By Chip Brownlee
Alabama Political Reporter
Sen. Phil Williams, who has prefiled a “bathroom bill” known as the Alabama Privacy Act, believes it has been misinterpreted as requiring bathroom “police” to monitor users’ gender in every restroom in the State.
“One of the complete fabrications or misinterpretations about the bill is that it requires an attendant to be in the bathroom, checking people’s gender, giving them permission to use the facilities and so on,” Williams said in an exclusive interview with APR. “It requires there to be a staff person whose job it is to address the public concern. You will have to have that or you will face civil penalties.”
SB1, which will be debated in the upcoming 2017 Legislative Session, will only affect businesses that have outlined official transgender-friendly bathroom policies that allow anyone, irrespective of their gender, to use any restroom at any time, Williams said. Businesses and entities that have not outlined any official policies or entities that have single-stall gender-neutral restrooms won’t be affected, he said.
The bill states entities that have restrooms, bathrooms or changing facilities that are designed to be used by multiple individuals at once, “irrespective of their gender,” must have those restrooms “staffed by an attendant stationed at the door of each restroom to monitor the appropriate use of the restroom and answer any questions or concerns by users.”
The “attendant” can be anyone employed by the business who, in an officially designated role, handles any questions or concerns about the use of their transgender-friendly restrooms, Williams said. The staff person can be dual-headed, but must make sure the public has a place to go if there is an “incident” or any “deep-seated concern.”
Williams, a Republican from Rainbow City, said the concern could occur on either side of the ideological debate over transgender bathrooms.
Last year, North Carolina Republican lawmakers passed the first “bathroom bill,” igniting debate nationwide over which restrooms transgender individuals should use. The bill’s passage prompted a firestorm.
North Carolina’s House Bill 2, dubbed the Public Facilities Privacy and Security Act, is more clear-cut than Williams’ SB2, even though the two share similar names and similar purposes. HB2 states that transgender individuals must use the bathroom that corresponds with their biological sex as stated on their birth certificate when using public restrooms. Williams’ bill does not define gender and doesn’t regulate restrooms based on biological sex.
North Carolina’s bill inspired boycotts that cost taxpayers in the State millions of dollars in lost tax revenue and more from lost economic development. Later, it drew lawsuits from the US Department of Justice and prompted President Barack Obama’s administration to issue a fierce directive enjoining public schools to allow transgender access to restrooms. That directive has since been stalled by a Federal Court in Texas.
Since then, debate over the issue has done nothing but crescendo. Yesterday, several conservative legal groups filed amicus curiae briefs in G.G. v. Gloucester County School Board, a pending US Supreme Court case that will determine whether gender identity can be included in Federal sex discrimination law.
The aftermath of HB2’s failed implementation prompted Williams and Republicans across the nation to develop their own, more diluted forms of the bill. Williams’ bill accompanies others like it in states like Texas, Virginia and Kansas.
In Alabama, people have a right to privacy and security under State law, Williams said. Businesses like Target and Planet Fitness — businesses that have explicitly outlined official transgender-friendly bathroom policies — must make sure that they are addressing the concerns of every person, not just a certain group, Williams said.
“How do they enact those policies with a complete disregard for the vast majority of the citizens who use the same facilities, who have a right to privacy and security?” Williams said “They don’t even bother to address it. They just assume that everybody will step aside and take their lumps. My bill comes at it from that standpoint.”
Williams said his bill, which has been maligned by many as anti-LGBTQ, has been misinterpreted. According to him, it does not prohibit transgender people from using the restroom they choose, and, in fact, it gives them the same opportunity to have their concerns addressed if they have issues in a transgender-friendly restroom.
“It can be somebody who is straight who wants to know why their 3-year-old daughter saw a man with a dress and a beard in the women’s room,” he said. “Or, it might be, for that matter, someone who is a transgender who wants to know why they were just threatened by somebody, and they want to address it with somebody who is on staff at the store. … They better have somebody who is there to address it and not let the person leave the facility and feel like they weren’t cared for.”
Williams’ bill also does not address any criminal or civil recourse if someone were to encounter harassment or assault while using a transgender-friendly restroom.
“If an assault occurs, they’ve already got laws for that. If some type of coercion or other action on the part of the individual occurs, they’ve already got their own individual liability under the law for that as it is,” Williams said. “My bill deals with the actual entities that provide the facilities and holding them accountable to the general public and not just part of the public.”
