TBO.com - TBO is Tampa Bay Online

Vote Thins Evolution Bill's Odds

ADVERTISEMENT

By CATHERINE DOLINSKI

The Tampa Tribune

Published: April 29, 2008

TALLAHASSEE - Prospects grew dim on Monday for legislation allowing public school teachers to criticize evolution theory in class when the House approved bill language that the Senate had already rejected.

Monday evening, House and Senate sponsors were holding out hope that House Republicans could be swayed to approve the Senate's version before the session ends Friday.

House members voted 71-43 for Rep. Alan Hays' bill, which requires teachers to give students "a thorough presentation and scientific critical analysis of the scientific theory of evolution." The mandatory "scientific critical analysis" does not appear in the Senate version from Ronda Storms, which instead focuses on protections for teachers who criticize evolution theory in class.

Both bills are a response from conservatives to a teaching standard recently adopted by the state Board of Education, which explicitly mandates the teaching of the scientific theories of biological and chemical evolution.

The more briefly worded House legislation survived two days of questions and debate in that chamber, but only after brooking opposition in the Senate. The upper chamber voted 21-17 on Wednesday to pass Storms' version, but soundly rejected the language when Storms offered it as an amendment.

"It's worse than the Senate bill - it's now mandating that you teach about the Raelians," said Senate Minority Leader Steve Geller of Hallandale Beach, alluding to a religious group believing in extraterrestrials and explaining the Senate's concerns that Hays' language would require teachers to present alternative theories.

Geller, who voted against both Storms' and Hays' versions, said the problem lies in the lack of definition for "scientific critical analysis."

"What the hell does that mean?" the senator asked. "It means you have to question it."

Storms, R-Valrico, said the Senate's position was firm, and that the body will have no choice but to refuse to concur with the House and send back the Senate version for consideration again. "We have to get there the way we said we'd get there in the beginning."

Hays, R-Umatilla, said he could not fathom the Senate's concerns with his proposal.

"Take the word 'scientific,' take the word 'critical,' take the word 'analysis,'" he said. "There is absolutely nothing in the definition of any of those three words, singularly or collectively, that would open the door for a religious study. It has only to do with the scientific evaluation of a scientific theory."

That, he said, would leave out intelligent design as well as explicitly religious concepts. "My question to anyone opposing this legislation is: 'What are you afraid of? Are you afraid of the truth?' If so, you're not a scientist."

After the House vote, an opposing group called Florida Citizens for Science released a statement saying they are "afraid of the stunting effect this legislation will have on science education, as students will be exposed to old, discredited arguments against evolution that have their roots in religious protestations against that science, and be misled into thinking those arguments have the same weight as the real scientific findings."

The group added that "We are afraid of people like Rep. Hays, who clearly demonstrate a profound ignorance of science and yet propose laws to regulate that subject."

Both the House and Senate bills began with the language that remains in Storms' Academic Freedom Act, derived from legislation proposed by the Seattle-based Discovery Institute, which supports the teaching of intelligent design as an alternative to evolution.

Monday evening, Hays said he thinks his version is the better one, but he will try to pass the original bill. He had not polled House members about it yet, he said, but is hoping that the Senate will send back the bill quickly and that House leaders will give him ample time to persuade enough Republicans to vote for Storms' version.

"Our Democratic colleagues are vociferous in their opposition" to either plan, Hays said, but "I believe we can bring this home."

Asked about the possibility of a last-minute save for the legislation during this final week of session, Storms said, "I believe in miracles."

Reporter Catherine Dolinski can be reached at (850) 222-8382 or cdolinski@tampatrib.com.

Share this:

Loading Comments...

Email Print

ADVERTISEMENT