Governor Jan Brewer to Veto Arizona Bill That Would Allow Businesses to Discriminate Against Gays

Press_brewer

Governor Jan Brewer says she has vetoed SB 1062, the bill that would allow businesses to discriminate against gays based on religious beliefs.

Brewer's remarks:

Good evening, and thank you for joining me here today.

I am here to announce my decision on Senate Bill 1062.

As with every proposal that reaches my desk, I gave Senate Bill 1062 careful evaluation and deliberate consideration. I call them like I see them, despite the cheers or boos from the crowd.

I took the time necessary to make the RIGHT decision. I met or spoke with my attorneys, lawmakers and citizens supporting and opposing this legislation. I listened and asked questions. As Governor, I have protected religious freedoms when there is a specific and present concern that exists in OUR state. And I have the record to prove it. My agenda is to sign into law legislation that advances Arizona.

When I addressed the Legislature earlier this year, I made my priorities for this session abundantly clear… Among them are passing a responsible budget that continues Arizona’s economic Comeback.

From CEOs — to entrepreneurs — to business surveys — Arizona ranks as one the best states to grow or start a business. Additionally, our IMMEDIATE challenge is fixing a broken Child Protection system. Instead, this is the first policy bill to cross my desk.

Senate Bill 1062 does not address a specific and present concern related to religious liberty in Arizona. I have not heard of one example in Arizona where a business owner’s religious liberty has been violated. The bill is broadly worded and could result in unintended and negative consequences.

After weighing all of the arguments, I vetoed Senate Bill 1062 moments ago. To the supporters of the legislation, I want you to know that I understand that long-held norms about marriage and family are being challenged as never before.

Our society is undergoing many dramatic changes. However, I sincerely believe that Senate Bill 1062 has the potential to create more problems than it purports to solve. It could divide Arizona in ways we cannot even imagine and no one would ever want.

Religious liberty is a core American and Arizona value, so is non-discrimination. Going forward, let’s turn the ugliness of the debate over Senate Bill 1062 into a renewed search for greater respect and understanding among ALL Arizonans and Americans. Thank you.

Read the veto letter HERE.

Here she is a photo she tweeted vetoing the bill:

Veto

Comments

  1. Homo Genius says

    Just for clarity – this wasn’t actually an “ant-gay” bill.

    The law would have allowed widespread discrimination. Businesses could just as easily discriminated against muslims or jews. Mormons could have discriminated against blacks for instance. Or women could have been denied the morning after pill.

  2. says

    I dunno … she pretty much had to veto the bill or face an economic onslaught. BTW, the White House petition to halt all American monies going to Uganda has taken off and has well over 600 signatures. Keep it up! Go here to sign if you haven’t already done so: http://wh.gov/lPvmY

    Your support is very much appreciated.

  3. Keith says

    We have many businesses to thank for this victory. . .so send Apple, Delta, and all the others who supported the defeat of this heinous and unnecessary piece of legislation. They deserve our gratitude and should be patronized and supported with our dollars and future business.

    Thank you!

  4. Mike says

    She kind of had to at this point, no? I give her very little credit, she didn’t do this out of kindness, compassion, morals….she did this for her state’s economy.

    That being said, I’m very happy it was vetoed, and am happy that all LGBT individuals in Arizona can breathe a sigh of relief. Now let’s oust some of the jerks that passed this!

  5. Paul B. says

    Can’t say I would want to have cocktails with the woman…and I know her heart is in the wrong place…and yes, she’s had way to much sun…and don’t get me going on the “hair”?
    But, she did do the right thing and for that I am grateful…thank you Gov. Brewer.

  6. TANK says

    I hate to say this, but Governor Jan Brewer looked awful tonight! Her hair was a mess, and that outfit was very drab. Her hairdresser and her personal groomer really need to do a better job. Given, they don’t have much to work with, but they could have done a much better job tonight.

  7. crispy says

    She is term limited, but she’s trying to find a way get around the law and run for governor again. She’s claiming the law is not clear.

    It’s great that she vetoed this bill. But let’s not forget that actual legislators that the people of Arizona voted into office passed this bill in the first place. That itself is still shameful.

  8. says

    @Randy
    She’s term limited out for Gov of Arizona.
    Unless she pulls a Bloomberg.

    Sooner or later one of these will pass.

    Time to go on offense and bring the battle to the states. We need to sue the states that have civil rights laws that don’t include sexual orientation.

    States have no rights to exclude a proven suspect class from those laws. By doing so states knowingly allow a suspect class to face discrimination. States must protect all citizens rights equally. Not just the ones with special interests or the ones they choose.

