March 4, 2009

Echo chamber in House echoes 2006 censorship kerfuffle
Today's debate reminds Anderson of the majority party's previous attempt
to muzzle House Republicans

Editor's Note: A transcript of the floor debate exchange is available here. Editorials from the Tacoma News Tribune and The Olympian on the censorship debate that took place in 2006 are available here.

The scuffle over censorship of dissenting opinions began again today, said Republican Rep. Glenn Anderson, after he was gaveled down during a floor speech.

Anderson explained he was interrupted by the House Speaker Pro Tem during his floor speech on House Bill 1978, the supplemental transportation stimulus package, only to listen to the Democrat speaker after him utter the same musings and be allowed to carry on without incident.

"The rules either apply to everyone, or no one," said Anderson, who recalled the red pen of censorship the Democrats used on Republican floor speeches, press releases and newsletters in 2006. "I thought we made a few things clear during the last dust-up over what was and was not acceptable to say on the House floor and in print. I guess we're back to the majority quashing any opinion they disagree with."

The Fall City lawmaker said he was making a simple point that taking money the federal government borrowed from China will have to be paid back through higher taxes from working Americans, no matter how much "stimulus" is thrown around.

"I got the heavy hand and the speaker following me was allowed to proceed as if the same rules did not apply to the majority caucus in the House," said Anderson. "Since when do we allow two sets of rules in our debates? In my opinion, it's a sad reflection on the tenor of the chamber these days."

Anderson said this isn't the first such incident this session. He noted that a House Republican colleague was gaveled down in the Tuesday night debate after saying virtually the same thing a Democrat representative said moments before.

"It's a matter of fairness," Anderson explained. "I have a duty to my constituents to call a bird that quacks a duck, and that's what I was doing. To not have the same rules applied to every member of the House is unfair and smacks of elitism."

If the majority party cannot make up its mind on a simple ruling, Anderson wonders how it can make major decisions about the state budget.

# # #

 For more information, contact: Bobbi Cussins, Public Information Officer: (360) 786-7252