that anti-discrimination clause to make sure we are protecting people’s religious freedoms but not using that as a shield,” Senate Majority Leader Bill Cowsert, R-Athens said.
Cowsert led an effort earlier this year to rewrite SB 129 in committee. The Senate Judiciary Committee passed a version that hewed more closely to federal language already on the books. Cowsert tried and failed, however, to add language to say the government could overrule a person’s religious beliefs to prevent child abuse or to protect individuals from discrimination.
Rep. Beth Beskin, R-Atlanta, on Tuesday also called for discrimination protections to be included, while Rep. Brett Harrell, R-Snellville, flatly said the bill should not come to the House floor for a vote.
The lawmakers’ comments further cloud the bill’s future. SB 129, sponsored by Sen. Josh McKoon, R-Columbus, passed the Senate earlier this year.
McKoon told The Atlanta Journal-Constitution that the views of the three GOP lawmakers are at odds with most of the Georgia Republican Party.
Since lawmakers adjourned April 2, McKoon said Republican conventions in 11 of 14 congressional districts adopted resolutions urging lawmakers to adopt SB 129 and that the state party unanimously endorsed it at its annual convention in May.
“It’s extraordinarily disappointing that Republican members of the General Assembly would ignore the clear and loud support all over the state for this measure in favor of siding with a narrow special-interest group,” McKoon said.
Late in this past legislative session, three Republicans, including Beskin, joined with Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee to add language making clear SB 129 cannot be used to discriminate against anyone. The bill’s opponents have feared the Senate version would allow businesses to refuse service to gays, lesbians or transgender customers.
The bill’s supporters, who say opponents’ fears are unfounded and that the anti-discrimination amendment “gutted” the bill, immediately tabled it and that’s where the proposal will be when lawmakers return to session in January.
“I’m hopeful the leaders in the House will see fit to leave it where it is and not move it forward this legislative session,” Hugley said.
Harrell, vice chairman of the Rules Committee, which decides which bills get a vote of the full House, agreed with Hugley.
“I don’t doubt for a moment the sincerity of the authors or those that support it,” he said. “I don’t doubt that the black and white words on the paper will do what supporters suggest.”
Still, he said, “I also would prefer it not come to the House floor for a vote.”
Beskin, said many of her constituents assume the bill is designed to allow discrimination.
“I’m not sure it is, but that’s the presumption,” she said.
But, once the anti-discrimination language was added to the bill, supporters fumed. If the bill isn’t designed to discriminate, “how can there be a problem with making that explicit in the bill?” she said.
Jeff Graham, executive director of Georgia Equality, which opposes SB 129 as passed by the Senate, saluted Cowsert, Harrell, Hugley and Beskin.
“It was heartening to hear Republican and Democratic leaders speak about the need for non-discrimination protections in any RFRA under consideration and understanding clearly the risks to the pro-business reputation of our state if we get it wrong,” he said.
About the Author