  9. Bernie says

    I have never been a fan of Jan Brewer, but I listened to her veto on this bill and she was able to articulate in a logical, intelligent and rational manner all the points why the bill is unnecessary and served no real need in Arizona…. I was very impressed and I give her big kudos on this…..

  10. northalabama says

    i, too, embarrassingly, was kind of hoping she’d sign the bill, just to be able to sit back, listen, and watch all the craziness that would ensue – including the conservative right wing religious nut jobs being forced to close shop when they attempted to apply the law as they felt appropriate.

  11. Andy says

    She did the right thing.

    She also added that religious liberty is a value, so is NONDISCRIMINATION.

    So people come on here commenting on her outfit and hair instead of being relieved?! So she wants to protect the border. Big deal. That makes her the devil? Nations are supposed to protect their borders. You don’t think China, Japan, Germany, and any other country does the same?

    Just celebrate and keep the asinine comments about her appearance out of it.

  12. Clayton says

    I’m with Andy. I don’t care what she looked like or what her motives were. She did the right thing and she expressed herself in clear, logical, intelligent words.

  13. wheelie81 says

    Just so those of you commenting on her re-election prospects know, she is not up for re-election. She will be out of office at the end of this year due to term limits.

  14. sam says

    I think motives are an important aspect to her decision. It wasn’t vetoed for the right reasons. If not for the economic downfall from signing the bill into law, she would have signed it. I don’t understand how Christians can hate so much. I’ve asked God, but he remained silent…

  15. Ppp says

    We all know that she is term limited, but those nuts who put this bill to her desk are up to reelection. The passage of this bill will burn out GOP . Now, they exonerate.

  16. Mike says

    Andy, protecting your borders and allowing the police to racially profile are two very different things. No, I don’t think Japan and Germany do that. SB 1070 was a horrible piece of legislation. But it wasn’t the year before a SuperBowl in Arizona, so she signed it.

  17. crispy says

    “So people come on here commenting on her outfit and hair instead of being relieved?! So she wants to protect the border. Big deal.”

    You don’t know much about Jan Brewer.

    In 2009, she signed a law repealing domestic partner benefits for same-sex spouses of state employees.

    In 2011, she signed a law that gave preference for adopting children to married couples, which excluded gay and lesbian couples since Arizona doesn’t allow same-sex marriage.

    She is rabidly anti-gay. This veto today is an anomaly.

  18. Randy says

    Unexpected. In her reasons, she didn’t talk only about the economy, or departure from her agenda, or being premature, but also talked about equality for all. That’s not something Arizona is known for, so maybe there is some hope for Arizona’s future, if even Gov. Brewer can begin to appreciate it.

  19. woodroad34 says

    The little brat was forced by the adults to do the right thing all the while she stamped her little princess shoes all the way to the Governor’s Office. Precious little lizard.

  20. Francis says

    Dog and pony show. Ms. Brewer could have vetoed this bill when reports were released she was going to do so, on Monday. She could have quietly vetoed the bill. She was never going to let this go through, but got her 15 minutes of fame from it and helped her image.

  21. TheSeer says

    The hag did the right thing and said the right thing, kudos for that.

    Nevertheless, the state of Arizona should be boycotted. The people of Arizona need to be punished for filling the Legislature with so many lunatics and extremists.

  22. Francis says

    If Jan Brewer cares about equality, she would help pass an equality-based law out of Arizona. She isn’t. She hasn’t, she wont, and unless Arizona suddenly turns moderate/blue, neither will the next Governor/legislature.

  23. jason says

    The Arizona bill was not just an anti-gay bill. It was much more broadly-based than that. It would have justified discrimination on the basis of any religious value.

    As for Jan Brewer, she’s my new heroine. Jan for President 2016!!!!

  24. MickyFlip says

    Well played, Governor Brewer. Well played. Spoken like a true politician..with perhaps a hint of pragmatism? However, I will applaud you for making the “correct” choice.

  25. Ppp says

    @Andy. When trivial thing, such as woredrobe or hairstyle, can be the cause of discrimination , the whole society will never be happy and peaceful. This whole world is full of discrimination and judgement.

  26. Mike says

    Politician not statesman.

    Spent so long deliberating over doing the right thing for Arizona that it became clear that she was going to veto it for the wrong reasons, or perhaps just wanted to savour an extra few days of irrational discrimination.

  27. TANK says

    @ANDY: You sound like a very self-satisfied and judgmental person. Please allow others to exercise their freedom to disagree with you without you resorting to calling them names or making spurious accusations against them. And if you think Jan Brewer looked good tonight then you are the delusional one: the lady obviously did not attend to her appearance and anyone who saw the press conference could see it. Male or female, old or young, lizard like or human like, the reality is that when we know lots of people are going to be seeing us, we should try to look our best and not just wear any old thing. Just keeping it real, guys!

