Seed Newsvine
A bill that would have given school boards the authority to permit administrators and teachers to carry concealed weapons on the state's public school campuses was defeated in a Senate committee Monday.
SB 9 lost on a party-line, 3-2 vote.
Sen. John P. Morse, D-Colorado Springs, was quoted by the Colorado Springs Gazette as saying that the bill would not only be of no help in reducing violence, but contribute to the problem.
The sponsor of the measure, Republican Ted Harvey of Highlands Ranch, had said he believed the measure is needed so that those who work in schools can protect children and themselves.
The defeat of the measure does not mean that schoolkids, teachers, support employees, and administrators have no protection against a firearm-toting intruder intent on doing harm. Current law permits armed police officers to patrol public school buildings in Colorado.
The presence of an armed guard or other people with guns in a building attacked by a shooter is not a guarantee that no one would be hurt. Some advocates of eliminating laws that set up schools as gun-free areas argue that the presence of an armed security guard at Columbine High School during a mass shooting incident in April 1999 prevented the deaths of some individuals. However, thirteen people, including 12 children, died in that massacre despite his presence.
SB 9 was co-sponsored in the Senate by Scott Renfroe, R-Greeley, and in the House of Representatives by Rep. Lori Saine, R-Dacono.
Showing posts with label Scott Renfroe. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Scott Renfroe. Show all posts
Monday, January 28, 2013
Thursday, January 17, 2013
GOP bill attacks science education
A group of Republican legislators want less science and more religion in Colorado's public school and university science classrooms.
HB 13-1089 would require K-12 public school teachers to "respond appropriately and respectfully to differences of opinion about controversial issues."
Evolution, climate change, the chemistry involved in the origin of life, and human cloning are specifically mentioned in the bill, which was introduced Thursday.
Josh Rosenau, a spokesperson for the National Center for Science Education and a biologist, said that there is no scientific rationale for focusing on those four topics.
"To me, what really unites the four issues that are listed in these bills is simply that they are scientific topics that conservatives don't like," he said. "It's purely political."
As a legal matter, a measure that purports to allow teachers to teach that that humans and other species were created by a deity would be ineffective under a 1987 U.S. Supreme Court decision.
"The Court ruled pretty decisively and has, in a series of cases going back to the sixties, said that you can’t teach creationism," Rosenau said. "They have specifically talked about laws that single out evolution as inherently suspect. The only reason you’d single out evolution for special criticism and scrutiny is religious motivation. There’s no scientific basis for that singling out of evolution."
The bill includes language that purports to disavow any goal of introducing religious criticism of biology's most fundamental and well-documented concept.
But Rosenau thinks that, notwithstanding that verbiage, the measure would embolden creationist teachers and encourage parents to pressure schools to teach creationism and its ideological sidekick, intelligent design, in the science classroom.
"It’s certainly a dog whistle to creationist teachers and students that they have permission to launch into a creationist lesson," he said. " It would give ammunition to parents who want creationism taught in schools to put pressure on teachers to do so."
Rosenau pointed out that it can be hard to stop teachers from introducing religious notions into their science instruction.
"For that to come to court, that would require not only that teachers are doing these things, but that someone step forward and file a lawsuit," he said.
As for climate change, Rosenau points out that some evangelical Christians object to the current consensus of the world's climatologists because their religion teaches that only God could change the planet's atmosphere.
"They’ll say that the atmosphere is irreducibly complex, that the feedbacks are so carefully created that human intervention couldn’t change it," Rosenau said, referring to religion-motivated doubters of ongoing human-caused climate change.
Similar legislation was enacted in Tennessee in 2012 and in Louisiana in 2008. A number of major scientific organizations have criticized the laws, arguing that they open the door to dishonest claims in science classes that evolution and climate change are scientifically controversial and undermine state laws that determine academic content standards.
"By permitting instructional materials that are not reviewed by the state’s science standards committees, the Louisiana Act and those like it encourage teachers and administrators to work outside these standards," the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology said in a 2008 statement. "This makes it possible for local school boards to define science and science education to suit their own agendas, thereby compromising the quality of science education for students, and allowing religious discrimination in America’s public school science classrooms."
