Chairman John Tippets
R-District 32, Bennington
(against):
Although he believes that "all people deserve equal and fair protection under
the law," he doesn't support adding groups to the Malicious Harassment Law because,
he asks, "where do you stop?"
Vice Chairman Bill Deal
R-District 12, Nampa
(for):
He believes in "freedom from fear" and that nobody in Idaho should have to be
fearful. Would like more broad legislation to encompass everybody. Deal believes that
passing the bill would have been "a beginning to put us on the right track"
towards overcoming Idaho's reputation for intolerance.
Jeff Altus
R-District 3, Hayden
(against):
He opposes all hate crimes legislation. Thinks that homosexuality is a choice and that
one should not receive extra protections for the risks that they choose. Altus also
believes that homosexuals are more worthy of punishment than heroine addicts (he supported
this list with a list of percentages of diseases that affect homosexuals). He doesn't believe
that Idaho's image will be hurt by the failure to pass HB36, because he thinks Idaho is known
more as a "racist state than a homosexual-hating state."
David Callister
R-District 17, Boise
(against):
He likes hate crimes legislation, but doesn't like how it singles out certain groups of people.
He hopes that Idaho is not getting an undesired reputation. Callister believes that the solution
starts with the elimination of "group names" from the bill.
Margaret Henbest
D-District 16, Boise
(for):
She felt that gays and lesbians are a highly targeted group and needed this protection.
Henbest agrees with Hewlett Packard that Idaho's image is being negatively affected.
Twila Hornbeck
R-District 8, Grangeville
(against):
She doesn't think that the defeat of HB36 will negatively affect Idaho's image.
Hornbeck says "talk to people who live here, nobody is being harassed. The law is doing fine."
Wendy Jacquet
D-District 21, Ketchum
(for):
Unavailable for comment
June Judd
D-District 7, St. Maries
(for):
She felt that the abuse that homosexuals have received in Idaho was clearly
apparent and could not be denied. Judd would prefer a bill that included all groups.
Paul Kjellander
R-District 15, Boise
(against):
He felt that sexual orientation may be added to the bill later on. Kjellander doesn't
believe that the defeat of HB36 will hurt Idaho's ability to attract talented people,
because people will look at the cost of living and the availability of jobs, not
"the Idaho Code"
Kent Kunz
R-District 34, Pocatello
(against):
Unavailable for comment
Tom Loertscher
R-District 30, Iona
(against):
He doesn't support hate crimes legislation because he thinks "all crimes are hate
crimes." He also believes that the current law already protects the harassment of gays and
lesbians so there is no need to put it into law again. Loertscher thinks people will
continue to come to Idaho because they want to live here, not because of our laws. He thinks
our taxing laws would be a far greater threat.
|
John Campbell
R-District 1, Sandpoint
(against):
In an interview in the Spokesman Review, Campbell said ". . . the argument that
the bill will protect heterosexuals being mistakenly harassed is weak. He said 'you can tell'
when someone is homosexual - they have 'pierced ears and affect a certain persona'"
Lawrence Denney
R-District 9, Midvale
(against):
He believes all categories should be eliminated from the law, and asked if sexual orientation was
added to the law, then where do you draw the line with other special groups? Denney does not
think that Idaho's image is being hurt.
Julie Ellsworth
R-District 13, Boise
(against):
She felt that the definiation of sexual orientation was far too broad and could be argued in
too many ways. However Ellsworth also felt that the defeat of HB36 would affect the perception of Idaho.
Debbie Field
R-District 13, Boise
(for):
She wants everyone to be included in malicious harassment legislation. Field believes that
voting for HB36 would allow for more equality of harassed citizens and said "that if the
current law isn't protection their rights, then it needs to." She also stated that
"everybody should be able to walk the streets free from fear, regardless of my personal
opinion." She would prefer a bill without reference to groups and with increased penalties
for malicious harassment.
Shirley McKague
R-District 14, Meridian
(against):
She believes that HB36 is "not necessary to start with" and she does not "think
that it is valid." McKague points to population growth as proof that the defeat of HB36
won't affect Idaho's image.
Bert Stevenson
R-District 24, Rupert
(against):
He believes that homosexuals already have equal protection. Stevenson doesn't believe that
Idaho's image is being negatively affected.
Jim Stoicheff
D-District 1, Sandpoint
(for):
He believes that the current hate crimes bill does not go far enough, because it excludes
homosexuals. Stoicheff thinks that the defeat of HB36 will strengthen the belief that Idaho
is an unsafe place for people who are different.
Ruby Stone
R-District 17, Boise
(for):
She disagrees with the homosexual "lifestyle" but thinks homosexuals should still
be protected from hate crimes. Believes that the bill should have a broader definition, so
that it protects everyone. Stone is bothered by the fact that some people believe that Hewlett
Packard should leave Idaho if they aren't happy with our image. She hopes that this issues comes
back again next year.
Cameron Wheeler
R-District 28, Ririe
(against):
He doesn't believe in adding groups to the law. Wheeler also doesn't believe that Idaho has a
hard time attracting talented workers, because we are the fifth fastest growing state in the nation.
Stanley Williams
R-District 31, Pingree
(against):
Unavailable for comment
|
