Mark Olson, disgraced representative from House District 16B, has a letter to the editor in the Sherburne Citizen this week. The crux of the letter is to inform local citizens of happenings at the Capitol. While it is laudable to keep people informed, when you read the letter you get the sense that Mr. Olson only concerns himself with the most extreme politics and ignores the boring but important governance that happens in the Capital.
From the Sherburne Citizen:
TO THE EDITOR:
The following are just a few highlights covering the period since March 13.
Last Friday marked the final committee deadline with just 25 legislative days remaining in the last regular session of this biennium.
First, in the House Local Government Committee an amendment was introduced to HF1097 which authorized local units of government to recognize same-sex partnerships when providing insurance benefits to their employees. The bill also broadens the definition of dependent to include any child unmarried under 25. It passed on a vote of 8 to 5.
The bill has now received its second reading in the House and Senate.
First, let me express how truly SHOCKED I am that employees of our local units of government might be homosexual and that they might want to have the same insurance benefits as their straight counterparts! HOW DARE THEY!
This is precisely the type of politics that keeps discrimination alive and well. It is not as though people are given rights of marriage. No, Mr. Olson cannot even handle giving gay couples the right to the same insurance provided to straight couples. In writing this letter his only purpose is to fan the flames of religious bigotry in the Bible belt so that the masses will rise up and smack down those uppity gay people yet again.
This is precisely the type of politics that keeps discrimination alive and well. It is not as though people are given rights of marriage. No, Mr. Olson cannot even handle giving gay couples the right to the same insurance provided to straight couples. In writing this letter his only purpose is to fan the flames of religious bigotry in the Bible belt so that the masses will rise up and smack down those uppity gay people yet again.
By the by, here is the exact wording of HF 1097:
A bill for an act
1.2relating to local government; modifying the definition of "dependent" for
1.3purposes of group benefits for local government officers and employees;
1.4amending Minnesota Statutes 2006, section 471.61, subdivision 1a.
1.5BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA:
1.6 Section 1. Minnesota Statutes 2006, section 471.61, subdivision 1a, is amended to read:
1.7 Subd. 1a. Dependents. Notwithstanding the provisions of Minnesota Statutes 1969,
1.8section471.61 , as amended by Laws 1971, chapter 451, section 1, the word "dependents"
1.9as used therein shall mean spouse andminorunmarried children under the age of1825
1.10yearsand dependent students under the age of 25 years actually dependent upon the
1.11employee, and others as defined by governmental units at their discretion.
Second, is Mr. Olson telling his constituents that THIS is a main highlight of the last month in the Minnesota House of Representatives? Really? Guns, Gays, and Immigrants were a more important addition to a letter to constituents than perhaps these measures:
- HF2553 (Winkler/Latz) Catastrophe survivor compensation fund established, and money appropriated.
- HF1812 (Carlson) Omnibus supplemental budget bill.
- HF3346 (Davnie) Mortgage foreclosure assistance provided, and maximum amount of financial assistance increased.
- HF380 (Hausman/Langseth) Omnibus Capital Investment bonding bill.
These are but a few of the things that are more important for your constituents to hear about than the religious crusade you are attempting to incite. Olson goes on to stir up fears that we may be teaching our children sex education.
A comprehensive Sexual Education proposal has found its way into the Senate K-12 Bill during the Senate Higher Education Committee hearing.
In the house the language was heard as an amendment to the Education Finance bill, but it was not adopted.
This provision would permit school districts to offer and establish policies for sexual education for kindergarten through grade six, and require them for grades seven through twelve. The next stop for this matter will be on the house floor or in conference committee.
It is interesting that on the bill that Olson wants to incite outrage about on gays, he purposely announces the file number of the bill. However, when referring to this "proposal" he leaves out such information so that the reader may not go and read for themselves what the language of the bill actually says. Also, never mind the overwhelming evidence (here and here) that abstinence only education is an utter failure.
The only substance provided in this letter appears to be a rundown of the NCLB opt-out legislation floating through the legislature. But then again, Mr. Olson would like to get rid of public education all together so it is somewhat disingenuous.
Mr. Olson ends with a run down of what your Republican Party of Minnesota is truly concerned about for this legislative session:
The only substance provided in this letter appears to be a rundown of the NCLB opt-out legislation floating through the legislature. But then again, Mr. Olson would like to get rid of public education all together so it is somewhat disingenuous.
Mr. Olson ends with a run down of what your Republican Party of Minnesota is truly concerned about for this legislative session:
I moved that HF 775; the Constitutional right to keep and Bear Arms be brought up on the House Floor from committee. Rep. Paul Kohls attempted the same action on HF 3010; the ban on sanctuary cities for illegal immigrants and Rep Steve Drazkowski moved for action on HF2652; the bill to make English the official language of the state.
On each of these motions the DFL majority motioned to table the motions with out debate, and was narrowly successful on all three.
Not concerned about mortgage foreclosures, health care, jobs, or any of the other concerns of people across Minnesota. Mark Olson and the Republican Party are worried that someone is taking away their guns and that others aren't speaking the proper language. It's good to see that the tax dollars of District 16B are well spent.
1 Response to "Mark Olson LTE: BEWARE Of Gays & Education"
It’s not just gay’s that would benefit from the bill, It’s also address’s committed heterosexual couples who are not married. (less that ½ the population is married)
Olson may be worried about guns because his conviction last year may infringe on his ability to carry one. Keep in mind that he was known to carry one with him on the house floor. He may be a fan of Jesus but there was no way he was going to turn the other cheek as is witnessed by his co-sponsoring the “castle bill” which would allow you to shoot anyone, any where any time you felt threatened. WWJD.
It’s nice to know that at a time when a record number of home foreclosures are happing in his home town and the Big Lake school system is laying off teachers, cutting bus service and thinking about shortening there school year to make up for a 1.5 million dollar annual shortfall, Olson is thinking about sex. Gay sex, teenage sex, school sex. And he’s thinking about guns because when he thinks about sex he thinks about guns. And he’s thinking about Mexicans.
And we elected him 8 times. What were we thinking about?