College professors have also objected to bills like HB 13-1089, arguing that they will inevitably lead to efforts to push religious notions in science classes.
"'[A]cademic freedom' for alternative theories is simply a mechanism to introduce religious or nonscientific doctrines into our science curriculum," said a group of more than 200 University of Iowa faculty members in a 2009 statement.
The language in the Colorado bill, like similar bills enacted into law in Tennessee and Louisiana and introduced in recent years in Alabama, Florida, Iowa, Maryland, Michigan, Missouri, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and South Carolina, is largely provided by the Discovery Institute, a Seattle-based organization that advocates the scientifically discredited idea of intelligent design and the bible-based myth that humans and other organisms on Earth were directly created by a deity.
HB 13-1089 has two major parts - one that focuses on K-12 science education and another that focuses on college-level science instruction.
The elementary and secondary school focus of the measure is labeled the "K-12 Academic Freedom Act" and would require school boards, administrators, and teachers to
Rosenau thinks this section might force teachers to grant credit for answers that have no scientific validity.
"What if a student stands up in class and says ‘you taught that life was created by this chemical process billions of years ago, and I think it was created 6,000 years ago?;" Rosenau postulated. "Then, what if the student says, 'That’s what I’m going to put on my test, and if you grade me wrong you’re interfering with my critical thinking?'."
The college and university section of the bill is similar.
The principal sponsors of HB 13-1089 are Rep. Stephen Humphrey, R-Windsor and Sen. Scott Renfroe, R-Greeley.
Co-sponsors include Reps. Perry Buck, R-Windsor; Justin Everett, R-Littleton; Chris Holbert, R-Parker; Janak Joshi, R-Colorado Springs; Dan Nordberg, R-Colorado Springs; Lori Saine, R-Dacono; and Jim Wilson, R-Salida, and Sens. Kevin Grantham, R-Canon City; Ted Harvey, R-Highlands Ranch; and Owen Hill, R-Colorado Springs.
HB 13-1089 would require K-12 public school teachers to "respond appropriately and respectfully to differences of opinion about controversial issues."
Evolution, climate change, the chemistry involved in the origin of life, and human cloning are specifically mentioned in the bill, which was introduced Thursday.
Josh Rosenau, a spokesperson for the National Center for Science Education and a biologist, said that there is no scientific rationale for focusing on those four topics.
"To me, what really unites the four issues that are listed in these bills is simply that they are scientific topics that conservatives don't like," he said. "It's purely political."
As a legal matter, a measure that purports to allow teachers to teach that that humans and other species were created by a deity would be ineffective under a 1987 U.S. Supreme Court decision.
"The Court ruled pretty decisively and has, in a series of cases going back to the sixties, said that you can’t teach creationism," Rosenau said. "They have specifically talked about laws that single out evolution as inherently suspect. The only reason you’d single out evolution for special criticism and scrutiny is religious motivation. There’s no scientific basis for that singling out of evolution."
The bill includes language that purports to disavow any goal of introducing religious criticism of biology's most fundamental and well-documented concept.
But Rosenau thinks that, notwithstanding that verbiage, the measure would embolden creationist teachers and encourage parents to pressure schools to teach creationism and its ideological sidekick, intelligent design, in the science classroom.
"It’s certainly a dog whistle to creationist teachers and students that they have permission to launch into a creationist lesson," he said. " It would give ammunition to parents who want creationism taught in schools to put pressure on teachers to do so."
Rosenau pointed out that it can be hard to stop teachers from introducing religious notions into their science instruction.
"For that to come to court, that would require not only that teachers are doing these things, but that someone step forward and file a lawsuit," he said.
As for climate change, Rosenau points out that some evangelical Christians object to the current consensus of the world's climatologists because their religion teaches that only God could change the planet's atmosphere.
"They’ll say that the atmosphere is irreducibly complex, that the feedbacks are so carefully created that human intervention couldn’t change it," Rosenau said, referring to religion-motivated doubters of ongoing human-caused climate change.
Similar legislation was enacted in Tennessee in 2012 and in Louisiana in 2008. A number of major scientific organizations have criticized the laws, arguing that they open the door to dishonest claims in science classes that evolution and climate change are scientifically controversial and undermine state laws that determine academic content standards.