LGBTQ activists believe Williams’ plan is yet another piece of legislation in a long line bills that have been proposed across the country in an attempt to limit transgender individuals’ rights. They say Republicans like Williams are attempting to remedy a problem that doesn’t exist.
The Human Rights Campaign, the country’s largest LGBTQ civil rights organization, plans to fight the bill in the legislative session coming up on Feb. 7.
“SB 1 is clearly motivated by anti-LGBTQ animus, and it contains some particularly insidious components that would make life demonstrably more difficult for transgender Alabamians,” said Eva Kendrick, state manager of HRC Alabama. “This bill, dubbed the ‘Alabama Privacy Act,’ appears to be a thinly-veiled attack on transgender people, and a proposed solution to a nonexistent problem. Transgender people value privacy just like everyone else, and we should closely scrutinize any attempt to limit the access of public facilities for anyone, regardless of gender identity.”
Kendrick and other activists within the LGBTQ community believe the bill would put Alabama even farther behind in terms of transgender equality — in a State that is already struggling to achieve even basic equality, according to a statewide report by the HRC Foundation.
“As we move into the next legislative session, pro-LGBTQ or pro-equality bills should be seen fairly and should be elevated to a place of dialogue and conversation because this is the time more than ever when LGBTQ Alabamians need protections put into place,” Kendrick said last week. “Not at the federal level, but in their own towns, cities and in their home state.”
Unlike North Carolina’s HB2, Williams’ bill does not preempt cities and other municipalities from passing their own ordinances governing transgender restrooms, but like HB2, SB1 does govern private businesses and could require dozens of businesses across the State to fork out extra money for new bathroom supervisors or public relations officials.
At the least, it could force employees to devote more time to calming concerns over their bathrooms. On top of that, the bill’s vague language could be interpreted to mean “bathroom police,” despite Williams’ assertions otherwise.
Even though Alabama Republicans have strong majorities in both the House and the Senate and a grip on the governor’s mansion until 2019, the fate of Williams’ bill could still be in flux. Although it could very well be on the track to passage, SB1 will surely face opposition from the small Democratic minority and even some Republicans in the State who fear the economic repercussions of passing such a bill.
Last year, Georgia Gov. Nathan Deal vetoed an anti-LGBT “religious freedom” bill passed by the Legislature of that State, fearing that cash-cow organizations like Disney and the NFL would fulfill their promises of leaving the State if the bill was signed into law. In North Carolina, lawmakers have been fighting over how to repeal their bathroom privacy act, not whether to repeal it.
Williams didn’t seem concerned, though. In our interview, he called out Target and Planet Fitness by name and promised to hold them accountable to his constituents, who he says have called him nonstop over the transgender bathroom issue. His bill, he said, is simply an attempt to assuage their concerns while protecting everyone’s rights and buffering the State from costly litigation that could follow a more hard-line piece of legislation.
“I get calls all the time about this bill or that bill while we’re in session,” Williams said. “There are only a few things that transcend the entire year. One of them is the increase people are seeing in their health insurance premiums. The other is this issue of transgender bathrooms. I have received a flurry of calls. That was the initial motivation that made me believe that this is something I should do.”
In response to individuals who say he is anti-transgender or anti-LGBTQ, Williams said they’re wrong.
“Am I a Christian conservative who believes in traditional values? Yes, I am,” Williams said. “Does my bill seek to just promote just that agenda? No, it doesn’t.”
House passes General Fund Budget
By Brandon Moseley
Alabama Political Reporter
The Alabama House of Representatives passed the state General Fund Budget on Tuesday.
The General Fund Budget for the 2019 fiscal year is Senate Bill 178. It is sponsored by Sen. Trip Pittman, R-Montrose. State Rep. Steve Clouse, R-Ozark, carried the budget on the House floor. Clouse chairs the House Ways and Means General Fund Committee.
Clouse said, “Last year we monetized the BP settlement money and held over $97 million to this year.”
Clouse said that the state is still trying to come up with a solution to the federal lawsuit over the state prisons. The Governor’s Office has made some progress after she took over from Gov. Robert Bentley. The supplemental we just passed added $30 million to prisons.
The budget adds $50 million to the Department of Corrections.
Clouse said that the budget increased the money for prisons by $55,680,000 and includes $4.8 million to buy the privately-owned prison facility in Perry County.
