Opinion: Gov. Mike Pence's Perception Problem With Religious Freedom Restoration Act
By John Dodge
CHICAGO (CBS) -- With the ink barely dry after signing Indiana's new religious freedom law, Gov. Mike Pence is asking lawmakers for a re-do.
Mr. Pence told the assembled media at a news conference on Tuesday in Indianapolis that while the law had been "smeared" by "sloppy" and "reckless" journalism, he was seeking these changes because of a problem with the erroneous "perception" that the law was a license to discriminate--specifically against gays and lesbians.
Mr. Pence is free to blame anybody he sees fit for creating what he has called a false narrative over the controversial law.
Yet, journalists didn't sign that law.
Mr. Pence did.
Now, just days after signing it, Pence says the bill needs to be revised to make it clear that the law is only about protecting religious freedom and not about denying services to individuals because of who they are.
"I've come to the conclusion that it would be helpful to move legislation this week that makes it clear that this law does not give businesses the right to discriminate against anyone," Mr. Pence said.
That raises a few questions.
If there were legitimate concerns about even the "perception" of discrimination, why did Pence not send the bill back to the Legislature in the first place?
Or make it clear to lawmakers who were debating the bill that changes were needed, or he would veto the bill?
Pence told reporters he did not "believe for a minute" that the General Assembly "intended to create a license to discriminate, or a right to deny services to gays, lesbians or anyone else in this state."
However, the law now needs to be changed to make that clear?
Whose work is sloppy?
Here's the deal: Pence claims this bill is the same as the ones President Obama supported as a state senator in Illinois or that President Clinton signed as President all those years ago.
It's not.
There are key differences in the scope of the law.
For instance, the definition of a "person" protected by the Indiana bill is expanded to all businesses.
Here is that definition contained in Indiana's current Religious Freedom Restoration Act (click on all of the images to enlarge):
Pence continues to hammer on this false talking point: Indiana's law is the same as the one then State Sen. Barack Obama supported in 1998.
Illinois' law does not expand the definition of a person to a business.
That's a significant point, and part of the reason why critics are concerned that a business in Indiana could discriminate against any group of people based on religious grounds.
That said, there are key parts of the Indiana law that are exactly the same as both the federal and Illinois laws.
Essentially, they all say that government cannot interfere with a person's religious practices and beliefs, unless there is a "compelling interest" to do so. That's a pretty high standard, thus giving individuals and religious groups the freedom to practice their faith.
Here is the language in the Indiana law:
And the federal law:
Mr. Pence, rightfully so, told reporters Tuesday that religious freedom is one of the most important principles in American society.
If the Indiana law stopped there, the state wouldn't have this mess, this "perception" problem.
However, the law didn't stop there.
It is also important to note another key difference between Indiana and Illinois.
In Illinois, gays and lesbians are protected from discrimination. In Indiana, they are not, and Mr. Pence has made it clear that affording them that protection is not part of his agenda.
It also is not part of the agenda of Pence's super-majority in the state House and Senate.
Consider the fact that attempts to amend the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, to protect civil liberties were rejected during the legislative session.
In the Senate, an amendment to protect against discrimination of same-sex couples, failed.
In the House, a broader attempt to protect civil rights in general, failed.
Pence said that he genuinely did not anticipate the backlash over the bill.
"Heavens, no," he said. (That was a very Hoosier response.)
Are we to accept the fact lawmakers simply didn't know what they were doing?
Or that Mr. Pence is actually that sloppy?
The governor has shown in the past that he has odd timing when it comes to learning things.
Take this for example: He claimed to have little knowledge of a plan--until it was reported by the independent media--to create a state-run news service. That's something that might have come in handy this week, which Pence said has been pretty tough on the state.
While the details of the revised bill have apparently not been finalized, hopefully the new version will do what it should have done originally: Protect the rights of everybody, to practice their faith and to love whoever they choose.