"By permitting instructional materials that are not reviewed by the state’s science standards committees, the Louisiana Act and those like it encourage teachers and administrators to work outside these standards," the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology said in a 2008 statement. "This makes it possible for local school boards to define science and science education to suit their own agendas, thereby compromising the quality of science education for students, and allowing religious discrimination in America’s public school science classrooms."
College professors have also objected to bills like HB 13-1089, arguing that they will inevitably lead to efforts to push religious notions in science classes.
"'[A]cademic freedom' for alternative theories is simply a mechanism to introduce religious or nonscientific doctrines into our science curriculum," said a group of more than 200 University of Iowa faculty members in a 2009 statement.
The language in the Colorado bill, like similar bills enacted into law in Tennessee and Louisiana and introduced in recent years in Alabama, Florida, Iowa, Maryland, Michigan, Missouri, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and South Carolina, is largely provided by the Discovery Institute, a Seattle-based organization that advocates the scientifically discredited idea of intelligent design and the bible-based myth that humans and other organisms on Earth were directly created by a deity.
HB 13-1089 has two major parts - one that focuses on K-12 science education and another that focuses on college-level science instruction.
The elementary and secondary school focus of the measure is labeled the "K-12 Academic Freedom Act" and would require school boards, administrators, and teachers to
create an environment within public elementary and secondary schools that encourages students to explore scientific questions, learn about scientific evidence, develop critical thinking skills, and respond appropriately and respectfully to differences of opinion about controversial issues.To accomplish this goal, HB 13-1089 would require that teachers be allowed "to help students understand, analyze, critique, and review in an objective manner the scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses of existing scientific theories covered in a given course."
Rosenau thinks this section might force teachers to grant credit for answers that have no scientific validity.
"What if a student stands up in class and says ‘you taught that life was created by this chemical process billions of years ago, and I think it was created 6,000 years ago?;" Rosenau postulated. "Then, what if the student says, 'That’s what I’m going to put on my test, and if you grade me wrong you’re interfering with my critical thinking?'."
The college and university section of the bill is similar.
The principal sponsors of HB 13-1089 are Rep. Stephen Humphrey, R-Windsor and Sen. Scott Renfroe, R-Greeley.
Co-sponsors include Reps. Perry Buck, R-Windsor; Justin Everett, R-Littleton; Chris Holbert, R-Parker; Janak Joshi, R-Colorado Springs; Dan Nordberg, R-Colorado Springs; Lori Saine, R-Dacono; and Jim Wilson, R-Salida, and Sens. Kevin Grantham, R-Canon City; Ted Harvey, R-Highlands Ranch; and Owen Hill, R-Colorado Springs.
Friday, November 9, 2012
Morse elected Senate president after Democrats keep majority
The state senate will soon have a new president after an election in which the majority Democrats retained control of the chamber.
John Morse, a second-term senator from Colorado Springs who was first elected in 2006, beat fellow Democrat Pat Steadman, D-Denver, for the post in a caucus election held Thursday.
"The time for politics and elections is behind us," Morse said in a statement posted on the website of the senate majority caucus. "Governing is hard, and it takes pulling everyone together - everybody in your caucus, everyone in the building, everyone outside your building. Let's move this state forward."
Morse, a former Fountain police chief, will succeed Sen. Brandon Shaffer, D-Longmont. Shaffer is term-limited.
The president pro tempore will be Sen. Lucia Guzman, D-Denver.
Sen. Morgan Carroll, D-Aurora, will be majority leader. Other members of the majority leadership team in the senate will be Irene Aguilar, D-Denver, and Gail Schwartz, D-Snowmass.
Sen. Bill Cadman of Colorado Springs will be the minority leader. Sen. Mark Scheffel, R-Parker, will be the assistant minority leader, while Scott Renfroe of Greeley and Kevin Grantham of Canon City round out the GOP leadership team.
Democrats retained their 20-15 senate majority in Tuesday's election.
John Morse, a second-term senator from Colorado Springs who was first elected in 2006, beat fellow Democrat Pat Steadman, D-Denver, for the post in a caucus election held Thursday.
