Senator Jay Costa: Probably the thing that’s most disturbing to me was discussed yesterday when we amended and discussed the amendment that was put up yesterday relating to this implication that there’s something inappropriate or illegal about the activity that’s been a lawful activity for a number of years and continue to find it offensive that that’s how this is being framed. And, Mr. President, I think that is distasteful. And I think as the gentleman, the previous speaker spoke when he talked about the fact that we attack a position or something that takes place and we put a different name to it, we call it somebody’s law, and we call it Paycheck Protection, whatever the case might be. But it disguises what the true motive is as was stated by the previous speaker. And that what was taking place.
But recently I think there’s an article from PennLive that came out a while back, just, you know, November 14 of last year. One of our colleagues stated very clearly that the paycheck protection is about the PSEA. And to his credit I guess he had the courage to stand up and say it’s about the PSEA. And that’s his position and that’s what’s his motive is. While we’re not permitted to speak about motives, his motives outside this chamber were clear.
Mr. President, we don’t agree with the intent and the motive that was described in this article and what the gentleman believes, but at the end of the day what has happened here? What has happened here is that we’ve allowed this institution and we’ve allowed this chamber to then take a position against, primarily against one organization to try to stifle their voice, to try to quiet their resolve and quiet what it is they have to say with respect to political speech that they have the right to be able to do. And they want to try to quash the union and the labor organization that exists there. We think that’s wrong and we should not be using this chamber to be able to do that through the legislative process. That’s what I find disturbing.
Yesterday I spoke about how they framed it as an illegal and inappropriate activity. Back when we had this conversation many months ago there was accusations that the people in the stands, in the audience who were watching here were labor leaders, that they were corrupt and the like and things of that nature. That’s wrong. That’s not how we should be governing here. We should be governing and look at issues along those lines that are the right things for people, all people of Pennsylvania. To target one particular group because they’re not happy with their publications and they’re not happy with the voice that they speak or they’re not happy what’s taking place at their local school districts mind you. Not necessarily here but our school districts where the activity is taking place that they’re trying to quiet, Mr. President, I think is wrong for this chamber and for this general assembly to able to participate and act along those lines. What we have in place is something that is appropriate and legal and I hope it’s that my colleagues on the House side recognize that and defeat this legislation that passed today along party lines, mostly along party lines, that over in the House they’ll be able to defeat it because it’s wrong for Pennsylvania; it’s wrong for this chamber to participate in something along those lines, and I think that’s what needs to be addressed.
We’ve got good men and women who work in our school districts and our cafeterias and our administrators who do very, very fine work for this commonwealth and educate our kids in a very fine way. And we’re going to continue to work to support them. But to quiet their voice and to only have that group of people or target that group to make it more difficult for them to participate in the process I think is inappropriate and wrong, and that’s the remarks that we would have provided on the record associated with 501, Senate Bill 501. And to whatever degree my remarks on petitions could be assigned to the vote on that bill, I’d ask that they do so. Thank you, sir.
[End of Transcript]