Clouse said that the budget raises funding for the judicial system and raises the appropriation for the Forensic Sciences to $11.7 million.
The House passed a committee substitute so the Senate is either going to have to concur with the changes made by the House or a conference committee will have to be appointed. Clouse told reporters that he hoped that it did not have to go to conference.
Clouse said that the budget had added $860,000 to hire more Juvenile Probation Officers. After talking to officials with the court system that was cut in half in the amendment. The amendment also includes some wording the arbiters in the court lawsuit think we need.
The state General Fund Budget, SB178, passed 98-1.
Both budgets have now passed the Alabama House of Representatives.
The 2019 fiscal year begins on Oct. 1, 2018.
In addition to the SGF, the House also passed a supplemental appropriation for the current 2018 budget year. SB175 is also sponsored by Pittman and was carried by Clouse on the floor of the House.
SB175 includes $30 million in additional 2018 money for the Department of Corrections. The Departmental Emergency Fund, the Examiners of Public Accounts, the Insurance Department and Forensic Sciences received additional money.
Clouse said, “We knew dealing with the federal lawsuit was going to be expensive. We are adding $80 million to the Department of Corrections.”
State Representative Johnny Mack Morrow, R-Red Bay, said that state Department of Forensics was cut from $14 million to $9 million. “Why are we adding money for DA and courts if we don’t have money for forensics to provide evidence? if there is any agency in law enforcement or the court system that should be funded it is Forensics.”
The supplemental 2018 appropriation passed 80 to 1.
The House also passed SB203. It was sponsored by Pittman and was carried in the House by State Rep. Ken Johnson, R-Moulton. It raises securities and registration fees for agents and investment advisors. It increases the filing fees for certain management investment companies. Johnson said that those fees had not been adjusted since 2009.
The House also passed SB176, which is an annual appropriation for the Coalition Against Domestic Violence. The bill requires that the agency have an operations plan, audited financial statement, and quarterly and end of year reports. SB176 is sponsored by Pittman and was carried on the House floor by State Rep. Elaine Beech, D-Chatham.
The House passed Senate Bill 185 which gives state employees a cost of living increase in the 2019 budget beginning on October 1. It was sponsored by Sen. Clyde Chambliss, R-Prattville and was being carried on the House floor by state Rep. Dimitri Polizos, R-Montgomery.
Polizos said that this was the first raise for non-education state employees in nine years. It is a 3 percent raise.
SB185 passed 101-0.
Senate Bill 215 gives retired state employees a one time bonus check. SB215 is sponsored by Senator Gerald Dial, R-Lineville, and was carried on the House floor by state Rep. Kerry Rich, R-Guntersville.
Rich said that retired employees will get a bonus $1 for every month that they worked for the state. For employees who retired with 25 years of service that will be a $300 one time bonus. A 20-year retiree would get $240 and a 35-year employee would get $420.
SB215 passed the House 87-0.
The House passed Senate Bill 231, which is the appropriation bill increase amount to the Emergency Forest Fire and Insect and Disease Fund. SB231 is sponsored by Sen. Steve Livingston, R-Scottsboro, and was carried on the House floor by state Rep. Kyle South, R-Fayette.
State Rep. Elaine Beech, D-Chathom, said, “Thank you for bringing this bill my district is full of trees and you never know when a forest fire will hit.
SB231 passed 87-2.
The state of Alabama is unique among the states in that most of the money is earmarked for specific purposes allowing the Legislature little year-to-year flexibility in moving funds around.
The SGF includes appropriations for the Alabama Medicaid Agency, the courts, the Alabama Law Enforcement Agency, the Alabama Department of Corrections, mental health, and most state agencies that are no education related. The Alabama Department of Transportation gets their funding mostly from state fuel taxes.
The Legislature also gives ALEA a portion of the gas taxes. K-12 education, the two year college system, and all the universities get their state support from the education trust fund (ETF) budget. There are also billions of dollars in revenue that are earmarked for a variety of purposes that does not show up in the SGF or ETF budgets.
Examples of that include the Public Service Commission, which collects utility taxes from the industries that it regulates. The PSC is supported entirely by its own revenue streams and contributes $13 million to the SGF. The Secretary of State’s Office is entirely funded by its corporate filing and other fees and gets no SGF appropriation.