"The time for politics and elections is behind us," Morse said in a statement posted on the website of the senate majority caucus. "Governing is hard, and it takes pulling everyone together - everybody in your caucus, everyone in the building, everyone outside your building. Let's move this state forward."
Morse, a former Fountain police chief, will succeed Sen. Brandon Shaffer, D-Longmont. Shaffer is term-limited.
The president pro tempore will be Sen. Lucia Guzman, D-Denver.
Sen. Morgan Carroll, D-Aurora, will be majority leader. Other members of the majority leadership team in the senate will be Irene Aguilar, D-Denver, and Gail Schwartz, D-Snowmass.
Sen. Bill Cadman of Colorado Springs will be the minority leader. Sen. Mark Scheffel, R-Parker, will be the assistant minority leader, while Scott Renfroe of Greeley and Kevin Grantham of Canon City round out the GOP leadership team.
Democrats retained their 20-15 senate majority in Tuesday's election.
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Schultheis Stirs Controversy With Comments About AIDS Testing of In Utero Infants
A Republican senator's claim that pregnant women should not be provided HIV testing because those who suffer from AIDS must be punished for "sexual promiscuity" set off controversy at the capitol today.
The remarks by Sen. Dave Schultheis, R-Colorado Springs, marks the second time this week that a GOP legislator has shocked colleagues at the podium.
Sen. Scott Renfroe, R-Greeley, compared homosexuality to murder during a debate Monday on another measure that would require the state to allow its employees to designate same-sex domestic partners as beneficiaries under their health insurance policies.
"This stems from sexual promiscuity for the most part, and I just can't go there," Schultheis said on the Senate floor this morning. "We do things continually to remove the consequences of poor behavior, unacceptable behavior, quite frankly. I'm not convinced that part of the role of government should be to protect individuals from the negative consequences of their actions."
Schultheis' comments came during the Senate's discussion of SB 179, which would, among other things, require health care facilities to test all pregant women who do not opt out for the human immunodeficiency virus.
During an interview with the Rocky Mountain News later in the day Schultheis attempted to clarify his comments. He explained that families would learn to avoid "promiscuity" if an HIV-infected baby is born to a woman who has AIDS.
"What I'm hoping is that, yes, that person may have AIDS, have it seriously as a baby and when they grow up, but the mother will begin to feel guilt as a result of that," the veteran Colorado Springs legislator told the Rocky. "The family will see the negative consequences of that promiscuity and it may make a number of people over the coming years begin to realize that there are negative consequences and maybe they should adjust their behavior."
Sponsoring Sen. Lois Tochtrop, D-Thornton, pointed out during floor debate on the measure this morning that sexual intercourse is not the only way a woman can contract HIV.
Tochtrop also said that treatment of an infected mother can dramatically reduce the likelihood that HIV Is transferred to the developing fetus.
Tochtrop and House sponsor Rep. Sara Gagliardi, D-Arvada, are nurses.
Renfroe's comments came during a debate on a bill to require the state to permit its employees to designate domestic partners as beneficiaries under health insurance policies.
"Leviticus 18:22 says, 'You shall not lie with a man as one lies with a female. It is an abomination,'" Renfroe said during debate on SB 88. "Leviticus 20:13 says, 'If there is a man who lies with a male as though to lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act, and they shall surely be put to death.' We are taking sins and making them to be legally OK, and that is wrong. That is an abomination, according to scripture."
"And I'm not saying that this is the only sin that's out there," Renfroe said. "Obviously we have sin, we have murder, we have all sorts of sin. We have adultery, and we would never think to make murder legal."
The remarks by Sen. Dave Schultheis, R-Colorado Springs, marks the second time this week that a GOP legislator has shocked colleagues at the podium.
Sen. Scott Renfroe, R-Greeley, compared homosexuality to murder during a debate Monday on another measure that would require the state to allow its employees to designate same-sex domestic partners as beneficiaries under their health insurance policies.
"This stems from sexual promiscuity for the most part, and I just can't go there," Schultheis said on the Senate floor this morning. "We do things continually to remove the consequences of poor behavior, unacceptable behavior, quite frankly. I'm not convinced that part of the role of government should be to protect individuals from the negative consequences of their actions."
