Sex ed mandate moves closer to becoming law after marathon House debate

After a nearly six-hour debate which alternated between eloquence and outbursts, the state House of Representatives early Thursday approved a bill to require public school districts to teach comprehensive sexual health education to all K-12 students beginning with the 2022-23 school year.

The House voted 56-40 to pass SB 5395. If the Senate agrees with the changes that the House made to the bill, it will go to Gov. Jay Inslee for his signature.

Under current law, public schools may provide sexual health education to their students, but it’s not a requirement.

The bill would be phased in over two years, with the mandate to teach all students in grades six through 12 beginning with the 2021-2022 school year and to all students a year later. Backers of the bill say it’s designed with equity in mind, to ensure all students get the opportunity to learn. There also is an “opt out” provision enabling parents to pull their children out of the sex ed instruction.

“We’re not trying to replace family values; we encourage family values,” said state Rep. Lillian Ortiz-Self, a Mukilteo Democrat who supported the bill. “We’re trying to teach facts and a curriculum and set some standards for our students. We want local control for our school districts...We want them to show the parents a curriculum in multiple ways and multiple venues.”

“We should leave some innocence for these children,” said state Rep. Mike Steele, a Chelan Republican who opposed the bill. “I’m not sure why we’re rushing to remove the innocence from our youth. We put so much on them already. I don’t know why we think it’s appropriate to put more, to put such weight upon their backs at such young ages.”

The bill states that the definition of comprehensive sexual health education for K-3 would be social-emotional learning. Supporters of the measure said that’s already taught at most schools and involves learning about healthy friendships and protecting one’s personal space from unwanted touching.

Opponents say a curriculum reviewed by the Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction is too explicit. State Rep. Vicki Kraft, R-Vancouver, cited what she said was a fourth-grade lesson that referred to vaginal, oral, and anal sex. Several of the bill’s opponents say sex education should be restricted to grades seven through 12.

Republicans attempted to kill the bill by attaching about 220 amendments to it. The House debated and voted on 29 amendments, with the Democrats who have the majority in the chamber defeating each one either by a voice or roll call vote. House Speaker Laurie Jinkins, D-Tacoma, then deemed the rest of the amendments as “dilatory” -- which means aimed at delaying consideration of the bill --and they were withdrawn.

Nearly half of the 29 Republican amendments came from state Rep. Matt Shea of Spokane Valley. Last December, House Republican Leader J.T. Wilcox suspended Shea from the GOP caucus after an outside investigator hired by the House said Shea engaged in “domestic terrorism” during a 2016 standoff at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in Oregon. Shea has denied any wrongdoing.

Shea’s unsuccessful amendments included requiring “any discussion of pregnancy in the curriculum, instruction, and materials to include the option of foster care, the benefits of adoption, and the potential consequences of abortions, especially those referred to as family planning.”

In opposing Shea’s amendment, state Rep. Monica Stonier, D-Vancouver, used an argument that she and her fellow Democrats repeated several times to reject Republican amendments -- that the state should not restrict the ability of educators to work with community members to choose a comprehensive sexual health education curriculum.

“As a matter of practice, when we’re legislating curriculum and instruction, we try not to be so prescriptive that we are telling educators exactly what they need to be talking about,” Stonier said.

An amendment from state Rep. Jesse Young, R-Gig Harbor, would have barred the use of any curricula that include lessons on legislative advocacy or lobbying.

State Rep. Michelle Caldier, R-Port Orchard, said earlier this year, people in “bright pink shirts” -- a reference to Planned Parenthood -- urged her to support the bill. She said the sex ed curriculum taught in public schools in King County directs youths to go to the Planned Parenthood website.

“It also states that if they ever become pregnant, this particular website is the place to go; this particular clinic that heavily lobbies us and funds your caucus,” Caldier said, addressing Jinkins.

Jinkins gavelled Caldier down, telling her: “The member should not impugn others’ motives.”

Caldier was not the only one who caused sparks to fly.

“I’m offended at the pornography that we’re going to be forced to teach our children,” said state Rep. Robert Sutherland, R-Granite Falls. “I’m offended at what this government is doing to the parents out there.”

State Rep. Tina Orwall, a Des Moines Democrat who was presiding over the House, banged the gavel. Orwall advised Sutherland to keep his remarks on the policy being debated.

And in her speech against the bill, Kraft ended by saying: “I also recently heard a story about an LGBTQ; I’ll cut to the chase. The truth, Madam Speaker, is that it would be better to be thrown into the sea with a millstone hung around your neck than to cause one of these little ones to fall into sin.” She cited the Bible passage as Luke 17:2.

This story was originally published March 5, 2020 at 6:16 AM.