Clouse warned reporters that part of the reason this budget had so much money was due to the BP oil spill settlement that provided money for the 2018 budget and $97 million for the 2019 budget. Clouse said they elected to make a $13 million repayment to the Alabama Trust fund that was not due until 2020 but that is all that was held over for 2020.
Clouse predicted that the Legislature will have to make some hard decisions about revenue in next year’s session.
Day Care bill delayed for second time on Senate floor, may be back Thursday
By Samuel Mattison
Alabama Political Reporter
The day care bill, which would license certain day care centers in Alabama, was once again delayed on the state Senate floor after one lawmaker requested more information.
Its brief appearance Tuesday ended with state Sen. Gerald Dial, R-Lineville, saying a compromise had not yet been worked out with the bill’s detractors.
Alabama’s Senate has been hesitant to act on the legislation because of complaints of state Sen. Shay Shelnutt, R-Trussville, who has been an opponent of the bill since its introduction last year. The bill’s delay on Tuesday marks the second time its been taken off the Senate’s agenda.
The bill has had a rocky time in this year’s session, but the bill’s sponsor state Rep. Pebblin Warren, D-Tuskegee, said she is still confident about its passage out of the Legislature.
Warren, D-Tuskegee, filed the bill this session with the support of influential lawmakers including Gov. Kay Ivey, who told reporters last year that she though all day cares should be licensed.
Mainly sparked by the death of 5-year-old boy in the care of a unlicensed day care worker, the bill had great momentum coming into this year’ session.
Despite the growing support from lawmakers, Religious groups had concerns that the bill would increase state-sponsored reach into religious day cares in churches and non-profit groups.
Spearheading the dissenters was Alabama Citizens Action Program, a conservative religious-based PAC.
Warren, proponents, and ALCAP announced a compromise to the bill while it was still in the Alabama House.
Announced by ALCAP originally, the new bill was a weaker version in that it did not require that all day cares in the state be regulated. Instead, religious-based day cares would only need to be registered if they received federal funds. At a Senate committee meeting in February, Warren said a similar requirement was about to come from federal law in Congress.
The bill moved through the House in a overwhelming vote in favor of the proposal and passed unanimously out of a Senate committee a few weeks ago.
Warren, speaking to reporters after its passage from the House, said she was unsure if the bill would encounter resistance in the upper chamber.
It was the Senate that killed the daycare bill last year amid a cramped last day where senators took the bill off the floor. The bill may face similar complications this year, as lawmakers seem to be preparing to adjourn within a few weeks.
Fantasy sports bill fails on Senate floor
By Samuel Mattison
Alabama Political Reporter
Would-be Fantasy Sports players in Alabama will have to wait to legally play in the state following a Senate vote on Tuesday.
The Alabama Senate decisively killed a bill to exempt fantasy sports from the state’s prohibition on gambling.
Not even entertaining a debate on the Senate floor, the proposal was killed during a vote for the Budget Isolation Resolution, which is usually a formality vote preluding a debate.
Fantasy sports are contests where participants select players from real teams to compete on fantasy teams using the real-world players’ stats.
Since 2016, the practice has been illegal in Alabama following a legal decision by the Attorney General’s Office that categorized it as gambling.
The bill’s sponsor, state Sen. Paul Sanford, R-Huntsville, predicted the bill’s failure during a committee meeting two weeks ago, where the bill passed unanimously.
- Sen. Paul Sanford speaks to reporters after a Senate Committee meeting on Feb. 28, 2018. (Samuel Mattison/APR)
Speaking to reporter’s after the committee meeting, Sanford said the decision to file the bill was mainly a philosophical belief that the practice shouldn’t be illegal.
Sanford, a fantasy sports player before its ban, said that fantasy sports are a way to bring people closer together and not a means to win money. The Huntsville senator is not seeking re-election.
The bill’s failure in the Senate follows its trajectory last year too. A similar version of the bill, also sponsored by Sanford, failed in the Senate during the final days of the 2017 Legislative Session.
Since Sanford is retiring, it is unclear if the bill will even come back next session, or if it will even have a Senate sponsor.
House OKs bill to clarify consulting contracts by state legislators
By Brandon Moseley
Alabama Political Reporter
Tuesday, the Alabama House of Representatives passed a bill to try to clarify how legislators accept consulting contracts under Alabama’s 2010 ethics law. Some pundits have suggested that House Bill 387 is actually designed to weaken the existing ethics law.