Schultheis' comments came during the Senate's discussion of SB 179, which would, among other things, require health care facilities to test all pregant women who do not opt out for the human immunodeficiency virus.
During an interview with the Rocky Mountain News later in the day Schultheis attempted to clarify his comments. He explained that families would learn to avoid "promiscuity" if an HIV-infected baby is born to a woman who has AIDS.
"What I'm hoping is that, yes, that person may have AIDS, have it seriously as a baby and when they grow up, but the mother will begin to feel guilt as a result of that," the veteran Colorado Springs legislator told the Rocky. "The family will see the negative consequences of that promiscuity and it may make a number of people over the coming years begin to realize that there are negative consequences and maybe they should adjust their behavior."
Sponsoring Sen. Lois Tochtrop, D-Thornton, pointed out during floor debate on the measure this morning that sexual intercourse is not the only way a woman can contract HIV.
Tochtrop also said that treatment of an infected mother can dramatically reduce the likelihood that HIV Is transferred to the developing fetus.
Tochtrop and House sponsor Rep. Sara Gagliardi, D-Arvada, are nurses.
Renfroe's comments came during a debate on a bill to require the state to permit its employees to designate domestic partners as beneficiaries under health insurance policies.
"Leviticus 18:22 says, 'You shall not lie with a man as one lies with a female. It is an abomination,'" Renfroe said during debate on SB 88. "Leviticus 20:13 says, 'If there is a man who lies with a male as though to lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act, and they shall surely be put to death.' We are taking sins and making them to be legally OK, and that is wrong. That is an abomination, according to scripture."
"And I'm not saying that this is the only sin that's out there," Renfroe said. "Obviously we have sin, we have murder, we have all sorts of sin. We have adultery, and we would never think to make murder legal."
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
GOP Plans Another Attempt to Require ID, Proof of Citizenship Before Voting
Statehouse Republicans will again attempt in the 2009 legislative session to convince the General Assembly to adopt bills requiring prospective voters to show identification and prove their U.S. citizenship.
One of the two anticipated measures, which were announced by the senate GOP communications office today, would force voters to show a photo identification issued by the state or federal government before being allowed to cast a ballot. The other would require submission of documents that are evidence of U.S. citizenship such as a birth certificate, certificate of naturalization, social security card, or passport.
“We have a responsibility as state lawmakers to protect the integrity of our elections,” Sen. Scott Renfroe, R-Greeley, and the expected sponsor of the photo ID bill, said. “People have an expectation that the voting process is secure and fair, these bills strive to meet those ends.”
Other Republicans intend to argue that the state's current election system poses too much risk of voting by persons who are not citizens of the United States, according to the release sent out by the senate GOP caucus.
El Paso County clerk and recorder Bob Balink has been a vocal advocate for legislation that would give clerks and recorders more ability to deny voter registration where citizenship cannot be proved to officials' satisfaction.
However, his aggressive stance on the issue has been attacked by Democrats, who argue that no evidence of widespread electoral participation by people who are not U.S. citizens has ever been found.
Sen.-elect Mark Scheffel, R-Parker, says he does not think the issue should be controversial at all.
"Only citizens are allowed to vote in Colorado--or anywhere else in the country, so it only makes sense that people wanting to participate in elections should have to prove their citizenship when registering to vote,” Scheffel said. “I don’t think that’s too much to ensure only citizens vote in our elections."
Similar measures were defeated in the General Assembly last year.
One of the two anticipated measures, which were announced by the senate GOP communications office today, would force voters to show a photo identification issued by the state or federal government before being allowed to cast a ballot. The other would require submission of documents that are evidence of U.S. citizenship such as a birth certificate, certificate of naturalization, social security card, or passport.
“We have a responsibility as state lawmakers to protect the integrity of our elections,” Sen. Scott Renfroe, R-Greeley, and the expected sponsor of the photo ID bill, said. “People have an expectation that the voting process is secure and fair, these bills strive to meet those ends.”
Other Republicans intend to argue that the state's current election system poses too much risk of voting by persons who are not citizens of the United States, according to the release sent out by the senate GOP caucus.
