• NASDAQ 0.00
  • DOW
  • S&P 500 0.00
  • 1 CAD = 0.9682 USD

Misrepresentations and Glaring Hypocrisy Surround Hilderbran’s Legislation Targeting the FLDS

2010-07-22 20:33:01

By Donald Richter

 

All of the current prosecutions of FLDS men in Texas are based on legislation passed in 2005 at the instigation of Representative Harvey Hilderbran specifically to target the FLDS people. The hearing on Hilderbran’s bill held before the Committee on Juvenile Justice and Family Issues on April 13, 2005, is one of the most glaring examples in modern times of hatred and misinformation spewed forth by supposed experts to arouse prejudice and promote draconian legislation against an unpopular minority group.
 
The only witnesses testifying at the hearing were avowed enemies of the FLDS: Mark Shurtleff, Utah Attorney General; Jon Krakauer, author of Under the Banner of Heaven, a sensationalized history of Mormon fundamentalists; Sam Brower, private investigator paid over $600,000 by Dan Fischer’s Diversity Foundation to target the FLDS; and Randy Mankin, editor of the Eldorado Success, a newspaper bitterly opposed to the FLDS.
 
Among the principal features of the bill was the provision raising the legal age of marriage with parental consent from 14 to 16 and making it a first-degree felony to be married to or to “purport to marry” a person younger than 16 and a second-degree felony to be married to a person 16 or 17 years old. In addition the bill made it a third-degree felony for a parent or guardian to consent to an underage marriage or for anyone to conduct a marriage ceremony where one of the parties is underage.
 
One member of the committee wanted to be sure that only the FLDS would be affected by this bill and that it would not interfere with unmarried couples living together: “Well, I just don’t want to get—I don’t know about Utah, but we have a lot of people who don’t have common law marriages, but they have, they engage in shacking up, and—you know that could create an appearance of marriage, when that is not really what we are talking about.”
 
Although HB 3006, which was the focus of the April 13 hearing, stalled in committee and never became law, Hilderbran was able to tack the marriage amendments to the end of SB 6, a Child Protective Services bill which had strong support in the legislature, and slip them through at the very end of the legislative session. (For additional information on Hilderbran’s bill, see our earlier article.)
 
Hilderbran’s opening remarks make it clear that his whole purpose in introducing HB 3006 was to mount an attack against the FLDS. He remarked, “In west Texas, in Schleicher County, Texas, near Eldorado, we have had a polygamist community relocate at least part of their community…” He went on to state, “I filed this legislation to keep Eldorado in Schleicher County, and all of Texas, from becoming the next Colorado City, Arizona, and the next Hildale, Utah.”
 
A substantial part of Hilderbran’s opposition to the newcomers was a fear of their potential political power. Regarding the number of FLDS who had relocated in Texas at that time, he made the following predictions: “We have several hundred, maybe as many as 400 folk, people that have moved here already. We expect maybe 1200 at the end of the year, and there is reports [sic] that it’s going to be several thousand in the next year or two.” He later said, “We are concerned that they could literally take over the county, and certainly the city, and that half of the county, almost instantly as they relocate.” After asserting that the FLDS “definitely participate politically” and “vote as a block,” Hilderbran said, “I have a very rural district, as you know…This is my smallest county by population….I think it’s under 3000 people…and 400 people can very definitely change the precinct.”
 
In reality, the FLDS had no desire to participate in the politics of Schleicher County and merely wished to be left alone.
 
Hilderbran tried to arouse additional fear by parroting the oft-repeated allegation that the FLDS would be a taxpayer burden: “And they have these big quotes, saying ‘bleed the beast,’ the welfare was a gift from God to them. So 87 percent of them are on welfare.” The truth is that not a single person on the YFZ Ranch was on welfare, and expressions such as “bleed the beast” are not used by the FLDS at all, only by their detractors. At the time of the raid, the YFZ Ranch was one of the largest taxpaying entities in Schleicher County. (See “Has YFZ Been Bleeding the Welfare System?”)
 
It is not surprising that Hilderbran was misinformed regarding the FLDS, considering the source of his information. Regarding the claims he was making, Ms. Thompson inquired, “So I’m assuming through some kind of investigative process that you became aware of the situation?” Hilderbran replied, “Reports in the media. The first report I saw was in the San Antonio Express in April of ’04, last spring.  And then a number of other stories…”   
 
The hypocrisy of the proposed legislation is nowhere more apparent than in Hilderbran’s remarks regarding the change in the legal age for marriage. “Currently, Texas law allows 14-year-old girls to be married to adults with consent of the parents,” he said. “Of course, historically, in Texas, most parents have their children’s interest in mind when they give consent. But when you are in one of these polygamy communities, of course, it’s forced.” I take personal exception to such a characterization of the people I have lived among for over sixty years. In common with most parents, they love their children and do everything possible to promote their welfare and happiness. Such inflammatory statements are simply not true and would not be tolerated regarding any other minority group. Imagine the reaction should Hilderbran have said that Texas parents typically act in the best interest of their children, with the exception of Jews and Blacks.
 
Hilderbran acknowledged that in some instances, the marriage of a 14-year-old girl might be in her best interest, so long as she is not FLDS. In particular, he made reference to actress and country-music legend Loretta Lynn, who was married at age 13 to Oliver Vanetta Lynn, known as “Mooney” for his involvement in running moonshine liquor:[1]
 
But, of course, her father was concerned about her and cared about her, and, and ended up approving of that marriage with her best interest in mind. Lots of parents are going to have situations where their children have had situations where maybe it’s the best course for them to get married, and those parents have normally made the right decision and helped guide their children with their best interest of those children in mind.
 
In this case, that’s not going to happen. It’s not about the children. They’re property. They’re chattel, and these women are property and chattel…
 
And to make sure that his bill targeted only the FLDS and allowed the necessary latitude for other parents to act according to their conception of the best interests of their children, Hilderbran concluded his little discussion of marriage laws by adding, “I ask you to offer suggestions to, uh, limit the unintended consequences…[of this bill].”
 
In subsequent articles we will examine the distortions and outright lies presented by Hilderbran’s “expert” witnesses at the April 13 hearing.
 

 

                [1] In his testimony before the legislative committee, Hilderbran places Ms. Lynn’s age as 14 at the time of her marriage, but Wikipedia, citing an article entitled “Loretta Lynn” in Country Weekly, says that she was only 13 at the time of her marriage.


Printer Friendly Version


Comments