Sponsor state Rep. Rich Wingo, R-Tuscaloosa, argues that the legislation is merely a clarification and is intended to prevent legislators from inadvertently crossing the line into illegality.
Wingo said that his bill would require legislators to notify the Alabama Ethics Commission that they have entered into a consulting agreement in an area outside of their normal scope of work.
State Rep. Paul Beckman, R-Prattville, said, “I have never understood why members of this body were allowed to take contracts as consultants or counselors.”
Wingo said, “Never do I use the word counselor in my bill; it is consulting.”
Beckman asked, “Are we going to be getting into an area where every time we turn around we create a bureaucratic nightmare where we have to go get an opinion. These opinions whether it is orally or written don’t hold up in a court of law.” Beckman said, “We are serving the people here but we get this admonition that we can still be a consultant if we get an opinion.”
Wingo said, “This does not apply to professions where a member is currently licensed.”
Beckman said, “I would like to see more opinions coming out of the Ethics Commission. Right now we have the Ethics Commission competing with the Attorney General’s office over who has more authority.”
State Rep. John Rogers, D-Birmingham, said,”This happened to a friend of mine. He just got out of prison. He was a state senator and had a written letter from the Ethics Commission which his lawyer read at trial and the jury convicted him anyway.”
Rogers never named his friend, but reporters think he was talking about former state Sen. Edward Browning ‘E. B.’ McClain who spent over 22 years in the legislature until he was convicted on 47 counts of conspiracy, mail fraud, bribery, and money laundry in 2009.
A federal jury found that McClain and the Rev. Samuel Pettagrue were guilty in a scheme where McClain would secure public funds for Pettagrue’s community programs and then receive a kickback once the funds were in hand. McClain was sentenced to five years and ten months in prison. McClain was not prosecuted under the Alabama ethics law as the state has a much weaker ethics statute then. The current ethics law was passed in 2010.
Rogers said, “If they offer me a consulting contract for a field like aerospace engineering that I know nothing about they are trying to pay me off. If you can already be a consultant for something you know about why would you seek a consulting contract for something you don’t know about.
Rogers this is how they can pay you off for your vote.”
State Rep. Artis “A.J.” McCampbell said, “I don’t like making changes to things like this because we get into things called unintended consequences.”
McCampbell was reading from the bill and Wingo said, “You are reading from the original version it has completely changed.” “We worked tirelessly on this bill with the Ethics Commission this is not a fly by night bill.”
“If a member of the legislature enters into a contract to do a consulting contract outside of their normal field of work this bill requires that they consult with the Ethics Commission first,” Wingo said. “It is up to the member to notify the Ethics Commission not to the company or person offering them the money.”
State Representative Pebblin Warren, D-Tuskegee, said, “Everybody but legislators are allowed to do contract work up to $30,000.”
Rep. Wingo said, “This is not intended to be a roadblock.”
State Representative Arnold Mooney, R-Indian Springs, said, “The whole purpose of this is not to prevent members from doing work in your field.” “What you are doing is offering to protect me.”
State Representative John Knight, D-Montgomery, asked Wingo what the Alabama Attorney General said about this legislation.
Wingo replied, “I have not contacted the Attorney General.”
Knight responded, “Something from the Ethics Commission does not carry a lot of protection from the Attorney General. We have seen that in the past. I think the Attorney General and the Ethics Commission should be in agreement in the working on this.”
Wingo answered, “Maybe this is a first step.”
Rep. Laura Hall, D-Huntsville, asked, “Do we have anybody doing work outside of their regular scope of work?”
Wingo answered, “Yes I think so.”
Wingo said, “If we had had this bill four or five years ago maybe we could have been spared the embarrassment that this body experienced with the former Speaker.”
Wingo was referring to former Speaker of the House Mike Hubbard who was convicted of 12 counts of felony ethics violations in June 2016. Ironically, Hubbard is largely responsible for creating the ethics law that he was found guilty of violating 11 times in his relentless pursuit of outside contracts and personal wealth.
Unlike McClain, however, Hubbard has not yet served any of this sentence.
House Bill 387 passed 67-0 with 26 legislators abstaining.
The bill now moves to the Senate for its consideration.
(Original reporting by the Alabama Media Group’s Lisa Osborn in 2009 was consulted in this report.)