El Paso County clerk and recorder Bob Balink has been a vocal advocate for legislation that would give clerks and recorders more ability to deny voter registration where citizenship cannot be proved to officials' satisfaction.
However, his aggressive stance on the issue has been attacked by Democrats, who argue that no evidence of widespread electoral participation by people who are not U.S. citizens has ever been found.
Sen.-elect Mark Scheffel, R-Parker, says he does not think the issue should be controversial at all.
"Only citizens are allowed to vote in Colorado--or anywhere else in the country, so it only makes sense that people wanting to participate in elections should have to prove their citizenship when registering to vote,” Scheffel said. “I don’t think that’s too much to ensure only citizens vote in our elections."
Similar measures were defeated in the General Assembly last year.
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
House Passes Resolution Calling for all CO Children to Have Health Insurance Coverage by 2010
The House passed Wednesday a resolution establishing a goal of assuring access to health insurance coverage for all children in the state by 2010.
SJR 8, which had previously passed the Senate in slightly different form, is not law. It is simply an expression of the legislature's desire and of a goal.
Debate on the resolution was nevertheless lengthy and, at times, contentious.
Reps. Rosemary Marshall, D-Denver, and Kathleen Curry, D-Gunnison, eventually proposed an amendment changing the language of the resolution from words requiring the legislature to "pledge" universal coverage of children to the less demanding commitment only to try to do so.
That amendment passed with 51 "yes" votes, though it provoked opposition from a number of Democrats including speaker Andrew Romanoff, D-Denver, majority leader Alice Madden, D-Boulder, and Health & Human Services Committee chair Anne McGihon, D-Denver.
Rep. Douglas Bruce of Colorado Springs was the only GOP member of the House to oppose the amendment.
The amendment soothed the controversy, as 61 members of the House voted "yes" on adoption of the resolution after it was approved.
The naysayers were Republican Reps. Douglas Bruce and Kent Lambert of Colorado Springs and Kevin Lundberg of Berthoud.
The Senate had previously amended the resolution to make clear that the goal of universal coverage of children should not create disincentives for people to obtain private health insurance.
After that amendment was adopted unanimously in the Senate the resolution passed in that chamber on a 27-7 vote.
The Senate "no" votes on the resolution were cast by Republican Sens. Greg Brophy of Wray, Bill Cadman of Colorado Springs, Ted Harvey of Highlands Ranch, Mike Kopp of Littleton, Joshua Penry of Grand Junction, Scott Renfroe of Greeley and David Schultheis of Colorado Springs.
SJR 8, which had previously passed the Senate in slightly different form, is not law. It is simply an expression of the legislature's desire and of a goal.
Debate on the resolution was nevertheless lengthy and, at times, contentious.
Reps. Rosemary Marshall, D-Denver, and Kathleen Curry, D-Gunnison, eventually proposed an amendment changing the language of the resolution from words requiring the legislature to "pledge" universal coverage of children to the less demanding commitment only to try to do so.
That amendment passed with 51 "yes" votes, though it provoked opposition from a number of Democrats including speaker Andrew Romanoff, D-Denver, majority leader Alice Madden, D-Boulder, and Health & Human Services Committee chair Anne McGihon, D-Denver.
Rep. Douglas Bruce of Colorado Springs was the only GOP member of the House to oppose the amendment.
The amendment soothed the controversy, as 61 members of the House voted "yes" on adoption of the resolution after it was approved.
The naysayers were Republican Reps. Douglas Bruce and Kent Lambert of Colorado Springs and Kevin Lundberg of Berthoud.
The Senate had previously amended the resolution to make clear that the goal of universal coverage of children should not create disincentives for people to obtain private health insurance.
After that amendment was adopted unanimously in the Senate the resolution passed in that chamber on a 27-7 vote.
The Senate "no" votes on the resolution were cast by Republican Sens. Greg Brophy of Wray, Bill Cadman of Colorado Springs, Ted Harvey of Highlands Ranch, Mike Kopp of Littleton, Joshua Penry of Grand Junction, Scott Renfroe of Greeley and David Schultheis of Colorado Springs.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)