Why weren’t harassment rules expanded sooner?
It’s impossible not to roll your eyes at the zany things that happen in the Pennsylvania Legislature.
Here’s the latest example, from last week’s debate about new operating rules for the state House.
The rules include expanded parameters for sexual harassment. Representatives now are prohibited from harassing “any individual” during their official duties, on House property or at a House meeting or event.
The previous rule was much more limited. It protected only other representatives and House staff from being harassed by a representative. Stupid, right?
The rule defines sexual harassment as “unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors or other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature.”
That change was long overdue. Some House Republicans were calling for the rule to be expanded and were critical of House Democratic leaders for not taking action sooner.
Time for the eye roll. Republicans controlled the state House for the previous decade. Last spring, a Republican representative proposed the same expansion of the rules. But her proposal was ignored by her party’s leadership.
In April, Rep. Kate Klunk of York County introduced House Resolution 192. Among other things, it called for representatives to be prohibited from engaging “in sexual harassment while performing House related services or duties or in or on any House owned or leased property or facilities.”
Her proposal was sent to the House Committee on Rules. It was never voted on.
Now all of a sudden, when the Democrats are in charge of the House, the GOP is hot-to-trot for reform. Give me a break.
When the House convened for a special session in late February to address child sex abuse lawsuits, Klunk sought to amend the session’s operating rules to include language from her resolution about sexual harassment.
Her request was rejected. It shouldn’t have been.
The rejection rightly drew criticism from GOP House members at a news conference on Feb. 27, in light of a recent allegation of sexual harassment raised by a lobbyist against a representative. He since has been identified as Rep. Mike Zabel, D-Delaware.
“Not only do I and other female House colleagues I have spoken to feel unsafe, but every woman who enters this building is now at risk of unwanted touching, advances and comments from this individual and they have no recourse within this building,” Rep. Kristin Marcell, R-Bucks, said at the news conference.
“I do not understand why we cannot work together to ensure we can advance women’s safety in this and every workplace,” Marcell added.
“It is past time for Democrats to take such matters seriously and make sure everyone can do their job and have professional interactions with their elected officials safely and without fear,” she said.
Rep. Martina White, R-Philadelphia, voiced similar concerns.
“We must ensure that this Capitol building is safe for anyone to advocate for their issues and exercise their right to free speech without fear of immoral legislators abusing their power,” White said.
House Minority Leader Bryan Cutler has questioned whether the expanded rule is expansive enough and whether it would cover the lobbyist’s allegations against Zabel.
“I understand that they believe it covers the situation,” Cutler, R-Lancaster, said, according to Spotlight PA. “I’m afraid we may not know until a complaint is potentially filed.”
The GOP criticism is warranted — but don’t forget that they failed to take a leadership role on this problem when they had the opportunity.
Eye roll.