  28. Felix says

    @AMERICANDREAMER

    Don’t be ridiculous, you know you can’t marry your goat since goats are emissaries from Satan, but you can still marry your pig, it’s your hillbilly right to do so.

  29. Paul R says

    She really doesn’t deserve much credit. At this point the veto was a done deal given that no one voiced public support for the bill in the past week, and major voices were against it. If she hadn’t vetoed, the legislature’s next step probably would have been to negate the law itself.

  30. Bill says

    @wheelie81 : if she wants to run for some other office or get a corporate job as a lobbyist, it might not be wise for her to do something that would have businesses really, really mad at her.

    Vetoing the bill was probably in her self interest, regardless of it being the right thing to do.

  31. StillmarriedinCA says

    In her badly mangled speech
    she said “The bill is broadly worded and could result in unintended and negative consequences.”

    Well, yeah, if you are a bigot and a hater there could be some UNINTENDED negative consequences for you. But if the bill had passed and had been enforced perfectly, there is no doubt it would have had INTENDED negative consequences for anyone who is gay or lesbian or perceived to be gay or lesbian. Shouldn’t she have vetoed it because of THAT????

  32. Lexis says

    Well, good for her. HOWEVER, if she were really in control of things in her party, then she would have let insider Reathuglicans in the Arizona Senate and House know she was going to veto this thing before it ever got this far and it would have died in committee a long time ago.

  33. Jack M says

    I’m not surprised. Despite Jan’s declaration that she arrived at her decision via independent thinking (an impossibility for her), she was not willing to deal with the outrage that would have resulted had she signed the bill.

  34. simon says

    Lexis:
    We have seen it before at the national level. It is only a small fringe group hijacking the party in Arizona. It is comforting to know that the mainstream GOP party is still against this kind of lunacy.

  35. Moe says

    This law would never have passed Federal scrutiny, so I refuse to give this vile woman accolades. Instead of waving all your rainbow flags and acting like she’s the Judy Garland of the political world, we should be focusing on how it took this very dumb, racist woman an entire week to make what should have been the easiest decision of her life.

  36. Bill says

    While fortunately the law was vetoed, taking time to veto it wasn’t a bad move as it gave several people who voted for it time to reconsider and ask for a veto.

    We should keep in mind that some of the legislators who voted for it might not be bigots: legislators (according to my gay state assembly-person) have to juggle a lot of different bills and task switch very rapidly, and with term limits, there are a lot of newbies working their way up a learning curve. They could have been fooled by a bill worded to sound like it was going to merely protect some religious guys. If so, the blame lies with the people who crafted the bill.

    As an example of why the bill might have sounded reasonable initially, suppose you have a small, fundamentalist church with a small number of members that cannot pay its minister enough to get by. So the minister and his wife run a catering business to make a living. Then Falcon Studios decides to make a “gay porn in the desert” video with some on-site photography and ends up hiring the minister as a caterer. This might be awkward for him, as being seen with these “sinners” might not go over very well with his parishioners. At the same time, it would be kind of funny as a scene in a John Waters film. Regardless, I can imagine an in-over-your-head politician not thinking things through and voting for the bill to protect highly religious people from such embarrassing situations and not realizing the wording actually does much more than that with serious negative consequences.

    A useful follow-up story would be to find out who wrote the bill (which is not necessarily the state senator who introduced it). We might be seeing the start of a trend where, knowing that they are losing, homophobic organizations are hiring political operatives to draft misleadingly worded legislation to get it passed and hiring lobbyists to get it passed.

  37. Paul R says

    Bill, the scenario of people voting for things they don’t understand does happen, and it’s an embarrassment. That said, it’s highly unlikely that it was an issue for the bill because it received enormous media coverage and general scrutiny before voting began.

  38. Bill says

    @Paul R: it got a lot of publicity in LBGT-related media. I’m not sure about Arizona newspapers: I tried to do a search on azcentral.com (which seems to be associated with a Phoenix newspaper), but if you want to search anything that is not current, they’ll charge you for it. Google, meanwhile, has eliminated the “sort by date” button (or seems to have).

    Regardless, usually a state senator’s staff handles the mail and for most of it just records a summary of public opinion. Unfortunately, political discourse in the U.S. has degenerated into a shouting match where people will say anything and will regularly demonize the opposition, so it wouldn’t be surprising legislators pretty much tune it all out, unfortunately missing the legitimate complaints due to those being buried in the noise.

Leave A Reply